TUC Response to 'Strengthening Women's Voices' Consultation

TUC Consultation Response

Strengthening Women's Voices

10th June 2011

The TUC welcomes the opportunity to discuss the ways in which the government can engage with women and organisations representing women. The consultation document recognises that this discussion has been necessitated by the abolition of the Women's National Commission.

It would be remiss not to take this opportunity to place on record, once again, the disappointment that this decision caused the TUC. The Women's National Commission comprised over 670 partner organisations across England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Island and represented the voices of some 8 million women. The original mission statement of the WNC when it was first established in 1969 was:

'to make known to Government, by all possible means, the informed opinion of women'

It is clear that the need for a representative body to 'make known to government the informed opinion of women' has not gone away. It is equally clear that the WNC performed this function admirably. The fact that barely six months since the abolition of the WNC, the government is asking how the role that the WNC fulfilled can be carried out in its absence, seems to bear out the TUC's argument that the WNC was needed and should not be abolished.

The TUC represents 55 trade unions and approximately 3 million women. As an umbrella organisation representing the voices of affiliates and their members, it is the TUC's hope and expectation that the responses provided below are taken to represent the collective voice of TUC affiliates and their members, rather than being given equal weight as an individual response.

The consultation document focuses largely on how government can engage with women in very practical terms (e.g. methods of communication, IT platforms and meetings). The TUC hopes that this focus is not at the expense of considering the key issues facing women. The government must also consider why it is engaging with women, what the issues are, and how the government should respond.

Question 1:

Please tell us what your organisation considers the three most important challenges or priorities for women in the UK today.

To reduce the breadth of challenges and priorities facing women in the UK today to just three would be simplistic and meaningless. The TUC represents some 3 million women in 55 trade unions. It would be a great disservice to our members to try to reduce the challenges that they face in their work and home lives to just three bullet points.

The TUC's policies are set democratically at conferences. This year the TUC women's conference debated more than 40 motions, ranging from the impact of the cuts on women, pensions, education, mental health, breast cancer, abortion rights, maternity rights, equal pay, the representation of women in trade unions, violence against women, international women's issues including motions on Haiti, Colombia, and Iran, the National Health Service, public sector equality duties, violence against women in the workplace, to representation of women in the arts.

To attempt to prioritise any of these serious and pressing issues would be to trivialise or diminish the rest. Delegates at the TUC's women's conference voted unanimously to carry all of these motions, thus sending the clear message to the TUC and to the women's committee that all of these issues are of vital importance and must be given priority in the TUC's programme of work for the year ahead.

Question 2:

Please rank the four distinct approaches outlined above (direct engagement, expertise of the sector, looking ahead, and IT platform) in order of preference with 1 being the most preferable and 4 being the least.

The Women's National Commission facilitated engagement between government and women's organisations. It also offered an unparalleled breadth of expertise from the women's sector on a wide range of issues, both nationally and internationally.

There is clearly now a need to fill the void left by the Women's National Commission and recreate some kind of representative body to ensure that as diverse a range of women's voices is heard by government.

Once again, the TUC takes issue with the framing of the question which sets up a false hierarchy. The government must use all of the suggested means of engaging with women and must focus on engaging with as diverse a range of women as possible via the women's sector and trade unions.

There is a risk that by engaging 'directly' with women - whether that engagement takes place through meetings or through an IT platform - rather than through a representative intermediary body such as the WNC, the voices of those who shout loudest or who are more computer literate will be heard more clearly than the voices of a diverse range of women including those from minority and marginalised groups.

In the current climate of cuts, many specialist women's services are closing or are being passed over by funders in favour of larger, general, non-specialist organisations.

According to analysis of the impact of the cuts on the women's sector by the Women's Resource Centre, specialist BAMER women's organisations are most susceptible to closure. In this context, it is incumbent on the GEO to ensure that 'direct engagement' with women's organisations does not simply mean engagement with a few large or generic organisations which do not represent the full spectrum of women's voices in the UK.

The use of IT is particularly problematic in terms of engaging with marginalised groups of women. There is a common presumption that everyone is computer literate and has access to high speed broadband but in fact nearly a quarter of the UK population still is not online. Many women would be unable to make their voices heard through an IT platform for a range of reasons. For instance;

• Lack of access to internet at home
• Not IT literate
• Low levels of literacy or ESOL
• Disability (in particular blindness)
• Lack of fast internet access due to living in a rural area
• Reduced access to internet services due to library closures

As such, an IT platform will have a very limited reach and may lead to engagement with a select and unrepresentative range of women's voices.

