THE Treasury last night refused to back down on proposals that would see women who have been raped forced to provide proof of the attack to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) when applying for tax credits.
As reported in yesterday’s National, detail provided by the Government about their plan to limit tax credits to a family’s first two children said that exceptions would be made if a third child was conceived through rape.
The statement angered many MPs and women’s groups.
Glasgow Central MP Alison Thewliss, who first noticed the proviso, was deeply critical of the government’s plans: “It is completely unfair to limit child tax credits to the first two children in a family; it is absolutely callous and inhumane however to ask a woman who has been a victim of rape to fill in some kind of form or to declare to a member of DWP staff that her child has been the product of rape. It piles humiliation on top of trauma. Tory ministers cannot say whether a woman will have to prove this, whether it will depend on a conviction – we know that rates of conviction are still far too low. It puts a woman in a very vulnerable position, and risks stigmatising both mother and child. The government must rethink this offensive proposal as a matter of urgency.”
The Treasury did not provide details of how the system would work. In the Red Book, the paper provides the details behind the Chancellor’s summer Budget, the Treasury simply said: “The Department for Work and Pensions and HMRC will develop protections for women who have a third child as the result of rape, or other exceptional circumstances.”
Sandy Brindley from Rape Crisis Scotland expressed major concerns about how this would work.
“This proposal is ill-conceived and unhelpful,” Brindley said. “It is difficult to see how it can be implemented. Rape is a very traumatic crime to experience. It can be difficult for a rape survivor to disclose what has happened to them to their closest friends or family but under this proposal they will be expected to disclose it to the DWP in order to qualify for benefits”.
Brindley continued: “What training will DWP staff receive in responding to disclosures of rape? Most rapes aren’t reported to the police. How is someone going to ‘prove’ to the DWP that they have been raped?”
Yesterday morning East Renfrewshire MP Kirsten Oswald raised the issue with Chris Grayling, Leader of the House of Commons. The MP asked Grayling to allow time for a debate on the “incredibly distasteful” proposal.
Grayling dismissed Oswald’s call and claimed Chancellor George Osborne had made clear the system would be “sensitive”.
Grayling said: “The Chancellor was clear yesterday that this provision will be designed to handle difficult cases in the most sensitive way possible. However, she must understand the necessity of putting in place a system of welfare that is grounded in common sense and designed to help people back into the workplace. She will know that there have been many examples of people with large families who are overt in their statements that they had such large families to take advantage of the welfare system.”
Oswald said Grayling’s answer was unacceptable and didn’t address the issue. Speaking to The National, Oswald said there were too many questions around the proposal. She said: “How on earth will this work? What if you didn’t want your child or other people to know the circumstances of their conception? How are DWP staff equipped to deal with this? Is it only if your third child is conceived as the result of a violent sexual attack? Is it going to be a tick-box exercise? There is no sensible structure that can be put in place here.”
A Treasury spokesperson said: “As part of the reforms to the welfare system set out in the Budget, we are absolutely clear there needs to be adequate protection for victims of rape and other exceptional circumstances. The details of these protections will be set out in due course.”
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