‘Callous decision’ by council to withdraw women’s aid funding
The inquiry committee must get to the bottom of whether there was a ‘malicious plan’
A Scottish council has defunded Women’s Aid services across its area, becoming the first local authority to withdraw financial support for the organisations which offer refuge and support for women and girls fleeing domestic violence and abuse.
North Lanarkshire Council has been accused of taking a “callous step” by cancelling its £350,000 annual payment to three Women’s Aid groups in return for striking a new £1 million contract with Sacro, the offender rehabilitation organisation.
The Scotsman understands that Monklands Women’s Aid, Motherwell District Women’s Aid and North Lanarkshire Women’s Aid all tendered for the new contract but were unsuccessful as they do not accept men into their refuges and do not work with perpetrators of violence.
Statistics for domestic abuse
innorthlanarkshireshowthat there is nearly one incident for every 37 households, with Airdrie and Coatbridge the worst affected.accordingtothecouncil’s own figures, 89 per cent of victims are women, and 11 per cent men.
Dr Marsha Scott, chief executive of Scottish Women’s Aid, said she was “appalled” at the actionsofthecouncilwhichhad “pulled the rug from under the feetoflong-established,trusted women’s aid services” and that legal action could be taken.
“While Women’s Aid services were busy responding to Covid-19tocontinueprovidingtheir vital support for women, children and young people experiencing domestic abuse in North Lanarkshire, they were met with hostility in unnecessary,competitivetenderingprocesses from North Lanarkshire Council that lacked both transparency and accountability,” she said.
“This did not have to happen and the result is that North Lanarkshire is now the only local authority area in Scotland that does not commission Women’s Aid services – a sad reflectionoftheircompletelack of understanding of the complex nature of domestic abuse and an upsetting dismissal of decades of work by grass-roots, localwomen’saidserviceswho are trusted and respected within their communities.”
She added: “Women in Scotland have felt a disproportionate impact of Covid – whether in unpaid care work, home schooling, job losses or homelessness.”
In his evidence to the MSPS’ committee investigating the Scottish Government’s mishandling of complaints made against him, Alex Salmond said he was not alleging there had been a conspiracy against him.
Instead, he called it a “malicious scheme or plan or campaign over a prolonged period of time”, making a distinction that may be lost on many.
The former First Minister said he had evidence to support his claims, pointing to text messages sent by SNP figures, including one by Peter Murrell, Nicola Sturgeon’s husband and the party’s chief executive, in which, the day after Salmond was charged, he said it was a “good time to be pressurising” the police. But he also made clear he believes there is evidence that the committee has not been allowed to see that would further back for his allegations.
Given what we know about Salmond’s admitted behaviour, his reputation will be forever tarnished and so he should not be regarded the most upstanding of citizens.
However, his evidence will be fuel to the fire of conspiracy theorists who have not been quite so circumspect and that poses a danger to the reputation of Scotland’s democratic and legal institutions. It is most unsatisfactory that this shadow of suspicion should be allowed to hang over them. The committee examining the Scottish Government’s handling of the complaints against Salmond and MSPS have stressed he is not on trial. However, the conflicting accounts of Salmond and Sturgeon must be properly tested and so both are on trial, if only in the court of public opinion.
The credibility and integrity of the current First Minister and other senior figures in the SNP and government have been called into question. The people of Scotland need to know whether or not Salmond’s claims are true or not and have confidence in the process of establishing this.
All pertinent evidence – including the Scottish Government’s legal advice about its position in the judicial review of the complaints process brought by Salmond – that can be made public, should be.
The anonymity of the women who complained about Salmond’s actions must be preserved and if the Salmond inquiry committee must sit in private in order for this to be achieved, then so be it, but it does need to get to the bottom of whether there was a “malicious plan” or a conspiracy, call it what you will, or not.