Women's Views on News |
- One in five people below the poverty line
- Events 9 June – 15 June
- The growing deficit in substantive democracy
- New measures to tackle rape cases
- The British Army frontline: women and children first
- Report critical of Yarl’s Wood
- Rennard apologises – for ‘intrusion’
| One in five people below the poverty line Posted: 09 Jun 2014 09:50 AM PDT
Today, Britain is a country where one in five people live below the poverty line and life expectancy in some areas is lower than in some developing countries. Yet the rich keep getting richer opening up a massive inequality gap – and the UK is on course to become one of the most unequal countries in the industrialised world. And although the UK is the seventh richest country in the world, it is also deeply unequal, and millions of families across the UK are living below the breadline. Oxfam’s ‘Below the Breadline’ report, compiled in conjunction with Church Action on Poverty and the Trussell Trust, reveals a scandalous situation in Britain in 2014. Oxfam and Church Action on Poverty have calculated that 20,247,042 meals were given to people in food poverty in 2013/14 by the three main food aid providers. This is a 54 per cent increase on 2012/13. The ‘Below the Breadline’ report is a follow up to the 2013 research report Walking the Breadline, in which figures from the Trussell Trust, the biggest network of foodbanks in the UK, revealed that cuts and changes to the welfare system were the most common reason for people resorting to food banks. This growth in food aid, the authors of Walking the Breadline concluded, demonstrated that the social safety net was failing. And they recommended, among other things, that the government conducts an urgent inquiry into the relationship between welfare changes and cuts, and the growth of food poverty. This year's report, Below the Breadline, shows that a combination of changes to the social security system, including a more punitive sanctions regime, a lack of decent work and rising living costs are contributing significantly to food poverty. And that more and more people are being forced to turn to food banks to put food on their table. The paper makes recommendations as to how the social security system could provide the safety net when people need it, supporting people into sustainable work and providing for those unable to work. It also calls for the UK minimum wage to be increased to a living wage by 2020. The government needs to provide a social security system that acts as a safety net for vulnerable people instead of driving them into poverty. All parties need to set out plans to address food poverty and commit to raise the National Minimum Wage to the Living Wage by 2020. Given their impact on hardship and hunger, the government needs to fully review zero-hours contracts and social security sanctions. Join thousands of others and press your MP to address the growing food poverty problem across the UK. Email your MP and ask them how their party will tackle these issues and end food poverty. And then please email Oxfam to let them know know if and how your MP responds. Thanks.  |
| Posted: 09 Jun 2014 04:05 AM PDT
Bristol: Until 14 June: Blue Stockings by Jessica Swale; at the Tobacco Factory Theatre, Raleigh Road, Bristol. A fast-paced mini-epic, centred around a key battleground on the march towards equal rights. In 1896 at Cambridge University, something deeply unsettling and utterly baffling is happening; the women are revolting. Girton College, Cambridge 1896 – knowledge is power. With the feminist and suffragette movement building momentum, a small group of determined educationalists and aspiring students are campaigning for young women to have the right to graduate. What they come up against is the prevailing wind of the day; science that tells them too much education could whither their wombs, and a social stigma that academic achievement leads to loss of femininity, along with any chance of marriage, a family or any normal life. This is a story of young women, ordinary in their desires, but extraordinary in their place in history. It shows us where we have come from, and challenges us to look at where we are now. Originally produced at the Globe Theatre London, Blue Stockings is a shocking and stirring play, which will send you out of the theatre feeling elated, appalled, and thoroughly educated. Tickets £15/£10. Edinburgh: 9 – 21 June: Harpies Fechters and Quines Festival at Edinburgh Central Library, 7-9 George IV Bridge, Edinburgh, EH1 1EG A festival of talks, exhibitions and workshops is organised through a partnership between Glasgow Women's Library, Edinburgh City libraries and the Bonnie Fechters women's group and is now in its third year. The theme is women in the arts. Free, but to book a place click here. 11 June: Edinburgh Reads The Poetry and Feminism of Willa Muir at Edinburgh Central Library, Conference Room, George IV Bridge, Edinburgh EH1 1 EG from 18:00 to 19:30 Dr Rhona Brown will be talking about Willa Muir and some of her poetry and her 1920s feminism, with reference to Woolf and De Beauvoir. Translator, poet and author Willa Muir (1890-1970), one of the first women to study for a University degree, one of Scotland’s foremost feminists, a brilliant, experimental psychology