SCOTTISH Labour has been rocked by sexism claims over the support provided to candidates in the General Election campaign.
Helen McFarlane, who narrowly lost out in Airdrie and Shotts, believes that sexism was a “potential explanation” for why the male candidates in Lanarkshire benefited from paid staff from the Scottish party.
Labour selected 29 men and 29 women to fight the snap general election, a decision which underscored the party’s commitment to gender balance.
At the time leader Kezia Dugdale said the move sent a “powerful signal” and she urged other political parties to “follow our lead”.
However, of the seven Labour candidates who won in Scotland, only two are women, and attention has shifted to whether females got a fair slice of party resources.
In Lanarkshire, Labour selected four women and three men, but only Hugh Gaffney and Ged Killen were returned to Westminster.
McFarlane fell agonisingly short by 195 votes and Angela Feeney, who contested Motherwell and Wishaw, lost by 318 votes.
In an article for Scottish Left Review, McFarlane hit out at what she said was a lack of support provided by her party.
“Equality of opportunity should not stop at generating a gender-balanced slate but must be demonstrated e.g. in the allocation of support and resources. In Lanarkshire, despite having four women and three men as Labour candidates, it was the three men who got paid staff from the Scottish Labour Party."
She added: “All the men got a shop front office rented for them to use and the women got none. There appears to be no statistical justification for this in terms of other election outcomes or margins – indeed, the majority in Airdrie and Shotts of 8,779 was the smallest of the seven seats to be overturned.”
McFarlane continued: “I have to question if sexism provides a potential explanation about this stark contrast of resource allocation? Two of the men got elected. Meanwhile, two of the women came a so close second, reducing the majority to 195 in Airdrie and Shotts and from 11,800 to 318 in Motherwell and Wishaw.”
An inspection of candidate spending and donation returns confirms that the male candidates received paid staff support from Scottish Labour.
Gaffney, who won Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill, benefited from “agent and other staff costs” from the central party and Killen, who was successful in Rutherglen and Hamilton West, declared £1,217 worth of help from Scottish Labour in the same spending category. Andrew Hilland, who came third behind the SNP and the Tories in Lanark and Hamilton East, got £1,090 of support.
None of the four female candidates declared any “agent and other staff costs” from party headquarters, although Monique McAdams got £113 of support in this category from the East Kilbride local party.
However, a Labour source said the party had regional campaign offices in North and South Lanarkshire and added that Killen did not have a shop front office.
A Scottish Labour spokesperson said: “We strongly reject this claim. Scottish Labour is firmly committed to gender equality and ensured there was a 50/50 gender split among our General Election candidates.
“It was the Labour Party which first introduced all-woman shortlists, and we have a proud history fighting to end the under-representation of women at every level of power.
“Our campaign in Lanarkshire ensured we gained two seats from the SNP, and we’re incredibly proud of all our candidates. We remain on an election footing and aim to win marginal seats such as Airdrie and Shotts in the next election.”
Tory MSP Annie Wells said: “No election candidate should be discriminated against, so these comments will raise alarm. These are very serious accusations, and need to be looked into.”
An SNP spokesperson said: "It looks like Labour can't break the habit of playing favourites and then falling out over it. If they spent as much energy fighting the Tories as they do fighting each other they might be in a better position."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel