Women's Social and Political Union
The final item of business today is a members' business debate on motion S2M-481, in the name of Cathy Peattie, on the Women's Social and Political Union. The debate will be concluded without any questions being put.
Motion debated,
That the Parliament notes that, on 10 October 1903, a group of women met in the Manchester home of Emmeline Pankhurst and founded the Women's Social and Political Union, which became known as the suffragette movement, with the aim of recruiting more working class women into the struggle for the vote and believes that this centenary year should be marked by efforts to promote the participation of women in the democratic process.
I start with a quotation from Emmeline Pankhurst in 1912:
"We in the Suffragette Army have a great mission: the greatest mission the world has ever known—the freeing of one half of the human race and the saving of the other half.
I incite this meeting to rebellion."
A hundred years ago, there had been little progress since Mary Wollstonecraft had published "A Vindication of the Rights of Women". Women had no right to education at university—with or without the award of degrees—and no right to become medical doctors; married women had no right to property of their own; and no women had the vote. Reform bills came and went, extending the male franchise, but, despite attempts at amendment by John Stuart Mill in 1867 and Woodall in 1884, Parliament refused to extend the franchise to women.
The National Union of Women's Suffrage Societies—known as the suffragists—started in 1867 with branches in London, Manchester and Edinburgh. By the turn of the century, there were also branches in Glasgow, Dundee and Aberdeen, but the union had only limited success: women were allowed to vote in some municipal elections.
In 1903, the Women's Social and Political Union was formed in Manchester to extend the struggle for votes to working-class women. The Daily Mail tagged the women "suffragettes". They organised marches and demonstrations, and, after 1907, in frustration at the lack of progress, increasingly turned to civil disobedience.
In Glasgow, the Women's Social and Political Union was very much an organisation of the political left. Its establishment in 1906 happily coincided with the launch of a new radical weekly newspaper, the Forward, which provided a platform for the campaign.
It is important to recognise the role that many Scottish women played in the votes-for-women crusade, and I do not have time to mention them all. Mrs Bream Pearce, or Lily Bell, was a regular columnist in the Forward. The Glasgow artist Helen Fraser was a national organiser who championed the cause of the suffragettes in by-elections in South Aberdeen, Hexham, and Kincardineshire, and in Montrose and Stirling burghs. Flora Drummond, known as "the general" because of her charm and great organisational skills, was often called on to organise large rallies and events. Indeed, she could be called an early spin-doctor.
Scottish suffragettes smashed windows, cut telegraph and telephone wires, poured acid in pillar boxes and set fire to public buildings. Women were imprisoned and some who continued their protests with hunger strikes were force-fed. Others were released to recover before being re-arrested to continue their sentence under the so-called cat-and-mouse act. Kier Hardie, speaking on the Prisoners (Temporary Discharge for Ill-Health) Bill, said:
"The endurance and heroism that these women are showing in prison equals, if it does not excel, anything we have witnessed on the field of battle or elsewhere."—[Official Report, House of Commons, 21 April 1913; Vol 52, c 52.]
In early July 1914, a visit to Perth by King George and Queen Mary was met by suffragettes demonstrating against the use of forcible feeding in Perth prison. One of the hunger strikers who was around at that time was Janet Arthur, Lord Kitchener's niece, who tried to blow up Burns's cottage in Alloway. Having had no food or drink in Ayr prison for five days, she was moved to Perth prison, where three other hunger strikers were held. She later described her fate as follows:
"The wardresses held me down, and one of them reached forward and slapped my face … the assistant doctor held my head in a most painful grip. Dr Watson then tried to force my teeth open with the steel gag, and said that if he broke a tooth it would be my own fault.
As he was unable to open my mouth he called for the nasal tube. He tried to force it up one side … but with all his strength could not force a passage. He succeeded in forcing it down the other nostril, and left it hanging there while he went out of the room. As it was extremely painful, I asked the assistant to remove it, but he only laughed. Dr Watson returned and fed me.