student and founder member of the Women’s Students Suffrage Society, is now recognised as a significant contributor to the modern Scottish literary Renaissance, a movement which reached its height in the years 1920-1940. Click here to register. Glasgow: 15 June: East End Women's Heritage Walk from 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm. Join Women Make History tour guides on our most recently developed Women's Heritage Walk. Researched by learners and volunteers at the Library, this women's heritage walk uncovers the hidden heroines of Glasgow's East End. Find out more about the women who worked in the Templeton factory, Suffragettes who were held in Duke Street Prison, or the woman who set up the Barras … and much more. Tickets £7.50 London: 10-12 June: Fringe at the Global Summit to End Sexual Violence Against Women in Conflict in Conflict at ExCel London, Royal Victoria Dock, 1 Western Gateway, London E16; from 9.00am, with last entry at 7.15pm. Angelina Jolie, Special Envoy for the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, and William Hague, the UK’s Foreign Secretary, are co-chairing the Global Summit to End Sexual Violence in Conflict. The Fringe events are open to the public, completely free to enter and no need to register in advance, with a range of activities, including theatre performances, films and discussion panels, as well as The Gallery, the Market Place, interactive exhibitions and the Digital Hack – #EndSVCHack – a blend of digital and physical space where people with different skills from diverse backgrounds use technology to come together to transform ideas into reality. Events are also taking place around the world in support of the drive to end sexual violence in conflict. 11 June: Domestic Violence Conference and Performance at The Maryam Centre, 45 Fieldgate Street, London E1, from 9.30am. The Muslim Women's Collective has organised this conference, which will be of interest to front line community centre staff and service users; health, education, legislative and social care practitioners. Entry free of charge to both the conference and the play but places are limited and must be pre-booked. 11-28 June: Orange Tree Theatre Festival at Orange Tree Theatre, 1 Clarence Street, London TW9. The final production of the season and the last under the stewardship of Sam Walters will be a festival of new work from new directors. Featuring: ‘I dream before I take the stand’; written by Arlene Hutton, directed by Katie Henry. From the writer of ‘Last Train to Nibroc’. A defence lawyer cross-examines a woman during her testimony in a sexual assault case – and in doing so, horribly distorts her perfectly innocent walk in the park. The play was called “a new feminist classic” when it premiered in Edinburgh in 1995. ’7 to 75′; created by Amy Hodge and the company of five. An exploration through text and movement of the journey through a woman’s life… from 7 to 75. Until 5 July: The F Word Project: Five Feminist Fables for the Twenty-First Century at Space Station Sixty Five, Building One, 373 Kennington Road, London SE11. A body of art, collected in a series of feminist graphic novellas by Maureen Burdock. Each novella features a common heroine originating from a culture whose current traditions cause women hardship, despite which they emerge strong and triumphant. The F Word Project increases awareness of women's struggles worldwide and the need for elimination of the injustices they experience. It provides inspirational role models for women by creating brave protagonists from various walks of life. In addition to the depiction of problems, the intelligence and goodness of human nature that make change possible are emphasized through the use of humour and engaging art and narratives.  |
| The growing deficit in substantive democracy Posted: 09 Jun 2014 01:09 AM PDT
By Mary Kaldor. Nationalism is a way of deflecting discontent towards a convenient scapegoat, the 'other' – an immigrant or Europe. It is a way of mobilising political support while avoiding any commitment to address the underlying causes of discontent; that's why it is often described as populism. Xenophobia and euroscepticism can never offer any constructive solutions. On the contrary the more the nationalist rhetoric succeeds the more our problems multiply and the more we blame the 'other'. There is a long and alarming history of deflecting democratic demands by the appeal of nationalism, of which the First World War is perhaps the most poignant reminder. In more recent times it is worth noting that sectarian conflicts in both Bosnia and Syria were and are ways of responding to, diverting and suppressing democratic movements. In Ukraine, what was a nation-wide protest against corruption and for human rights is rapidly being reframed as a conflict between 'eastern' Russians and 'European' Ukrainians. So what is the nature of the underlying discontent? It is a huge frustration and lack of trust in the political class. Despite our right to vote and publicly protest, there is a widespread sense of powerlessness , a feeling that whatever we say or do makes no difference, that established parties are all the same and voting is largely irrelevant. In democratic theory, a distinction is often drawn between formal or procedural democracy and substantive democracy. Formal democracy is about the rules and procedures of democracy; they include a full adult suffrage, regular elections, freedom of association and media and so on. Substantive democracy is about political equality. It is about being able to influence the decisions which affect your life. And it is about democratic culture –'the habits of the heart' as De Tocqueville put it. Despite the dramatic spread of democratic procedures in recent decades, there is a profound and growing deficit in substantive democracy everywhere. 