Impact of Conflict on Women and Girls

Monica Harding Excerpts

Thursday 9th January 2025 Westminster Hall

[Monica Harding (Esher and Walton) (LD)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts, and I thank the hon. Member for Norwich North (Alice Macdonald) for securing this incredibly important debate, in which there have been many insightful and inspiring comments.

We have heard today that women and girls disproportionately suffer the impact of the global rise in conflicts, forcing record numbers of them to flee their homes. That dramatically increases their vulnerability to sex trafficking, child marriage and other forms of gender-based violence, for which they are often marginalised and stigmatised by their communities.

Conflict does not impact women through gender-based violence alone; it brings with it the loss of livelihoods, worsening healthcare and higher death rates. It also undermines women’s ability to give birth safely and interrupts women’s access to essential supplies, such as contraceptives.

We have also seen brazen assaults on civilians, aid workers and critical service delivery points, all of which constitute flagrant violations of international humanitarian law. Essential infrastructure, such as hospitals, displacement camps and safe spaces, has also been a casualty of war, and that has cut women and girls off from vital services and emergency assistance at a time when they are most at risk. Conflict therefore increases existing structural and gender inequalities and takes decades to undo. Time and again it is women and girls who bear the brunt of the increasing number of armed conflicts around the globe. The last year has offered devastating examples. I will only touch on the current crises in Sudan and Gaza, being brief because they have been covered so much already in this debate.

Nearly 70% of those killed in Gaza over a six-month period were women and children. That is, in itself, a terrible statistic and also a disproportionately high level compared with usual conflicts. Pregnant women living through the conflict in Gaza are three times more likely to miscarry, and if they do carry their babies to full term they are three times more likely to die in childbirth due to a lack of access to medical care and nutrition. We also know that women and girls, although their nutritional needs are greater, eat less and last in these conflicts, which are already plagued by malnutrition and starvation, yet none of the UK’s humanitarian funding for Gaza since October 2023 has been ringfenced for women’s needs, women’s rights and women-led organisations. That must change.

In Sudan, since the start of the conflict in April 2023, the number of people in need of sexual and reproductive health services has more than doubled, yet only 6.7% of the funding needed for gender-based violence prevention and response has been provided. Neither Palestine nor Sudan were included in the UK women, peace and security national action plan—I look forward to hearing why, in the Minister’s response.

From Members in this debate, we have heard harrowing accounts of sexual violence in both Gaza and Sudan. I will make one addition. We hear about women in Sudan who have taken their own lives to escape rape by paramilitaries, or because of being raped, or who have experienced sexual violence to protect their children from being afflicted. That is the shocking nature of these conflicts. Through the preventing sexual violence in conflict initiative, the UK has been able to provide important support to survivors in Ukraine, providing expertise and material support to document sexual and gender-based violence, including through the atrocity crimes advisory group, but NGOs are unclear whether the lessons learned from that critical work are being applied to the conflicts in Sudan and Palestine. I should therefore be grateful if the Minister would confirm that the atrocity crimes advisory group has been dispatched to Sudan and Gaza. If it has not been, why not?

I would also like to hear from the Minister on the Government’s plans to pick up the commitments that the previous Government made through the preventing sexual violence in conflict initiative, so that the UK can again demonstrate global leadership in tackling sexual violence in conflict. When we consider how vulnerable and targeted women are in these conflicts, not only does it offend our morals and consciences but, as hon. Members have said, it makes absolutely no rational sense. In Gaza, for instance, women make up 70% of frontline health workers and 60% of caregivers. As we have heard, women are important advocates in conflict-torn places and are critical to building lasting peace, with strong evidence to demonstrate that the involvement of women and girls in peacebuilding is key to ending conflict and building long-term, sustainable peace and stability. I endorse the eminently sensible and practical suggestion of my hon. Friend the Member for Tunbridge Wells (Mike Martin) to give women a seat at the table. Women must always have a seat at the table, and there are many women at those tables today.

In 2021, only 0.2% of UK humanitarian ODA went to frontline women’s rights organisations and movements, so will the Minister commit to funding for women’s rights organisations that is ringfenced within humanitarian spending? As a signatory to the UN Security Council resolution on women, peace and security, the UK must lead on this issue. The UK must be vocal, clear and more consistent in its support for international humanitarian law, and in its condemnation of all violations and abuses against all civilians, including women and girls.

I hope the Minister not only agrees with but acts on my last point, which is that—as the hon. Member for North Herefordshire (Ellie Chowns) pointed out— increasing international development funding is the fundamental way that the UK Government can properly tackle the kind of gender-based inequality and sexual violence that we have discussed in this debate. Prioritising development funding before a conflict breaks out, and allowing programmes to tackle existing gender inequalities in peacetime, is a far more effective way of tackling the deep-rooted inequalities that women and girls often experience in those fragile states, and it can reduce some of the gendered impacts and violence when conflict breaks out.

Gender-based violence is not inevitable; it is rooted in existing inequalities. UK aid for programmes that include a gender equality objective nearly halved between 2019 and 2021, with a devastating impact on women and girls. Funding for programmes supporting women and girls desperately needs to be restored immediately, as does the humanitarian relief reserve fund, and health programmes, which have also been cut. All those programmes have been eroded in the years since UK ODA was cut from 0.7% of GNI to 0.58% by the previous Government, and cut further to 0.5% in this Government’s Budget. It is no secret that the Liberal Democrats are pushing hard for the return to 0.7% of GNI, and remain perplexed as to why the Government insist on adopting the fiscal tests that they so vigorously opposed when in opposition. The point about 0.7% is that it is proportionate to a country’s prosperity. Will the Government commit to reviewing their use of fiscal test, and their declared goal, which is to return to 0.7%?

In conclusion, women and girls generally do not start wars, and neither do they usually have the power to end them—but they suffer disproportionately from them. It is within our gift to empower women and girls, so let us commit to doing so.