Question 3:

Do you or your organisation consider there should be other means used to engage and listen to women than those outlined - please explain/describe?

As outlined above, the TUC believes that it is essential that government engages with as diverse a range of women's organisations and organisations which represent women (such as trade unions) as possible. The role of the Women's National Commission will be difficult to replicate but this is essentially what the TUC believes the government needs to attempt to do in order to ensure that the needs, priorities, concerns and views of women from across the UK are genuinely heard and, more importantly, are listened to.

Many women in the trade union movement have been frustrated by how little women's voices seem to be listened to - particularly when women's voices may be at odds with government priorities. An example given at a recent TUC women's committee meeting - at which GEO representatives were present - was that Government's decision to cease funding the Poppy Project and to instead give funding to a faith based organisation offering generic rather than specialist services.

The TUC Women's Committee felt that this was an example of government failing to consult women and failing to take into account what women need when making funding decisions. The Committee also felt that the closure of the Women's National Commission in spite of strong opposition was a reflection of the failure of government to listen to what women say they need and want.

The TUC broadly supports the Women's Resource Centre's calls for a coordinating hub for women's organisations and organisations representing women (such as Trade Unions) which can bring together expertise and views of a wide range of women from larger representative bodies as well as local and grassroots groups.

The TUC also echoes the Women's Resource Centre's call for women's voices to be head at all levels of government including devolved parliaments and assemblies as well as by local governments across the UK.

Question 4:

Do you or your organisation agree that the approaches we have outlined above are sufficient to ensure the following categories of women/organisations can take part?

The measures outlined in the consultation document are all positive steps in engaging with women across society and across equality strands. However, the TUC believes that these steps alone are not sufficient.

The way in which the question is framed does not recognise how multi-faceted women's lives and identities are and the intersections between different equality strands. One single woman could be categorised by more than a dozen of the 'categories of women' listed in the consultation document.

The measures outlined in the document cannot be considered in a political vacuum. It must be noted that the women's sector and the women represented by the trade union movement are contending with an onslaught of cuts to funding, cuts to jobs, cuts to services, cuts to welfare, and - particularly in the third sector - increased competition leading to fewer specialist services and increasingly large, non-specialist organisations winning contracts and driving down pay and conditions. The issue of funding and resources must be taken into consideration when considering how the government engages with women's organisations.

Question 5:

In this section we outline our envisaged approach to direct engagement. Please let us know which of the following in your organisation's view is most effective; conferences; discussion groups; networking events; training events; visits by ministers?

The TUC welcomes all of the forms of engagement listed and does not recognise the need to rank them in order of efficacy. All forms of engagement listed have their place and are of value to different groups in different contexts.

It is important to note that the ability of individual women and groups representing women to engage in these processes will to a large extent be determined by funding and resources. Once again, in a context of reduced funding and spending cuts, many women and organisations will find it harder to engage in the processes described in the consultation. Whether it is a question of reduced funding for travel expenses when attending conferences or training events or a question of lack of resources to engage with discussion groups or to respond to consultations, it must be recognised that there is a danger that only the larger, better resourced organisations will be able to engage.

As mentioned in response to Question 3, at a recent TUC Women's Committee meeting there was a lengthy discussion regarding this consultation and one of the themes to emerge was a sense that women and trade unions are not being listened to. If individual women and organisations representing women such as trade unions are to invest time and resources in engaging with government, it is vital that their participation is worth their while and that government is seen to actually respond to their concerns and recommendations.

Any 'direct engagement' must be meaningful and must be a two way process rather than just an opportunity for participants to hear about government plans or proposals. 'Engagement' must mean that women and representative organisations must be given the opportunity to respond to government proposals and to influence and shape government policy. Women's organisations must have a voice to ensure that the agenda of any such engagement reflects their priorities.

Question 6:

Please let us know which of the following in your organisation's view is the most effective; time-limited 'expert' groups, one-off policy forums; consortiums to provide expertise on specific issues; commissioning organisations or businesses?

The TUC queries the need to create new, time-limited expert groups when many specialist groups already exist within the women's sector.