The wardresses continued holding me down so that I couldn't move, and the assistant doctor continued to hold his hands over my mouth and whenever the food came up tightened his grip to prevent me letting it out."
With the outbreak of war, the suffragettes' campaign abated. However, the contribution of women to the war gave added weight to their demands, and in 1918 women over 30 got the vote. In 1928, the threshold was lowered to 21, the same as for men.
We owe those women so much, and I believe that we have a responsibility to continue their work. We do not have to chain ourselves to the railings, but we can continue their work through our democratic system to ensure that young women are nurtured and encouraged to enter political life.
There are still many battles to fight—to close the pay gap, to end poverty here and across the world, to achieve a more equal society and to remove the glass ceiling. To do all those things and more, women must have a key role as decision makers at all levels, yet so many women feel that their voices are not heard. Many women do not even vote. Women are active in communities and voluntary organisations, making their communities better places to live. We must find ways of encouraging them to participate in the democratic process. Most councils have a handful of women councillors; how can we bring them closer together?
I am proud to be a member of the Scottish Labour Party—the only party at the first Scottish Parliament elections to agree a 50:50 selection process. I am grateful to the Scottish trade union movement, the Scottish Trades Union Congress women's committee and organisations such as Engender, which worked tirelessly not only for the establishment of a Scottish Parliament but also for 50:50 representation. The Scottish Parliament has the fourth highest representation of women in the world, but we must strive to ensure that young women are ready to take that work forward. In 100 years, so much work has been done, but there is still much to be done.
I shall close by singing a few lines by James Oppenheimer.
"As we come marching, marching, we bring the greater days,
The rising of the women means the rising of the race.
No more the drudge and idler, ten that toil where one reposes,
But the sharing of life's glories—bread and roses, bread and roses."
I am proud to bring this debate to Parliament today. [Applause.]
Encore!
I call Christine Grahame to be followed by Marlyn Glen.
You have caught me on the hop writing my speech, Presiding Officer. That shows how busy women are. Members will be glad to know that I am not going to sing—if I were to let them hear me singing in private, they would understand why.
A hundred years on, how much we take for granted and how far we still have to go. Cathy Peattie eloquently described what women went through to get the vote, but we now toss it aside lightly—by "we", I mean society at large—and do not bother to go to the polls or register to vote, which is shameful. I do not quite believe that voting should be made compulsory, but something ought to be done, if only in memory of those people who fought so hard and suffered so much—the force-feeding, humiliation and vilification—to obtain it.
My first point is that the vote is precious, but I also want to talk about the young girls of today, who have a much harder time than I had when I was growing up and was liberated, as it were. At the age of seven or eight, young girls are put into clothing that makes them into young teenagers, and they are expected to see Britney Spears or Christina Aguilera as role models. That is not a problem, as we all have flim-flam in our lives—I still have some—but it becomes a problem when there is nothing but flim-flam and all efforts are concentrated on how one looks, how thin one is and whether one can look 35 when one is 55. The pressures on women are outrageous and they must be brought to an end.
Mary Scanlon will forgive me, but the only role model that was ever really on the political scene, was, of course, Margaret Thatcher, who had a privileged life, was well-off and had a rich husband—that is where I went wrong in life. She had her children looked after and brought in policies that were anti-family, such as taking milk away from schoolchildren and the introduction of the poll tax, which was both anti-family and anti-poorer people. Many more women than men fall into the category of being poor. Margaret Thatcher was not a good omen for women in politics, although we have redressed the issue, and many better women have been involved in politics since then. At the risk of being obsequious, I point out that some of them are in the chamber now.
Practical problems still exist. When I went to university, a grant and other support was available, but people do not have that support now. My parents had four daughters and one son and, given that I am the least troublesome of those four daughters, I think that the son was disadvantaged. That is hard to believe, but true—members should meet my sister who lives in Orkney. We had my father's support to develop careers if we wished although there was no pressure on us to do so. That still does not happen in some households in Scotland. I bet that some girls are still told, "Get away out and get a man and get settled down," which is what my granny told me many moons ago. Thankfully, I ignored that completely.
