If any of you follow the Women’s Budget Group, you will have seen a huge growth in the amount of analysis that they are putting out. The general election and Brexit have been busy times with lots of new potential policies being proposed and therefore… Read More »Brilliant work from the Women’s Budget Group
It was great to be back at the London School of Economics and Politics again running a day-long workshop for Masters students on Gender Budgeting for Change and Campaigning for Change. They are such a fantastic group of people to work with – challenging and… Read More »Gender Budgeting and Campaigning for Change at LSE
First published on the Women’s Resource Centre Tumblr
The government must report to the committee about the steps they have made towards women’s equality in key areas such as health, employment, education, representation, social and economic benefits, sex role stereotyping, trafficking and marriage and family law.
Just three weeks prior to this, the Chancellor announced his spending review for 2015-16 detailing government spending cuts and increases in advance of the 2015 election. But how and why are CEDAW and the government’s economic policies connected?
How governments spend and raise money have different implications on women and men. When the some of the Women’s Budget Group, a network of over 200 academics and experts, met to discuss the Chancellor’s spending review, it was clear his announcement held significant disadvantages to women.
Though CEDAW makes no specific references to public expenditure, it does ask the government to take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against and ‘ensure the full development and advancement of’ women (Articles 2, 3). They must achieve this not only through active government policy to improve gender equality but also to ensure that their policies don’t unintentionally discriminate against women.