'They call it democracy but it isn't' was one of the slogans of the Spanish indignados. There are many reasons for the weakness of substantive democracy. The most obvious reason is globalisation. Procedural democracy is organised on a national basis. Yet the decisions that affect our lives are taken in Brussels, Washington DC, in the headquarters of multinational corporations, or by financial whizz kids in London, Hong Kong or New York, playing the market on their computer screens. However perfect our democratic procedures at national levels, if the decisions that affect our lives are no longer taken at national levels, then voting cannot affect those decisions. Yet this is not the only reason. Globalisation has been a way of escaping what might be described as the sclerosis of the nation-state. The institutions of the deep state grew in the aftermath of World War II and have become deeply embedded in routines and practices, including the tendencies for control and surveillance that are hard to shift. Political parties turned themselves from being fora for debate about the public interest into electoral machines that through an array of techniques were only able to echo and reinforce already existing prejudices gleaned from focus groups representing the so-called middle ground. Bureaucracies that developed their own self-reproducing logics included the civil service, the military and intelligence agencies. Where there are political initiatives designed to bring about change they often get caught up in such institutional constraints. Paradoxically, this statist inertia has been combined with twenty years of neoliberalism supposedly aimed at undermining the state. Yet while neo-liberalism has hugely increased inequality and hollowed out welfare, it has left the deep state either untouched or enmeshed with capital through promises of future Directorships and consultancies after retirement. It has led to a culture of selfish individualism and greatly strengthened the power of money and its hold on the political class. It is the hold of finance over party financing and media that largely explains the persistence of neo-liberalism in the post-crash world, as Colin Crouch explains. When nationhood is fear – what is the alternative? So how can substantive democracy be restored or indeed brought into being? The answer is not to return decisions to the nation-state because even if that were possible in this interconnected neoliberal context, a return to the nation-state is actually a return to inertia, paternalism, surveillance and fear of the 'other'. Nor is the answer an improvement in the procedures of democracy in the European Union, even though that might be desirable, since procedures without substance will leave us where we are now. By substantive democracy I mean how can ordinary people influence the decisions that affect their lives in Europe as a whole. I mean post-national democracy in Europe, rather than reviving national democracy or democratising the European Union, although both might be part of the answer. Making this possible, I would argue, requires both bottom-up and top-down transformations. The bottom-up answer is about opening up the public sphere at all levels, about developing new deliberative and dialogic forms of politics especially at local and transnational levels that build on the 2.0 culture of writing and editing and not just reading. (See Selchow and Moore). It is about devolving the decisions that affect our lives to manageable communities of interest both local and transnational. It is about constructing a diverse and heterogeneous infrastructure of an intensive public engagement. This is not possible, however, without top-down measures that open up such possibilities. We need a form of global governance that could protect these openings from the storms of globalisation – constraints on financial speculation perhaps through a Tobin tax, regulation of multinational companies including closing down tax havens, or policies to slow down climate change including a carbon tax. The aim must be to regulate, constrain and tax global bads at the same time as generating revenue at global levels to promote global goods such as stabilising the euro, promoting employment, supporting reforms on transparency and accountability, investing in resource saving and renewable energy, or peace interventions. In other words, the aim of global governance is to create a framework for civilising globalisation in such a way as to make it possible for decision-making to be devolved to the lowest levels and returned to the citizen. The European Union ought to be such a model of global governance but it would need much greater visibility and accountability. It is not only anti-Europeanism