Apart from cultural issues, there are other practical problems. A mother cannot be wonder woman; it is not easy to arrange child care and have a career or a job. Children are not convenient and do not run to a timetable. When they are sick, it always happens at 4 o'clock in the morning, at which point the mother has to do something about work the next day. Somehow, women are expected to cope with such situations and still look as if they are 35 when they are 45. Some women are under huge pressures, although I am glad to say that I am not under them.
Although a lot has happened, I sometimes feel that the wheel has gone a little too far and that we need to backtrack a bit. Men and women are not equal; they are different and different things happen in their lives. People require aid with their differences so that they can have equality of opportunity. By saying that people are not equal, I mean that they are not the same. The Scottish Parliament has done well, but it could do more.
Am I running out of time, Presiding Officer?
I had envisaged that members would speak for about four minutes, but you can have up to five.
I will finish on this point, which I already touched on. Let us think of elderly women, many of whom do not get the full state pension because they never paid enough stamps, as they took time off to have children. They are often on benefits and as they live longer they have to rely on society for their care in the community. On those issues, which women understand, we could do more here and at Westminster to ensure that women have a legacy from those fair women of the past so that they do not still find themselves disadvantaged just because of their sex.
If we run out of time, I will take it off the men.
I am delighted that Cathy Peattie has secured the debate and I support the call to mark the centenary year of the WSPU with efforts to promote the participation of women in the democratic process.
We all share the same sense of outrage when we ask a woman about her voting intentions and she says that she never votes. However, sometimes women are persuaded to vote after a bit of encouragement and after hearing a bit of the history that we are remembering today, which it is important for us never to forget. Of course our sense of outrage at non-voters stems from remembering when women were not allowed to vote. Every woman and man should recognise that long, hard struggle by always exercising their right to vote.
I will add a Dundee dimension to the debate. The Dundee branch of the WSPU operated in the early 1900s in the Nethergate and its organiser was a Miss McLean—no doubt at least a spiritual ancestor of our MSP Kate Maclean, in whose constituency the branch operated. The members did the usual things that radical political women still do—agitate, advocate and demonstrate. The more militant moved from heckling to smashing windows, egg throwing and, in some cases, even arson. Ethel Moorhead's first major act of political defiance was to throw an egg at Winston Churchill during a meeting in Dundee. She became the first suffragette in Scotland to undergo the horrors of force-feeding in 1914. I apologise if this sounds like a history lesson, especially to the Presiding Officer.
It brings back 25 happy years in the classroom.
I thought that it might.
The 1908 Dundee by-election saw Winston Churchill returned as MP. At that time, he was a left-of-centre Liberal, but his association with Dundee was neither happy nor long lasting. The Women's Freedom League used the occasion of the by-election to highlight the discriminatory nature of the franchise by producing mock polling cards for polling day. I am holding an enlarged copy of one of those cards. The card was designed to look official, but it had a stark political message. It tells women to take the card with them, but says that because they are women, they may not vote. It also bears a couple of slogans:
"Legislation without representation is slavery"
and
"Taxation without representation is tyranny".
It is unfortunate that those slogans still resonate in some parts of the world today.
Women were denied the vote altogether and that is the message that we should give women voters. It is all too easy to forget the steps forward that women made and how hard they had to struggle.
Members of the WSPU in its early years would have felt hugely satisfied if they had known that 100 years later not only would women have the vote and that there would be a few women MPs down the decades but that here in Scotland and in Wales so much positive action was being taken to make women legislators.
Turnout was dismal in the two Scottish Parliament elections and the most recent Westminster general election, and young women make up one of the core groups of abstainers. That is not to say that young women are politically apathetic. The huge numbers of young women and men who took to the streets to demonstrate against the war in Iraq in February and the thousands who are involved in single-issue politics all have an interest that lies outside the current style of party politics.
