Engender blog

10 questions for Damian Hinds on the 'rape clause'

Today Engender, along with Scottish Women's Aid and Rape Crisis Scotland, have written to Damian Hinds, Minister of State for the Department of Work and Pensions asking ten questions about the implementation of the so-called 'rape clause'.

It has long been clear to us that both the ‘rape clause’ and the family cap which underpins it are unworkable policies (see our previous blogs here). We also know, however, that women in Scotland will be seeking information on how the UK Government intends to implement the policies, and how it will impact on their families, so we have written for clarity on a number of issues we don't believe have been fully thought through. You can read the letter below, and we'll be publishing a response as soon as we get one.

Engender joins equalities organisations working together to improve political representation

Today, along with organisations working for equality for women, disabled people, black, minority ethnic people and the LGBT community in Scotland, we're delighted to announce a joint project aimed at increasing diversity within Scottish politics. With funding from the Scottish Government, organisations Engender, Inclusion Scotland, BEMIS, the Council for Ethnic Minority Voluntary Organisations (CEMVO), Stonewall Scotland, the Equality Network and the Women 5050 campaign will work to enable political parties to remove the barriers that stop underrepresented groups from taking part in politics as party members, activists, party staffers, and as elected representatives.

UK General Election 2017: Priorities for women’s rights and equality

On June 8th 2017 the UK will go to the polls for a snap General Election (the BBC have a handy 'what you need to know' guide if you're not sure what that means).

Many have been taken by surprise by this election, and while parties are working on selecting their candidates and writing manifesto, we're keen to make sure that calls for women's equality aren't lost in the melee.

The ‘family cap’ and ‘rape clause’: where do we go from here?

Sometimes in the life of a gender advocate the stars align to create a Platonic policy process. A proposal comes forward from government that is simple and easy to understand. Gender-disaggregated data is available. Other women’s organisations have the resource and interest to engage in a discussion about how to respond. Women are easy to include in the conversation. Feminist analysis leads inexorably to specific policy calls. Colleagues from across civil society agree with our take on the government’s proposals, and integrate our asks into their lobbying strategies. Government listens keenly to our input and develops its policy accordingly.

Most of the time, though, there is much more friction in feminist policy and advocacy. Government proposals may be vague or unclear, or broken into chunks that are hard to knit together. Consultation processes may be too short. There may be no data on how the policy will affect women and men, or no data at all. Other women’s organisations may not have the time or resource to focus on a specific area of policy, because of competing priorities. Feminist analysis may produce politically untenable asks. Other women’s organisations may disagree on our analysis or approach, or have other political drivers to sit out a particular issue. Colleagues from across civil society may feel that the gender dimension is a distraction or dilution of their own urgent priorities. Government may intentionally shape a consultation process to distance civil society, and women’s organisations.

The recent lobby and advocacy around the ‘family cap’ and ‘rape clause’ has definitely involved some friction. What that is, and why that has been sheds some light on broader questions about gender and policy.

There are lots of people in Scotland who have only become aware of the ‘rape clause’ in the last few weeks. In fact, its story began almost two years ago. So what’s been going on, and where do we go from here?