THE UK Government could be forced to respond to public revulsion over the so-called rape clause.
Thousands have signed up to a petition on the Parliament’s website calling on Theresa May and her ministers to “repeal the ‘family cap’ measures in the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016, including all of its exemptions”.
The petition is on course to reach 10,000 signatures imminently which will automatically force the Government to issue a response. It if reaches 100,000 signatures then it will almost certainly trigger a debate on the issue in Parliament.
Much to the annoyance of the Tories, anger over the rape clause is not going away. Hundreds attended a rally in Glasgow’s George Square on Thursday night protesting what the Government have euphemistically called the “non-consensual conception exception” to the two-child limit on benefits.
The only way a family can apply for welfare for a third dependent, is for a mother to prove her son or daughter was conceived as the result of rape. Anyone applying for that exemption must fill out an eight-page form, and name the child.
Campaigner Alys Mumford who set up the petition, which went live on Thursday, said the rape clause “cannot be delivered in a way that does not breach women’s rights and undermine women’s equality and safety”.
Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson infuriated protesters after she said the Government would be guilty of “gross hypocrisy” unless they mitigated the need for the rape clause.
“At Holyrood, we now have the power to create new benefits. So the Scottish Government could, if it wanted, propose a new benefit to provide funding for families with more than two children,” Davidson said.
She added: “Of course this would have to be paid for, but if the SNP Government believes this to be of such importance, then it can act. However, if Nicola Sturgeon simply wants to use this to complain about the policies of the UK Government — and not act at Holyrood when she has the power to do so — then she leaves herself open to the charge of gross hypocrisy.”
Sturgeon called Davidson’s comment “pathetic”.
“@scotgov spends millions mitigating welfare cuts & will continue to do so. We wouldn’t have to if Tories didn’t make callous cuts,” the First Minister added.
Responding on her Facebook to some of the criticism, MSP Annie Wells, a rising star of the Tory Party attacked campaigners, accusing them of “bandying about” a “topic of such a highly sensitive nature on Twitter with the use of hashtags”.
She then claimed there was “misinformation currently in the public domain”, and said all any women with a child conceived with rape would need is evidence from “a third party professional, such as a health worker or support worker, will be required” and that there would be no need to involve police.
Wells was immediately criticised. “Forced disclosure is traumatising,” Emma Ritch from Engender told the MSP.
Labour MSP Monica Lennon tweeted: “No @AnnieWellsMSP it’s not hashtags stopping mums and rape survivors getting help. Don’t you dare blame the women fighting your #rapeclause”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here