The WSPU's ideals will be fulfilled only if we can bring those women into our political culture, so that they vote and take voting seriously and, more important, if we work with the same vigour for the rights of women who work outside politics with which we worked for the rights of women in politics.
We are in a privileged position in the Parliament and each of us needs to continue the struggle in our parties to promote the participation of women in the democratic process. The Equal Opportunities Commission has produced a handy guide for political parties to help them through the promotion, selection and election of women candidates, so we do not have any excuses, because it is all written down for us. However, it is not just about the democratic process—we have to work throughout society.
I endorse the 50/50 campaign, the aim of which is to increase the access of women in Scotland to power and influence across society and within decision-making bodies at all levels—in the UK Parliament, local government, health and enterprise boards, and in all public appointments. The list is long. It is largely up to us to see that it does not take another 100 years before we can say that equality has been achieved.
I thank Cathy Peattie for the debate, and for reminding us of the struggle by women. I must admit that I did not enter politics to fight for women or feminist issues. I have not thrown eggs or broken windows and I gave up trying to look 35 some years ago, but I am pleased to speak in this debate.
I am proud to belong to the party that produced the first female MP and the first female Prime Minister. From grocer's daughter to Prime Minister and a highly respected politician on the world stage, it is fitting to acknowledge today the contribution of Mrs Thatcher to our politics and history. It is also fitting to note that Mrs Thatcher went round many constituencies before she was selected as a candidate. She was certainly not brought in through any source of influence.
I thought it would be pertinent tonight to remind members of my experience when I went after my first seat. It was 1989, the seat was North East Fife and I was delighted to become the candidate. I owe North East Fife Conservative Association an enormous debt of gratitude. The association invited along 14 men and me, as the token woman. I still have the letter that asked me to bring my wife that night—they forgot that the letter was being sent to a woman.
At the recent Conservative conference in Blackpool, I was pleased to attend a fringe meeting by the Fawcett Society and MORI, which our then chairman Theresa May attended. She confirmed that the Conservative party is examining its selection process. At that public meeting she said that candidates will no longer be selected on the basis of tub-thumping speeches, and that much more emphasis will be put on their ability to deal with cases of domestic abuse in their surgeries. We may not be moving towards a 50:50 split, but there is recognition of the contribution that is made by women, and of what the Conservative party is looking for, not just from women, but from male politicians.
As Cathy Peattie said, in the world league table of proportions of female representation, Scotland is now in fourth place. We are bettered only by Sweden, Wales and Denmark. Today, we should not forget that women now lead councils in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Fife, Tayside and Highland, although undoubtedly there is considerably more scope for female participation at local level, given that only 22 per cent of Scottish councillors are women, compared with 39.5 per cent of MSPs.
Mary Scanlon just made the point that I was going to ask her to clarify. Although we have some superb female politicians leading at local council level, we need an awful lot more women coming in behind them. I hope that we can all agree on that in this chamber.
Yes—it is important that 22 per cent of councillors are female and that some of our leading councillors are highly respected women.
We do not need women simply to come to the chamber to put forward women's and family issues, although that is welcome. I was delighted to secure a members' business debate on men's health. Perhaps some of our male MSPs found that difficult, but it is right for good and effective female MSPs to raise issues across the whole spectrum, in particular issues such as men's health.
Cathy Peattie listed many heroines in her speech and I hope that the Parliament will continue to have a large representation by women; indeed, that representation increased at the election in May. I hope that one day a female MSP will become First Minister and perhaps even Presiding Officer.
I am not sure whether I should rule that out of order.
I start by welcoming the honourable Esterina Kilasi MP from Tanzania, who is in the gallery this evening. [Applause.] Tanzania has 20 per cent representation by women in its Parliament.
I congratulate Cathy Peattie on securing a significant and poignant debate. The struggles and achievements of the suffragettes at the beginning of the 20th century are well recorded and should not be underestimated. Debates such as this are important in that they serve to remind us of that fight. As time passes, there is a danger that the struggle will, in the eyes of some, lose its relevance and become a relic of a forgotten age when women had to fight for their right to participate in the democratic process, even at the most fundamental level. It is important that we try not to let that happen.