that explains why populist parties have done so well in the European elections. It is also the assumption that European elections do not matter. The European Union is abstract and bureaucratic; the European Parliament is thought to have little power. What is more, voting for the European Parliament is actually undertaken on a national basis. As Anna Topalski points out, you cannot vote for a European party in the European elections, you have to vote for national parties. Apart from Germany, where there were pictures of Martin Schulz, the socialist candidate for President of the Commission during the elections, there was almost no discussion about future European officials or European policies. Voting in the European election is not about electing a European Parliament it is about protesting national policies. It is okay to be irresponsible in a European election because no one really knows what they are voting for. But actually it is not okay. It sets in motion an anti-European rhetoric that could mean the death of Europe with incalculable consequences. Transforming the European Union needs a basic change in procedures. Citizenship could be based on residence rather than nationality, empowering immigrants in Europe. Voting should be transnational and based on cross-European parties rather than being national and based on national parties. European elections should take place at a different moment from local and national elections in order to focus on European issues. Perhaps there should also be voting for a European President, so that the Union is associated with a person and not with 'a bureaucracy'. But these procedures only make sense if they are associated with a different set of policies that allow for democratisation at other levels. Finally, a word about my own country, Britain. Already the commentators are calling on political leaders to take up the challenge of UKIP, which topped the poll. They are asking parties to take euro-scepticism and concern about immigration seriously. This is exactly what should not happen. Making these issues respectable generates a momentum towards populism that prevents us from addressing the problems of democracy. So far the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, has resisted those pressures. He doggedly, and quite rightly, talks about the problems of housing, energy prices, the National Health Service and the cost of living. Resisting these pressures is more than an election strategy. This is a strategy for avoiding descent into a nightmarish nationalist cycle of disintegration. Mary Kaldor is a professor of global governance and co-director of LSE Global Governance at the London School of Economics. A version of this article appeared in OpenDemocracy on 27 May.  |
| New measures to tackle rape cases Posted: 06 Jun 2014 06:30 AM PDT
The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the national policing lead for adult sexual offences have announced major new action to tackle rape, and are together calling for a renewed challenge against persistent myths and stereotypes they believe are still having a negative impact on cases. The DPP, Alison Saunders, and Assistant Commissioner Martin Hewitt have published a new national rape action plan in which they set out their clear commitment to addressing the issues preventing rape cases from successfully progressing through the criminal justice system. The plan includes: Steps to ensure better application of the legislation on consent and that police and prosecutors focus on steps taken by a suspect to seek consent from their alleged victim where this is an issue; Updating the joint police and CPS national rape protocol on the investigation and prosecution of rape cases; Steps to monitor police decisions to take no further action in rape cases, including the quality of record-keeping and authorisation of decision making; New practical guidance for frontline police officers and prosecutors; A National Conference later this year with all specialist rape prosecutors and police rape leads to raise awareness of key issues and Reviews of the operation of CPS rape and serious sexual assault units and the instruction of appropriate advocates in rape trials. This action plan is the outcome of more than six months of work and a rape scrutiny panel convened to investigate the fall in the number of rape-flagged cases referred by police to the CPS. New figures already show an 8 per cent rise in the volume of police referrals for 2013-14, compared with 2012-13, and the CPS charged 700 more defendants over the same period, which is an increase of 25 per cent from the previous year. This increase in volume will take time to impact on statistics for completed cases. In the last year, the total number of completed prosecutions and convictions increased, but the conviction rate has dropped from 63.2 per cent in 2012-13 to 60.3 per cent in 2013-14. The action plan also aims to address this fall in conviction rate, while maintaining the rise in volumes. Announcing the new plans, Alison Saunders, said: “Over the last year, we have worked hard to increase the volume of rape cases referred by the police and charged by prosecutors and our latest figures are certainly encouraging. “But even though there have been slightly more defendants