Campaigners against domestic abuse. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

From surviving to leading: the women changing how we look at domestic abuse

How women as community leaders can combat domestic abuse.

The past week has seen action from all parties on the issue of violence against women and girls. Yesterday the Liberal Democrats announced that sex and relationship education should be compulsory for all children from age seven and Labour appointed Seema Malhotra MP to focus on tackling violence against women and girls. Last week, the government described its plans to reopen the debate around making domestic abuse a crime.  All of this at the very least provokes welcome discourse on an issue which service providers, communities and politicians continue to struggle to address.

As Movement for Change Community Organiser for the North West of England, my work revolves largely around health and social care. In February this year, the women of Barrow-in-Furness came together to turn their anger about the acceptance of domestic abuse within our community into action to change this. Six local women took a lead. Some have experienced domestic abuse, others have seen the effects of this on loved ones.

They set about asking questions that it seems had not been asked of local citizens before; “What do you think is acceptable in a relationship?” “What constitutes a happy and positive relationship?” “What is not acceptable?” “Why?” The outcomes suggested that people do know what they want to see in their own relationships, in their children’s relationships, in the people around them.  Trust was the most common answer.  Laughter, equality, respect, friendship all featured high in the over 200 responses. Violence was felt to be unacceptable, with people expressing this quite strongly in their responses.

Why then does Cumbria – along with many other parts of the UK – continue to experience high rates of domestic abuse?  A report commissioned by the Cumbria Police and Crime Commissioner earlier this year makes sensible recommendations on this.  However, what the women found in many of their conversations, was a much less black and white response.

It seemed that where violence as a physical manifestation of abuse was widely agreed to be unacceptable, many people, male and female, had no recognition of what constituted other forms of abuse. Similarly if an example of abusive behaviour, as defined by the Home Office, was provided by means of explanation, people were reluctant to describe that behaviour as abusive or wrong. What it did do, in many interactions, was render people silent and thoughtful – it created a tension in the conversation which couldn’t be filled with a “right” or “wrong” answer.  It created space for this to be thought about, discussed and considered.

I listened to two young women disagree with each other as to whether the scenario they had watched – a young man taking control of his partner’s mobile phone and issuing her with a warning about texting people he disapproves of – was acceptable or not.  On the whole, the conclusion they came to was probably not – but, they agreed, there was something about the situation which made them uncomfortable. They wanted to talk about it more with their friends.

Abuse can reduce a person to fearing for their lives, even without anyone ever having laid a finger on them. It cost Cumbria £1.76m in 2011 in treatment for mental health problems. And it can manifest itself on children in a similarly invisible on the surface but devastating way. 

The week’s events show all party recognition that domestic abuse needs to be higher on the social agenda than it has been to date. It is interesting that the actions of each of the parties this week mirrors to a great extent the actions of the women working with Movement for Change. These women are community leaders. Their courage in stepping up to represent others and addressing the issue head on led the wider community to take action. Together they negotiated with the local Police and Crime Commissioner to fund the pilot of a £5000 evidence based package of education on what positive relationships look like in a local junior school. They won the support and accolade of local politicians, councillors, Action for Children and the Youth Offending Team as well as many other service providers and the police. 

Perhaps most strikingly, they built a local movement of over a hundred people from across the community on a sunny Friday night in May. They sat them around tables with people they didn’t know, talked openly and without apology about domestic abuse in all its horrible forms, recreating that tension, that uncertainty – and then let people fill that space through talking and listening.   The women leading the project describe themselves as ordinary, local women.  In many ways, they are some of the most extraordinary individuals. Through their refusal to accept a community where domestic abuse remains unchallenged, they have demonstrated that it is experience, determination, anger about an issue, collective action and  a belief that things can be different which transforms the people you might least expect, these unlikely leaders, from  being “survivors” into pioneers.

Charlotte Smith is a Movement for Change community organiser in northwest England. Click here for information about the Movement for Change Showcase at Labour party conference.

Photo: Getty Images
Show Hide image

The future of policing is still at risk even after George Osborne's U-Turn

The police have avoided the worst, but crime is changing and they cannot stand still. 

We will have to wait for the unofficial briefings and the ministerial memoirs to understand what role the tragic events in Paris had on the Chancellor’s decision to sustain the police budget in cash terms and increase it overall by the end of the parliament.  Higher projected tax revenues gave the Chancellor a surprising degree of fiscal flexibility, but the atrocities in Paris certainly pushed questions of policing and security to the top of the political agenda. For a police service expecting anything from a 20 to a 30 per cent cut in funding, fears reinforced by the apparent hard line the Chancellor took over the weekend, this reprieve is an almighty relief.  

So, what was announced?  The overall police budget will be protected in real terms (£900 million more in cash terms) up to 2019/20 with the following important caveats.  First, central government grant to forces will be reduced in cash terms by 2019/20, but forces will be able to bid into a new transformation fund designed to finance moves such as greater collaboration between forces.  In other words there is a cash frozen budget (given important assumptions about council tax) eaten away by inflation and therefore requiring further efficiencies and service redesign.

Second, the flat cash budget for forces assumes increases in the police element of the council tax. Here, there is an interesting new flexibility for Police and Crime Commissioners.  One interpretation is that instead of precept increases being capped at 2%, they will be capped at £12 million, although we need further detail to be certain.  This may mean that forces which currently raise relatively small cash amounts from their precept will be able to raise considerably more if Police and Crime Commissioners have the courage to put up taxes.  

With those caveats, however, this is clearly a much better deal for policing than most commentators (myself included) predicted.  There will be less pressure to reduce officer numbers. Neighbourhood policing, previously under real threat, is likely to remain an important component of the policing model in England and Wales.  This is good news.

However, the police service should not use this financial reprieve as an excuse to duck important reforms.  The reforms that the police have already planned should continue, with any savings reinvested in an improved and more effective service.

It would be a retrograde step for candidates in the 2016 PCC elections to start pledging (as I am certain many will) to ‘protect officer numbers’.  We still need to rebalance the police workforce.   We need more staff with the kind of digital skills required to tackle cybercrime.  We need more crime analysts to help deploy police resources more effectively.  Blanket commitments to maintain officer numbers will get in the way of important reforms.

The argument for inter-force collaboration and, indeed, force mergers does not go away. The new top sliced transformation fund is designed in part to facilitate collaboration, but the fact remains that a 43 force structure no longer makes sense in operational or financial terms.

The police still have to adapt to a changing world. Falling levels of traditional crime and the explosion in online crime, particularly fraud and hacking, means we need an entirely different kind of police service.  Many of the pressures the police experience from non-crime demand will not go away. Big cuts to local government funding and the wider criminal justice system mean we need to reorganise the public service frontline to deal with problems such as high reoffending rates, child safeguarding and rising levels of mental illness.

Before yesterday I thought policing faced an existential moment and I stand by that. While the service has now secured significant financial breathing space, it still needs to adapt to an increasingly complex world. 

Rick Muir is director of the Police Foundation