The suggestion that businesses may be commissioned to gather views of women is particularly worrying for the TUC. The TUC cannot see the role for business in engaging with women's organisations and representing the views of women.

The question of whose views would be represented on 'expert panels' is also troubling. Any panel or body advising government on policy relating to women must represent all relevant interest groups, not just a select few 'experts' and 'business leaders'. Trade unions represent some three million working women in the UK and, as such, are an important voice to consider when developing policy.

The notion of a 'one-off' policy forum suggests a lack of ongoing dialogue and interaction between government and the women's sector. The TUC would not like to see policy devised on the basis of a single 'snapshot' or one-off forum - particularly if that forum is not representative of the women's sector and organisations representing women such as trade unions.

Given the precariousness of organisations working in the women's sector at the present time, it is important to note that many specialist services in the women's sector simply do not have the capacity to engage in the types of activities outlined in the consultation document.

According to a WRC member survey in 2011, 95% of women's sector organisations face funding cuts or a funding crisis in the next year. A Women's Aid survey in March 2011 found that 60% of refuge services have no funding agreed from 1st April 2011 and 72% of outreach services have no funding agreed from 1st April 2011.

The UKRC is an example of an organisation representing women which offered unparalleled expertise and had consistently delivered results (using the government's own preferred measure of Social Return on Investment) yet which faced funding cuts of 80%. The research based expertise of organisations such as UKRC cannot be replaced by one off policy forums or 'expert' groups with business representatives.

Similarly the TUC believes that the government's decision to cease to fund the Poppy Project and to instead fund the Salvation Army represented a shift away from expert and specialist services to generic services.

In order to engage effectively with those services that offer unrivalled expertise in their given area, the government must commit to funding these organisations.

Question 7:

In section 2.4 we outline what we mean by looking ahead. Please let us know which of the following in your organisation's view is the most effective; direct engagement; online engagement; conferences; specially commissioned research; official data and statistics.

Once again the TUC questions the appropriateness and logic of ranking options by preference and creating unnecessary and meaningless hierarchies. The approaches listed are not mutually exclusive and the TUC would like to see the GEO using a range of approaches to engage with the women's sector and representative bodies.

The TUC believes that engaging with women's sector organisations and representative bodies such as trade unions is a more effective means of engagement than listening to individual women's voices.

When engaging with individual women there is a danger that the loudest and most eloquent voices will be heard at the expense of women who are less confident or less able to engage directly.

Marginalised groups of women are less likely to be heard if the government favours direct communication with individual women. Women's sector organisations and representative bodies such as trade unions are able to give voice to a wide range of their members' or service users' concerns, including marginalised and hard-to-reach groups of women.

The TUC does not believe that online means of communication, such as webchats and online surveys, are likely to engage with a broad spectrum of women. Just some examples of women who may be excluded from online engagement are:

• marginalised women
• women without access to IT
• women who are not IT literate
• women who do not speak English as a first language
• women with low levels of literacy
• disabled women who need accessible materials such as Braille

Online surveys may be of some use in gathering information from NGOs and trade unions working with women.

Census data is useful but can only provide a very limited amount of information about a single 'snapshot'. Since the census is only carried out at 10 year intervals the data collected is all too quickly out-of-date.

Other sources of official data such as the labour market statistics provided by the Office for National Statistics should continue to provide a rich source of information about emerging trends and issues for women. The TUC has expressed concern in a separate consultation by the ONS (The Future of NOMIS) about the proposed changes to NOMIS. The TUC uses NOMIS data in a variety of different ways, including data on women in the labour market. It is vital that the government continues to produce such data and to disaggregate data by gender (and other equality strands) wherever it is possible and appropriate to do so.

A great deal of in-depth, robust research has been produced by third sector organisations in the women's sector, trade unions, professional associations and academics. Such research is often entirely contingent on adequate funding from central government or from grant giving bodies. The TUC would encourage the GEO to continue to recognise the wealth of expertise and the 'reach' of those organisations already carrying out research relating to women and to safeguard funding and grants in the sector to ensure that this research continues.

Commissioning business to carry out research (as suggested in section 2.3, paragraph 23 of the consultation document) is a poor substitute for funding existing experts in the field to carry out the research in their area of expertise.

Question 8:

In this section we outline the way we envisage the IT platform will operate. Please identify the top five [means of communication] which your organisation consider should be available on the new site.