Analysis of modern elections indicates that those who are familiar with the struggles of the suffrage movement—the older generation—continue in the face of falling voter turnout to see the importance of participating in the electoral process by using their vote. Older women are well aware of the sacrifices that were made by the suffragettes, but younger women are less familiar with that history, as Marlyn Glen pointed out. When I meet with the response "I never bother to vote" during election campaigns, I often find myself having to give a short history lesson and plead with people to use votes that were hard fought for and won.
Voter apathy is a term that is much used to describe low turnouts at elections. However, that excuse is a bit too convenient and easy. We should ask why voters are apathetic. People can be motivated and turn out in large numbers when an issue is seen as important and they believe that their actions might help to achieve change. We can cast our minds back to February and the people who marched against the war.
The concept of value remains essential to the voting process. In order to restore voter turnout, we have to work to restore the perceived value of the vote. Many people feel that they are dis- franchised from society because of poverty, deprivation and despair. In the case of women, many still feel that they are marginalised and excluded from political and public life because of structural inequalities. The introduction of easier ways of voting will not on its own provide a solution that will increase voter turnout; it will not do much to increase women's representation in political and public life.
That might be done by tackling the inequalities in society and by proving—by deeds, not words—that politics is relevant to ordinary people and that elected members of parliaments and councils are making a difference to everyday life. The first Scottish Parliament elections saw a huge intake of women, mainly in the Labour party, where a 50:50 balance was achieved.
I point out that in the first session of Parliament, the SNP delivered 40 per cent of its representation by women. We did not use positive action, although many of us argued for that. Part of that success was due to our making the argument, which is as important as delivering the mechanism. Action is necessary in some parties; in others it is the argument. Either way, we have to achieve a result.
I congratulate the SNP on the representation that it achieved. It took action by just having the debate, as Fiona Hyslop said.
We now have almost 40 per cent representation by women in Parliament. In the current system of party politics, the parties are the gatekeepers and the action that they take, or do not take, directly influences levels of representation. Labour's 50:50 balance was no accident; rather, it was the result of many years of struggle by women in the Labour and trades union movement that produced the system whereby seats were twinned. The new Parliament was an ideal opportunity to do that because there were no incumbents or candidates who had fought seats for years—there was a clean slate.
However, the women were not parachuted into their seats. They had to go through selection, a robust hustings process and a vote by the membership. That process created a level playing field on which women were selected in the same way as men.
Women's representation is important not only because women make up over 50 per cent of the population, but because the critical mass of women is proven to make a difference to the policies and practices that the Government employs. I would have gone through a list of such differences but I do not have time. Perhaps Margaret Curran will mention some of them in her closing speech.
It is not an exaggeration to say that women have to work harder to prove themselves. Esterina Kilasi tells me that she thinks that she has to work twice as hard as the male member who held the seat before her. We cannot change the situation overnight but, in the spirit of the suffragettes, we must continue to try. Only then will true equality be achieved.
My final point is that we, like the WSPU, need our male colleagues to engage with our aims for equality. Keir Hardie was almost an honorary suffragette—he helped their cause and he scarcely made a speech without calling for women's enfranchisement. When asked to write a motto, he chose:
"Votes for women and socialism for all".
I would like to update that to, "Equality for women and socialism for all".
As members may have noticed, I am not a woman, but I am privileged to take part in this important debate.
I was well brought up: I had a grannie and three aunties who were suffragists—as opposed to suffragettes; I think that there is a distinction—and who were active in the legal wing of the women's movement. I have at home the autobiography of Mrs Pethick-Lawrence, who was one of the leaders of the non-Pankhurst wing—as we might call it—of the women's movement. The book describes one of my aunties as
"our champion newspaper seller in Scotland".
One of the ways in which the women's movement was a pioneer was in the production and sale of its own newspaper. The movement developed the approach that is now taken by political parties, which publish the news that they cannot get newspapers to publish. Those newspapers were important.