convicted, the steady increase in conviction rates we have seen in recent years has halted, and this must be addressed immediately. “I am determined to ensure our long-term progress to tackle rape continues, particularly in dispelling the myths and stereotypes surrounding these types of cases. “The new action plan makes very clear that, as with cases of child sexual abuse, the focus of any investigation and case preparation should not be on the credibility of the victim but on the credibility of the overall allegation, including the actions of the suspect. “Our figures show that the proportion of cases ending in jury acquittals has increased by 4.2 per cent over the past year. “Myths and stereotypes still pervade throughout society and have the potential to influence jurors too. “We have a part to play in fighting any pre-conceptions through the way we handle and present our cases to those juries. “Where cases turn on the issue of consent, prosecutors must focus on what steps a suspect has taken to seek consent from the complainant and the extent to which an alleged victim is capable of giving consent.” As the National Policing Lead for Adult Sex Offences, Assistant Commissioner Martin Hewitt will be working with the College of Policing to progress the action plan. Hewitt said: “Rape and sexual offences are uniquely damaging crimes for the victim. “They are also complex to investigate and prosecute, and victims’ needs and reactions vary from person to person. “All the changes we have made in the way police deal with sexual offences - specialist training of officers, the introduction of early evidence kits, greater access to sexual assault referral centres and working closely with support groups - are changes that have emerged from looking at ourselves and realising that we can do things better. “We've taken another hard look at how we do things and found room for further improvements. “We are determined that the service we provide to victims is the best it can be so that more victims have the confidence to report, knowing that they will get the support they need to go through the criminal justice process and that we will do everything we can to bring offenders to justice. “This action plan will help to achieve this.” The End Violence Against Women Coalition (EVAW) was consulted as part of the CPS and police rape scrutiny panel and welcomes broadly the ongoing work and commitment of both agencies to improve justice for rape survivors. Professor Liz Kelly of London Metropolitan University, co-chair of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said: “I warmly welcome this joint initiative, especially the focus on investigating the steps taken to get consent and monitoring decision making where cases are not proceeded with. “I am pleased to see that already 700 more defendants have been charged in 2013-14 compared to the previous year but we need to see a corresponding rise in convictions. “Everyone reporting sexual violence deserves the highest standards from the criminal justice system and the National Scrutiny Panel has identified actions which, if implemented consistently across England and Wales, provide an opportunity to achieve this.” “I would add that – action in the criminal justice system is not the whole answer. We know that only around 10 per cent of rape victims report the offence to the police. “Those survivors still need support and should by right have access to a specialist support service in their local community at any time in their lives when they need it. “In addition, if we are truly to turn the tide on the 85,000 rapes which are committed in England and Wales every year, we need good sex and relationships education in schools that addresses victim blame, consent and sexual ethics, and why girls who have sex are called sluts whilst boys become legends.” The Coalition particularly notes DPP Alison Saunders' comments that, “…the focus of any investigation and case preparation should not be on the credibility of the victim but on the credibility of the overall allegation, including the actions of the suspect…” and believes that if implemented, in line with the law on rape, this will help improve justice and tackle the impunity for rape many perpetrators confidently assume. In November 2013 the Office of the Children's Commissioner published a report on young people's understanding of the law on consent. It found young people understood the law in principle, but when applied to real life situations they tended to revert to victim-blaming myths around women's and girls' behaviour. This underlines the importance of the criminal justice system taking this new approach.  |
| The British Army frontline: women and children first Posted: 06 Jun 2014 04:35 AM PDT