The TUC welcomes the proposal that policy updates, signposting to other departments' policies, information on international policy and links to international fora such as UN Women should all be available on the GEO website. The TUC also supports GEO newsletters and e-bulletins with updates from ministers and officials.

While recognising the limitations of ICT as a means of conveying information regarding policies to women (as mentioned earlier, many women do not have access to the internet, particularly at a time when many local libraries with free internet facilities are closing), the TUC can see the value in improving the existing GEO website to provide more policy information and links to those who are able to access it.

However, the TUC is concerned by proposals to use an IT platform as a means of 'voting' on policy proposals or gathering information from women. It is one thing to use IT to convey information, recognising that it may not reach everyone. It is another thing to use IT to gather information which may inform policy decisions, given that the information has been gathered from a small and unrepresentative sample.

The TUC is alarmed by recent moves such as the government's Red Tape Challenge which seek to make policy decisions on the basis of public online voting or anonymous comments on websites. Policy cannot and must not be devised on the basis of online gimmicks.

As outlined above, those who vote will invariably be a small and unrepresentative sample group. The online voting format does not distinguish between individual respondents or voters and those representing the views of significant groups of women such as third sector organisations and trade unions.

Furthermore, online voting systems are open to abuse and it would be difficult to prevent multiple votes from one person for example.

It is the TUC's view that information gathering and opinion canvassing are better achieved through open and transparent public consultation and rigorous and robust research rather than online surveys and votes.

In summary, the TUC supports the use of technology to disseminate information - with the important caveat that other means of dissemination must also be used in order to reach those who cannot access the internet for various reasons. However, the TUC does not support the use of technology as a substitute for the usual policy making processes of evidence based research and public consultation.

Questions 9 & 10:

As above

Question 11:

IT and Social Media tools

While the TUC recognises the benefits of social media as a means of communication with affiliates, union reps, union officials, and other interested parties, it also recognises the limitations of these new forms of communication. The TUC successfully uses newsletters, blogs, discussion groups and email bulletins in a range of different ways to communicate with different interest groups but recognises that these technologies facilitate conversations between a certain web-savvy group of users but may not reach the wider union audience.

The TUC believes it is important to separate out the different aims and objectives of different communication methods and to identify the appropriate technology to achieve those aims. For instance, using Flikr, YouTube, Vimeo or other file sharing technology may be useful to share PowerPoint slides and documents with participants in a workshop or conference but these technologies may not be useful, relevant or accessible to a wider audience.

Many TUC newsletters are sent out as hard copies as well as by email in recognition of the fact that many of the intended readers may not have regular internet access or personal email accounts.

According to the government's own statistics, 27% of UK households do not have access to the internet. Some 9.2 million adults in the UK have never used the internet.

There is a strong correlation between social class and education and internet usage. Thirty one percent of adults with an income of less than £10,399 had never used the internet. According to the same household survey, 45 per cent of adults without any formal qualifications had used the Internet, compared with 97 per cent of those with a degree.

There is also a regional digital divide with only 59% of households in the North East of England having access to the internet as compared to 83% in London.

Of those that do have internet access, not all will use social networking websites such as Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. It is not clear from the consultation document how GEO is proposing to use social media to engage with women. Without any further detail it is hard to see what possible purpose social networking sites could serve in terms of improving government engagement with women and organisations representing women.

Questions 13-26:

About your organisation

The TUC is the voice of Britain at work. With 55 affiliated unions representing 6.2 million working people, and approximately 3 million women from all walks of life, we campaign for a fair deal at work and for social justice at home and abroad.

We negotiate in Europe, and at home build links with political parties, business, local communities and wider society.

The TUC has a women's committee elected at the statutory annual women's conference. As well as campaigning on equality issues closely associated with the workplace such as equal pay, the gender pay gap, occupational segregation, pensions, maternity rights, and workplace sexual harassment, the TUC also campaigns on a range of other issues affecting women such as violence against women and girls and abortion rights.

The TUC is a campaigning organisation and acts as an umbrella organisation for affiliated trade unions.

While many trade unions and individual union members will respond to this consultation, the TUC speaks on behalf of its affiliates and the views represented in this consultation response reflect discussions with TUC women's committee members.

The TUC and the unions affiliated to the TUC represent the interests of all of the groups listed in Question 29.

---

ITU 2008

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/iahinr0810.pdf