The National Library of Scotland has a small collection of photographs of people who were involved in the suffragette movement that were collected by my aunties. The photographs demonstrate that we have more to learn from the movement. Many show the fancy dress parades that the women's movement often held. There are photographs of, among other people, Flora Drummond, who was a very impressive female. If she was put in charge of the Scottish football or rugby teams, we would do a damned sight better than we do at the moment. The photos show a lot of splendid-looking women in fancy dress. One of my aunties used always to dress up as Mary Queen of Scots because she was tall and red-haired. I think that we might engender some interest in politics if we went in for fancy dress parades, rather than our dull approach.
Although I come from Linlithgow and have some red in my hair, if the member thinks that I am going to dress up as Mary Queen of Scots to get votes for women, I am afraid that he is mistaken.
As we are in Edinburgh, I must mention Elsie Inglis, who was a leading suffragette as well as a medical pioneer. The Scottish women's movement was involved in Scottish women's hospitals—indeed its members moved almost en masse into the hospitals, as doctors, nurses and helpers. Members probably know the story of how Elsie Inglis went to see a general in London to offer to establish a hospital in France to help with the wounded. She was told to go home and be quiet. However, she established hospitals, first to help the Serbians, then the Romanians and later the French, but not the British—but British men are pretty stupid, as many members realise.
The women's movement was part of a wider campaign to give women a fairer deal in life. As members have said, that work continues and I am well aware that the playing field is still uneven, not just in politics but in many areas of life. We must keep working on that.
The things that helped women the most were the typewriter, the bicycle and the contraceptive. However, a lot of other things—
Will the member take a very quick intervention? He has missed out the washing machine, which is far more important.
The member may certainly add the washing machine to the list.
A lady Scot was the first woman golfer to do a full swing, instead of a sort of half swing. That is a trivial thing, but it illustrates the sorts of breakthroughs that women had to make. There are still many breakthroughs to be made in order to give women a fair deal. I am aware that my party has a dismal record on representation by women here and at Westminster. We have good representation at council level in Scotland and England, but we must address the parliamentary situation.
The subject of the debate is splendid and more people should know about it. We should all keep going to try to create, as far as possible, a level playing field for men and women.
I welcome the opportunity to discuss the legacy of the WSPU. I very much agree with the sentiments of Cathy Peattie's motion and thank her for lodging it.
For democracy's sake, women must be involved in the political process—now as then. That must be part of a wider process of broadening access to, and involvement in, our democratic process. If members will forgive me for saying so, politics is too often seen as a white, male, middle-class and middle-aged game. I score three out of four at the moment.
We should look back at why the WSPU was founded. Its foundation was prompted by dissatisfaction with the political process—a feeling that, in spite of Keir Hardie, the Labour Party was often too lukewarm in its support for women's suffrage and that the existing suffrage movement was too close to the mainstream parties and too cautious in its politics. The WSPU attracted many working-class women, particularly in Scotland. Cathy Peattie and Marlyn Glen have outlined some of the links with the socialist co-operative and labour movement, but we should remember that the WSPU is most famous for its direct action tactics.
When I was at school, I learnt about Mahatma Ghandi and the direct action and civil disobedience that he was responsible for in India as part of the campaign for emancipation of the people of the Indian subcontinent. It is a shame that I did not learn about what happened in my country—the direct action and civil disobedience that took place here a century ago in support of the emancipation of half the population of this country.
Cathy Peattie mentioned some of that direct action, which included the smashing of windows in Government buildings, the slashing of pictures in art galleries and, especially in Scotland, the attacking of postboxes—which were a symbol of the Government—with acid. As frustration grew about the fact that the existing political system was not able to respond to or to listen to the views of women, the scale of arson and attacks on property gradually mounted. As has been said, that campaign was successful in the end.
What I have read about the suffragettes often downplays the direct action; more is made of the work that women did during the war. The idea that women were not working before the war—
Women have always worked.