By Rachel Taylor. Shortly after announcing it would be reviewing the ban on women in combat roles, the Ministry of Defence last week published annual recruitment figures which revealed that 1,140 women joined the armed forces in the year to April 2014, accounting for 9.6 per cent of total intake. This marks a small increase on the previous year's figures, when just 8.4 per cent of new recruits were female. Nevertheless, it is clear that the armed forces – and the Army in particular – remain overwhelmingly a young man's game: last year, 17-year-old boys enlisting outnumbered women and girls of all ages combined. Regardless of the numbers involved, it is right for the MoD continuously to review its personnel policies to ensure they are in line with anti-discrimination legislation and reflective of modern social norms. If combat roles are opened up to women, it will be one of the biggest developments in British armed forces personnel policy since 1999, when a European Court of Human Rights judgement forced the MoD to end its ban on gay servicemen and women. Prior to the court's ruling, the MoD had argued vehemently that allowing openly gay people to serve in the armed forces would have catastrophic effects on unit cohesion and operational effectiveness. Once the ban was lifted, these fears were demonstrated to be wholly unfounded. The Army and Navy now rank in the top 100 of the 2014 Stonewall Workplace Equality Index and the armed forces continue to operate as effectively as they ever did. An equally seismic policy shift occurred a few years later when the MoD was forced to introduce a minimum age limit of 18 for soldiers entering hostilities (although it still insists on maintaining a loophole to allow it to deploy younger soldiers if it considers necessary). Once again the MoD fought reform for years, but had to concede defeat in 2003 when the UK ratified the UN Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict. Yet again, the MoD's fears of military disaster proved groundless. The idea of sending into battle a soldier who is too young to play Call of Duty is unthinkable – but barely a decade ago this was routine practice. Despite grudgingly accepting that it can no longer send under-18s to man the frontline, the MoD still refuses to review the minimum enlistment age. It resists proposals to raise the enlistment age as passionately as it fought its previous battles over homosexuality and deployment age (using many of the same arguments). This obstinacy now leads to an interesting scenario – the possibility, in the near future, of 16-year-old girls being enlisted into some of the British Army's most dangerous combat roles. Projecting figures which reflect the 2012/13 recruit intake (the latest year for which full role distribution figures are available), we could expect to see around 90 girls under the age of 18 joining the infantry (the Army's largest combat branch) each year. That's about 3% of infantry intake. The British Army's policy on enlistment age is already seen as an anomaly internationally – it is one of fewer than 20 in the world which officially enlist from 16. It is hard to predict the reaction of its military allies if it starts fielding a force in which a sizeable minority of its combat recruits are 16-year-old girls who, like the boys, will be sent to the frontline on their 18th birthday. Arguing against lifting the ban on women in combat roles, Colonel Richard Kemp said "The essence of infantry soldiering is to close with the enemy and kill him face to face with bullets, bayonets and grenades… It is a dreadful, gut-churning, traumatic and incredibly tough job". But in January 2011, when Colonel Kemp argued with me on the Today programme against proposals to raise the enlistment age, he expressed no such qualms in relation to the 1,050 minors who joined the dreadful, gut-churning, traumatic Infantry that year. For them, apparently, it was just "a good opportunity". Responding to renewed criticisms of the enlistment age last Sunday, he also argued that enlisting 16-year-olds "boosts the quality and fighting effectiveness of the armed forces", although he didn't specify how. Understandably, "dreadful" is not the word the Army uses in its "Junior Entry" recruitment brochures directed at under-18s and their parents. In fact, the words "kill", "violence", "trauma", and "injury" do not appear a single time anywhere in the Junior Soldier information leaflet, which presents the Army Phase One training centre at Harrogate like a residential sixth-form college. Remarkably, neither does the word "war". Not once. The old guard will retort "But they don't go into war until they're 18!" as if an 18-year-old boy is more emotionally and psychologically resilient than a woman can ever be, simply by virtue of his penis. This would-be defence also draws a false distinction between the experience of life on operations (including, but not limited to, combat) and life in training. If somebody is recognised as too young to participate in war, they cannot logically be considered old enough to participate in all-immersive training for war. Infantry training, as Colonel Kemp is at pains to point out, involves learning how to kill people "face to face with bullets, bayonets and grenades". It involves simulated warfare and prolonged, intense physical and psychological pressure, designed to make recruits crack. It is inherently dangerous in and of itself, as the deaths in training (including of three recruits aged under 18 in the past three years) will testify. If frontline life was inherently different to training, then the training would be useless. The whole purpose is for them to merge as seamlessly as possible, which makes a deployment age of 18 meaningless if the Army still trains from 16. The MoD no doubt worries about the impact on public morale of female soldiers