Women’s right and public sector funding (Scotland): please feedback

Email sent!!!

And organisations which recite every got funding aren’t subject to FOIs. I think we need to ask that any org with a turnover of, whatever, half a million? Of which over 50% is funded through taxation, public money (I’m including money like lottery money which is public cash) has to be subject to FOIs. Better still has much more transparency and accountability. We need to have means of holding these orgs to account. Should Audit Scotland have right to have oversight? I don’t know. I’m saying we need to put democratic accountability on the table when it’s public money at play. We need to discuss how that scrutiny happens.

Done

Thanks Betsy for the pointers.

Have signed up thanks Susan

Just bumping this in honour of Magdalen Berns.

I have, I just got the newsletter. :)

As Betsy says, it's in the latest newsletter. Please sign up here, if you haven't already.
forwomen.scot/take-part/

That's brilliant, Betsy, thank you.

The latest newsletter from Forwomen.Scot has some info which may be helpful for putting together a submission:

We will be submitting a response to the consultation on the funding of third sector organisations. It is a good opportunity to let the Scottish Government know that vulnerable women are being harmed as a result of policies being influenced by organisations advocating for transgender ideology and legislation.

As the deadline is this Friday 23rd August, we would also encourage everyone to put in their own submission as soon as possible. The more voices the Government receives reminding them that women and children matter, the better. Respondents need not be resident in Scotland. All responses will be considered by the Equalities and Human Rights Committee.

Some points you may wish to consider in your response:

• Women still face structural disadvantage yet have no funded third sector representation (Engender are a mixed sex organisation (constitution states self-id) and have stated they do not represent women).

• Funding for women's groups appears to be conditional on having a transwomen inclusive policy, which prohibits any use of single-sex exceptions allowed under the Equality Act. These conditions should be removed as soon as possible.

• Imbalance in funding, with LGBT groups heavily funded. Even within these organisations, there is a disproportionate focus on the T, indicating the remit is not fulfilled across the board. See the funding allocations here.

• Money does not always go to the correct place eg. Equality Network which is concerned with sexuality and transgender identity received considerable funding for support of Differences of Sex Development, which would have been better allocated to a charity concerned with these medical conditions.

• Funding for advocacy organisations should be contingent on them demonstrating how they have consulted with the interest groups they claim to represent. Many new grassroots groups such as FWS and Women & Girls in Scotland were formed in response to Engender not being representative. Similar issues exist with Scottish Trans Alliance not representing the views of many transsexual people.

• No oversight across all the protected characteristics. Funding and influence often given to one area only with no consideration on how policies will impact on other vulnerable groups. For example, the LGBT Youth transgender guidance for schools which breached girls human rights, or Glasgow Life's changing room and toilet policy which has the effect of excluding women and religious service users. Third sector organisations often do not have legal expertise and have been found to give incorrect information eg. Stonewall incorrectly advising local authorities on the Equality Act.

• Many equality organisations provide front-line services so should be subject to the same Public Sector Equality Duties as public bodies, including the need to conduct Equality Impact Assessments. The lack of these contributes to the failure to identify or address issues when there are competing rights.

• Little accountability, outcomes of funding should be publicly reported (maybe this annual report should be made public) and organisations in receipt of public money should be subject to Freedom of Information requests.

Has anyone requested that their name not be published with their submission? I feel a bit wary having it published but also feel I shouldn't shy away from it.

Perhaps Wings of Scotland could tweet it? People don’t have to give long answers, even a brief emailed paragraph would help.

argh.

Deadline is this Friday!!

reminding self to do this bump

Thanks Birdsfoot I'm not very confident at writing but I'll give it a go. The more responses the better, I would hope.

Bump

Do you have to be in Scotland to fill this in? I'm in England but have been considering a move to Scotland.

Depressing, Birdsfoot. I had thought use of anecdotes in parliamentary debate was to try and push emotive responses/a rhetorical technique. Bit horrifying to think it might be the only thing they're aware of ...

I answered as a public sector worker who signposts vulnerable people to third sector organisations. I only answered the first, second and last questions.

My response might not be given much weight but I felt it was worth giving my perspective.

Okay, thanks Birdsfoot, I shall add it to my list for later in the week. I can see at least parts of it might be relevant to some groups/programmes I'm involved with.