Exactly—working-class women have always worked, whether at home or in factories. Women have always been working, but there is a tendency to say that they were given the vote because they worked in munitions factories during the war. That downplays the importance of the direct action movement.
I want to pay tribute to the women who have been involved in direct action in the peace movement. It was the peace movement that brought me into politics; that movement is still dominated by women. In particular, I want to pay tribute to Angie Zelter, Ellen Moxley and Ulla Roder for the direct action that they took as part of the campaign against the Trident military base at Faslane. That direct action is in the spirit of the direct action that the suffragettes took. We ought to celebrate women and direct action then and now.
I thank Cathy Peattie for lodging the motion. It is important to remember that the political process does not mean just the party-political process; there is a huge tradition of extra-party and extra-parliamentary activity. Finally, I thank Cathy for singing "Bread and Roses".
Deputy ministers usually respond to members' debates but it will be noticed that I won the argument with Mary Mulligan, so I am pleased to be here to respond to a subject that is of obvious critical importance. I begin by thanking Cathy Peattie for lodging the motion for tonight's debate and I pay tribute to her excellent speech. As a history graduate, I think that tonight has demonstrated a fascinating grasp of history among my colleagues. It has been extremely interesting indeed.
The Women's Social and Political Union represents something very significant for those of us who are involved in politics. Where we can, we want to honour their contribution to the political emancipation of women. We have a real attachment to that period of history because it seems to symbolise the struggle for the political emancipation of women. Although none of us would make any claim to rank alongside them in our perhaps more humble contributions to the political process, we see ourselves as carrying on that tradition. People might take different interpretations of how they see themselves in that, but I believe that that history is important.
I recognise what many have said about the lack of women who vote—I will perhaps speak about that later—but, when we knock on doors or when we are canvassing at the polls, there are women who tell us, "I always vote because women died to get me the vote." People feel that very strongly. It is critically important that we remember that history, which is something that we should cling to.
We know that the issue is not just about the vote, as Elaine Smith said. A number of the suffragettes—Sylvia Pankhurst in particular—saw the vote as the means to achieve the wider liberation of women in order to change and improve women's circumstances. That is obviously significant to our attempts, but the issue is also about the representation of women. All of us now recognise and have as an established aim the need to have equal representation of women. I am pleased to hear about the progress in the Conservative party and I congratulate the women who have struggled there to achieve that.
However, it is clear that if we were to take our eye off the ball, the situation could easily slip back. While recognising that none of us want to get into any party-political point scoring, I would say that I am proud of what the Labour party has achieved through the 50/50 campaign. As women in the Labour party, we are disappointed with progress at Westminster. Not enough work has been done there. The 50/50 campaign has been flagged up by many women tonight, but the campaign is on-going. It was not just about the Scottish Parliament, but continues to be about other legislatures and other forums for decision making that women should be part of. We want to encourage women to be part of broader Scottish and British life. We should always remember that the situation could easily fall back if we do not keep ourselves focused on that agenda.
We also know that we need a broad agenda about what women's issues are. Elaine Smith flagged up that point. As Christine Grahame said, it is about culture. We need to look at our own culture and at what opportunities we are creating for women. We have had many debates about violence in the chamber, but having a focus on women gives us an understanding of that. We also know about education and the work that is going on. It is important that we keep the women's agenda alive. Although I am sure that the suffragettes would look down on us and say, "Well done, girls," for doing so well in the Scottish Parliament, they might be a wee bit disappointed both that it took us quite so long and that we are still having to work so hard to maintain that in other places.
The minister mentioned the need to keep the women's agenda alive. Over the summer, I saw a report that said that the minister was keen to ensure that the women's agenda was pursued by the Executive. In the remainder of her speech, perhaps she can share with us what that is likely to be.
I was about to come on to exactly that issue, so I thank Fiona Hyslop for that useful introduction. Part of the agenda is about broadening the participation of women.
