SWBG blog

Does the Draft Scottish Budget Meet Women’s Needs? The Women’s Economic Empowerment Group Discuss

The women’s economic empowerment group met after the Cabinet Secretary presented her budget to Parliament last week. The discussion focused on whether they felt their needs and the needs of women reflected in the budget decisions taken.

The Cabinet Secretary mentioned care 15 times, tax 16 times, poverty 5 times and investment 23 times while disabled/disability and women weren’t mentioned at all. Despite this, it could be argued that a number of the announcements made could benefit both women and disabled people. This included increased funding for wraparound care, funding for colleges to support disabled people into employment, and the increase in Scottish Child Payment for Under1’s from 2027.

The overall feeling of the group was that, while the Cabinet Secretary had said some positive things about areas they cared about, they weren’t sure that the funding allocated would actually make a difference in their lives. For instance, women shared their experiences of having difficulties getting GP appointments and of having their health concerns taken seriously. They felt that the additional funding to primary care and, in particular, to the walk-in GP clinics could make a difference. However, they were unclear how long this would take and if they and their families would benefit from the decisions taken anytime soon. They also queried what funding would be available to address the health inequalities experienced by women, who despite the publication and delivery of the Women’s Health Plan in 2021 are experiencing longer waiting times to access gynaecological services.1

The group had questions about whether budget decisions recognised the interconnectedness of the systems that we interact with. They highlighted this in relation to the announcement of funding for the Summer of Sport and the offer of free-swimming lessons. They questioned whether this budget announcement took any cognisance of decisions made in recent years at the local authority level to close or reduce the opening hours of facilities, and how funding to local authorities in general would support the delivery of these services. They queried whether disabled children would benefit from these announcements, and if the funding would be enough to address the barriers they often experience.

They also questioned whether additional funding for employability support would support more parents into work without addressing the challenges posed by the current childcare offer, or how, without changes in employers’ willingness to employ and support disabled people, this funding would lead to more disabled people accessing good-quality employment.

After listening to the Cabinet Secretary’s announcement, the questions posed to her afterwards and her responses, the group’s reaction was: “You can tell we are in an election year.” However, despite being in an election year, there were things the group felt were missing from the budget statement. While they welcomed the introduction of the mansion tax and the taxing of private jets, they felt that further changes were needed to make the system more progressive overall. They were also concerned about social care. While it had been mentioned, they weren’t convinced that the Budget paid enough attention to the problems being experienced across Scotland or to the recommendations made by the local government committee in their pre-budget scrutiny. 

Finally, there was a lack of optimism that these announcements would make a difference to them and their families due to the way these will be delivered at a local level.

Conclusion 

All in all, the group were left with a mixed feeling. While they recognised that the Budget included some positive announcements, it ultimately failed to tackle some systemic problems, such as the undervaluation of care and problems with implementation.