LONDON LETTER:Despite efforts by the party to make it more palatable to women, research shows its cuts in public spending will affect them disproportionately, writes MARK HENNESSY
WHILE THE House of Commons may have been consumed by Rupert Murdoch this week, in time it may be seen that 30 minutes of debate on some findings by Warwick university could be more significant in the next election.
Labour's Coventry North West MP Geoffrey Robinson had brought with him a report entitled, " Unravelling Equality? A Human Rights and Equality Impact Assessment of the Public Spending Cuts on Women in Coventry".
The University of Warwick findings are blunt. They argue that women will suffer twice as much as men from the cuts. “Women will be hardest hit by cuts in welfare benefits and other changes to the tax and benefit system.
“Women in Coventry (as in the rest of the county) will be disproportionately affected by the cuts in public spending. Women are more likely to lose their jobs.
“Women will also be hit hardest by cuts in services,” it went on.
The analysis is stark; 78 per cent of Coventry city council’s staff are women, thus, inevitably, they will suffer most from £38 million in cutbacks being imposed, in keeping with Chancellor George Osborne’s spending strictures.
Local hospitals and West Midlands police are also shedding staff, while two state quangos, the British education and communications technology agency and the qualifications and curriculum authority, are closing, with the loss of 700 jobs, mostly female.
Nationally two-thirds of all jobs in the public sector are held by women; while 40 per cent of all jobs held by women are in the public service – compared with little more than 10 per cent for men.
Women in the West Midlands city are less likely to be in paid work than others elsewhere in the UK; while those who are employed are poorly paid. The gap between men and women’s wages is 10 points higher than the already bad UK average.
For those who stay in work, public sector workers face a two-year pay freeze, while childcare tax credits will be cut from 80 per cent to 70 per cent of costs. Some childcare services in the city will disappear.
The benefit changes will cost Coventry women £30 million this year alone, while men will be £15 million worse off, argue the researchers, who strongly criticise efforts to impose sanctions on those not seeking work and significant changes to disability welfare rules.
“This will further increase inequality between women and men in Coventry. For some women this could lead to a significant loss of income, pushing those women into poverty and raising significant human rights concerns.
“Lone parents, disabled women, carers and BME [black and ethnic majority] women are likely to be particularly badly hit by the changes,” said the report from Warwickshire’s Centre for Human Rights Voices and campaign group Coventry’s Women’s Voices.
The schools’ budget in the city has been cut by 24 per cent this year, further education colleges are facing the loss of a quarter of their budget, while universities in the region have decided to charge all, or almost all, of the £9,000 tuition allowed by the government.
MPs were disturbed by figures provided by Warwickshire university showing that 30,397 women in Coventry “are likely to have been raped or sexually abused at some point in their lifetime”, while 38,575 are likely to suffer violence in the home.
The cuts will make their situation harder. Support services are being cut or closed down, while the number of specialist police dealing with domestic abuse is being cut from eight to two. In addition, the crown prosecution service may cut the number of cases it takes on.
“Cuts to legal aid will reduce the ability of women suffering violence to get the legal help and support they need,” said Warwickshire, adding that cuts to benefits may increase women’s financial dependence on men, making it harder for them to leave violent relationships.
The Coventry report is evidence that British women – who see David Cameron as a modern man, comfortable with family duties – may be tiring of him already. If so, the political consequences could be profound.
Osborne, the Conservative’s political strategist, worked hard following Cameron’s takeover as party leader in 2005 to make the party palatable to women, with pledges to guarantee the National Health Service, strengthen the family and improve life for the elderly. However, once in government these promises have, predictably, been difficult to honour.
The NHS budget is protected to a degree, but medical inflation will mean cuts in practice, while the plans to delay retirement has left a core group of women in their 50s angry.
Last Christmas, a YouGov poll showed that 45 per cent of women backed the Conservatives, compared with 34 per cent of men. However, the first signal that difficulties lay ahead came in the local elections in May when the support of women fell away significantly. Today, the gap has disappeared.
Cameron and Osborne have made efforts to redress the situation. However, women are the biggest consumers of public services, or, at least, are most likely to have day-to-day contact with them. Pleasing them may not be possible.