However, before going on to that, I want to make one point about the Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002. We in the Labour party understood that, if political parties were not allowed at least to choose to have mandatory mechanisms, that breakthrough will never be achieved. I accept that there are other points of view and I understand the logic of the point that was made earlier, but that is for other parties to decide. However, the fact that political parties can now adopt such mechanisms is significant.
As an Executive, we want to use powers in any way that we can to broaden the participation of women in public life. Part of the remit of our widening access progress group will be to consider how to take forward work on encouraging women in local authorities and, more broadly, in public bodies.
I will move on to talk more particularly about work that we are doing. As Elaine Smith said, we must be careful not to make a superficial analysis of why women are not involved, do not vote and do not have the influence that we want them to have. We know that that relates to basic matters such as the domestic work that they undertake and their child care responsibilities.
Child care remains an important element of the work that we are doing. In all my work to develop strategies on social justice and on giving people more access to opportunities, child care emerges again and again as a key issue. We know that mothers do twice as much child care as fathers do and that we need, in a sense, to liberate women and to have proper child caring strategies in our society. Deep down, men and women need to come to terms with the fundamental challenges in how they view work and their lives.
We are in a consensual debate. I am sometimes concerned that women feel that they must use child care and go out to work. I would like some emphasis in this Parliament and in that other place on financial encouragement for women to be at home with their children if they wish to be. Will the minister comment on that?
I do not want to become involved in political point scoring. The Treasury is working to ensure that women can make the choices that they wish to make. The tax and benefits system is the proper way to address that. I have never subscribed to the campaign for wages for housework, because that might legitimise some discrimination against women—that can be debated. Perhaps the tax and benefits system could be used more to deal with the situation. In addition, services should be provided for women that allow them to make effective choices at various stages of their lives.
The way in which our culture views child care has shifted considerably, but I am sure that I speak on behalf of the many working mothers in the Parliament—I often think that we should establish a therapy class to assuage our guilt and to deal with our occasional struggles—when I say that a fundamental issue is the work-life balance. Many of us try hard to ensure that we have working processes around us, not to deal with exhaustion on our part, but to allow us to lead full lives. That was part of the campaign and why we wanted to be here.
We wanted to become MSPs not only because we wanted more women around the place, but because we wanted to change Scotland to ensure that it operated in women's interests. Working ourselves to death at all hours and not caring for our children is not a good place for men or women to be. The more we fight to be with our children, the more we do a service to our daughters and sons who follow us. That is the work-life balance with which we must come to terms.
I will talk quickly about what the Executive is doing to tackle issues and I will focus on a few measures. We have talked about the women's fund for Scotland before. Two big developments have occurred, one of which is the establishment of a Scottish women's convention. Engagement was needed with women's organisations throughout Scotland to ensure that they produce a range of policies. I could talk about those policies, which range from subjects such as violence and harassment straight through to child care. In a sense, I commissioned those organisations—if they would allow themselves to be commissioned—to present detailed policies that require Executive action.
The Executive also established the strategic group for women, to which Fiona Hyslop alluded. That was a small group of informed women who have worked on different aspects of the issue for some time and had a perspective on what the Executive should do. We have just received that group's report. The group will launch the report at the end of this month, after which we will respond to it. We will have to address a comprehensive range of matters as a result of that report.
Our commitment must be on-going. I do not want to go through the list of issues that we are dealing with, because it is considerable, but I am happy to talk to anybody who is interested.
I thank Cathy Peattie again for securing the debate. She and I have worked together for many years on the issues that have been discussed. She and I have fought many a battle and won some, along with Marlyn Glen, Sarah Boyack, Karen Whitefield, Elaine Smith and many others who are here tonight. We were returned to Parliament to continue the debate here. I pay Cathy Peattie the tribute that she deserves for her work over many years and her continuing commitment to the agenda in the Parliament.
When things get hard, when we are up against resistance to our agenda and when we are dealing with child care issues and changing the institutions in which we work, perhaps remembering the inspiration of the suffragettes and their bottle helps us to maintain the force that we need to continue the agenda.
Meeting closed at 17:55.