being killed. In contrast, it believes we can tolerate the 92 British fatalities in Afghanistan who were still legally children when they enlisted – no doubt seduced by the sports, adventure, and "games rooms" promised in the same teen recruitment brochure which fails to mention the word "death" a single time. And it thinks we can stomach the deaths in Afghanistan of the twelve British soldiers who were aged just 18 when they were killed. Perhaps the MoD comforts itself with the fact that adolescents have an underdeveloped perception of risk and mortality, and consequently hopes that their experience of war – including their own death or permanent injury – is less traumatic for them than it might be for adult women. Of course, there's a big question over whether 16-year-old girls would ever be able to pass the demanding physical tests required for entry into infantry combat roles. But the physical suitability of teenage boys for these roles is also highly questionable. Whilst the 690 boys aged under-18 who enlisted into the infantry in 2012/13 "passed" the physical entrance tests, in the long term they are – according to internal MoD documents – twice as likely as adult recruits to be medically discharged due to training injuries. MoD guidelines on training of young recruits explicitly state that under-18s "have lower bone strength and joint stability, making them more susceptible to acute and overuse injuries". Essentially, the problem with training teen soldiers is that they have children's bodies. This is brought home graphically by reports of medical staff working with military casualties who are forced to perform painful, repeated re-amputations on the youngest patients because their limbs keep growing through the scar tissue. The idea of 16-year-old girls serving in the British Infantry sounds so ludicrous that most people dismiss it out of hand. But if the majority of public and MoD opinion now accepts the concept of women serving in combat roles, it is clear that the real problem with 16-year-old girls joining the infantry is not that they are girls, but that they are 16. And this should be equally true for 16-year-old boys. From the Defence Select Committee to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, from children's organisations to veterans' groups, from the NUT to the EU Directorate-General for External Policies and the Bishops of the Church in Wales, the MoD is under constant pressure to raise the enlistment age to 18. A 2013 survey found that an overwhelming 70 per cent of respondents who expressed a view thought the enlistment age should be raised to 18. Yet despite all this the MoD still clings in growing isolation to its belief in the need to recruit minors. In July last year, and again this March, the Defence Select Committee challenged the MoD to present evidence justifying this policy. Nearly a year after the original request was made, the MoD has still not been able to produce a response. There are undoubtedly great changes ahead for armed forces personnel policies, which we have every reason to believe will be implemented as successfully as those of the recent past. But if the MoD truly wants to modernise the armed forces for the 21st century, it needs to start by recognising that "Boy Soldiers" are as outdated as the Cavalry. Rachel Taylor is a research and advocacy manager at Child Soldiers International, and runs the campaign to raise the UK enlistment age to 18. A version of this article appeared in OpenDemocracy on 3 June.  |
| Report critical of Yarl’s Wood Posted: 06 Jun 2014 02:45 AM PDT And MP calls for inquiry into the ‘serious allegations’ of sexual abuse at the centre. Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre is ‘not fulfilling its basic function’ by detaining women for extended periods of time without deporting them, according to a report published recently. The Annual Report for 2013 by the Independent Monitoring Board (IMB) revealed that the majority of women were held for 30 days or less, but a worrying number were detained for much longer periods: one detainee was held for three and a half years before being given temporary release. Six women were held for more than a year and three for more than eighteen months. Yarl’s Wood is run by Serco. IMB members are independent, unpaid and work an average of 2-3 days per month. Their role is to monitor the day-to-day life in their local prison or removal centre and ensure that proper standards of care and decency are maintained. Their report can been seen here. They also called into question the proportion of detainees placed in the facility, and not removed from the country, a figure which stood at 62 per cent in 2013. And that: ‘The financial costs of this failure, as well as the costs in terms of human suffering, for people detained for lengthy indefinite periods, are immense.’ It also found that pregnant women ere still being detained in the facility and urged the immigration minister to review this policy. The report also called on the immigration minister to set up a monitoring board to oversee the removal of detainees on charter flights – flights which are currently subject to last-minute cancellations. When the UN's special rapporteur Rashida Manjoo visited the UK, she said she was ‘blocked’ from visiting the immigration detention centre on her recent trip to the UK. Rashida Manjoo began her investigation on 31 March, the day after Jamaican Christine Case died inside Yarl’s Wood and during a high-profile campaign that failed to prevent teenage student Yashika Bageerathi being deported from Yarl’s Wood to Mauritius two days later. This latest report comes in the same week that a former Serco officer who worked inside the Yarl’s Wood immigration detention centre alleged that an anti-immigration culture was ‘endemic’ among staff. He told The Observer that vulnerable women have been deported without their mental health being properly assessed and of a ‘blind spot’ inside the centre which guards knew was not covered by CCTV. Serco has recently had to disclose a report revealing that it had failed to properly investigate a sexual assault claim a resident made against a member of staff there. Alistair Burt, the MP for North East Bedfordshire, has called for an inquiry into the ‘serious allegations’ of sexual abuse at the centre. And the family of Christine Case, who died at Yarl’s Wood on March 30 while being held there, are calling for a full and ‘timely’ investigation into her death. Her funeral takes place today. A statement from her family ended by saying 'The circumstances surrounding her death, and the ever growing controversy around conditions in the Yarl’s Wood centre leave us with too many agonising questions.’  |
| Rennard apologises – for ‘intrusion’ Posted: 06 Jun 2014 01:09 AM PDT
In February 2013 Channel 4 News aired allegations by two women of sexual impropriety over several years by Chris Rennard, the Liberal Democrat party’s former chief executive. The women told the news programme he abused his position for years by inappropriately touching and propositioning them. One of them said she had spoken to two senior party figures about her claims, but claimed no action was taken. Allegations from more women were broadcast later that week. It then transpired that party leader Nick Clegg had known of the women's complaints in 2009 and done nothing, and that even in 2014 the party had no suitable procedures for dealing with allegations of serious sexual harassment. A pastoral care post has now been set up, to deal with any such complaints. Rennard, the former chief executive of the Liberal Democrats, has previously denied all the allegations made against him. But in a letter read out by his lawyer last week, he said that he now wanted to "apologise sincerely for any such intrusion and assure them that this would have been inadvertent". The letter continued: "Lord Rennard wishes to make it absolutely clear that it was never his intention to cause distress or concern to them by anything that he ever said or did." "He also hopes that they will accept that the events of the last 14 months have been a most unhappy experience for him, his family and friends and for the party." Rennard had previously been unwilling to apologise officially because of concerns that in doing so he would open himself up to legal action. According to his lawyer, he has now released this apology because he wanted to "achieve closure". Alison Goldsworthy, a Welsh Liberal Democrat activist and one of the four women who made allegations against him, has described the apology as a "start", but said it did not go far enough and has called for him to be expelled from the party. Goldsworthy told Channel 4 News: “I am relieved that some acceptance has now started to come forward from Chris Rennard that what he did was not okay but very frustrated that I have had to spend the last 15 months talking about things that are really very private and quite intimate to me to be able to achieve it.” She also pointed out that if he had offered his apologies 15 months ago then things might have been very different. Bridget Harris, a former adviser to the Welsh government who also alleges sexual harassment, said it was now down to the party leaders to act. The apology comes after an internal investigation undertaken by Alistair Webster QC concluded that the claims against Rennard were credible but could not be proven beyond reasonable doubt. And it was, apparently, seen by the Deputy Prime Minister and leader of the Liberal Democrats Nick Clegg weeks ago and was delayed until after the recent European and local elections. According to a Liberal Democrats spokesperson, an appeal has been submitted by three of the original complainants against the conclusion published after Webster's investigation. A separate appeal has been submitted by Rennard against the findings of the investigation and the disciplinary process. Both appeals are ongoing. Rennard, who is credited with masterminding by-election victories for the Liberal Democrats during his 20 years in the party, was and remains suspended from the party, and currently sits as an independent in the House of Lords. Speaking to the BBC earlier this year, Alison Smith, one of the other complainants, said: “The reason we pursued the Rennard issue doggedly is to change the culture for the future. “Politics will only be a safer place for women if all parties make difficult choices and change from within.”  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Women's Views on News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |