The exemption of hunting and shooting to the new ‘rule of six’, introduced at the beginning of this week, adds yet another example to the long list of classist and sexist strategies imposed by the UK government during this pandemic.
In the UK, as with many countries across the world, Covid-19 has exposed the deep divisions between social classes. The government’s response, or lack thereof, has only exacerbated them.
When lockdown began at the end of March, those who were able to quickly adjusted to Zoom-working and banana bread-baking safely from their homes. But the key workers, whom we and the economy rely on, still needed to go out to work and were therefore still at high-risk of exposure to the deadly virus.
These are the people who are labelled by the government as low-skilled and are in the roles that are amongst the lowest paid, often below the poverty line: carers, retail assistants, factory workers, cleaners and delivery drivers to name a few. They include roles which are overwhelmingly represented by women, people from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds and those born outside of the UK. Consequently, they have seen the highest number of deaths related to Covid-19.
Class inequality is by no means a new phenomenon. Over a number of years, many workers in Britain have been made economically vulnerable by zero-hours contracts, and more still by being less likely to qualify for Statutory Sick Pay. The Coronavirus pandemic has done nothing but make the need to value and protect these workers all the more apparent.
“Boris Johnson’s ‘bitter regrets’ do not seem consistent with a government that turned the blame onto care homes themselves.”
It was unsurprising then, that a party with a history of disregard for the vulnerable did not incorporate an appropriate level of protection for them into their strategies. The crisis in care homes is a clear indicator here: providers were told to stay open, without testing and without sufficient or adequate personal protective equipment (PPE). This led to the deaths of many residents and social care workers, the occupation which places women at most risk of death from Covid-19. Boris Johnson’s “bitter regrets” do not seem consistent with a government that turned the blame onto care homes themselves.
Another sign that the pandemic has disproportionately affected Britain’s poorest is evidence that the most deprived areas of the UK have seen more than double the amount of deaths than in the least deprived areas. The detrimental effects on the mental and physical health of these communities will be profound.
The Government appears to be ignorant of what life is really like for so many people. Health Secretary Matt Hancock said he found it “unbelievable” that people were ‘flouting the rules’ by using parks during lockdown, with some subsequently closing. But for those living in small flats without any outdoor space and unable to escape to a second home or to County Durham, going to the nearby park is a very believable lifeline.
Food banks buckled under the pressure of an 89% increase in requests for emergency parcels in just one month. Although the government did bring in measures to support those who had lost their jobs they did not go far enough. Families were, and are still, falling through the gaps. With the schemes soon coming to an end, fears are growing for those who are unable to put food on the table and calls are being made for the government to step-up and prolong the support.
“If we are to protect livelihoods and mental health, the government needs to make internet access a priority, and ensure it is available and affordable to all.”
The digital divide also remains prevalent: 60,000 children do not have an internet connection at home; 700,000 households do not have a laptop, desktop computer or tablet; and many have to share a device or workspace. So how exactly are people supposed to stay connected, earn a living or complete their school work from home? If we are to protect livelihoods and mental health, the government needs to make internet access a priority, and ensure it is available and affordable to all.
The easing of lockdown restrictions over the summer continued to impact upon the lives of those in low-paid jobs, particularly for women in these industries.
Despite the reopening of hairdressers and barbers, the beauty industry was told to keep its doors closed while the Prime Minister joked about attending a salon himself. In an industry led by women, and where treatments such as eyebrow threading require the same level of face-to-face contact as beard-trimming, the government’s sexist strategy was undermining and dismissive.
Mothers have criticised the sexist policies surrounding caring responsibilities, with a lack of childcare reported as the reason for half of all female redundancies and parents (especially those who are key workers) having to reduce their hours or potentially even sacrifice their careers. The government needs to incorporate childcare into their economic recovery plans, or we risk widening the gender pay gap and pushing women out of the workforce they have worked so hard to get into.
“This disruptive strategy exposes an attempt to continue to halt the social mobility of young people.”
The summer also saw many school pupils heartbroken after receiving results that were shockingly lower than their predicted grades. Pupils from low socio-economic backgrounds were worst affected by the discriminatory algorithm designed to avoid ‘grade inflation’ by teachers, with disadvantaged pupils more likely to see a drop in their grades than those in more wealthier areas. Despite the government’s (albeit four days too late) U-turn, this disruptive strategy exposes an attempt to continue to halt the social mobility of young people.
At present, we are still seeing strategies that are both classist and sexist. In the past week, the publication of documents outlining the legal restrictions relating to the ‘rule of six’ were allegedly delayed due to discussions over the addition of hunting and shooting as an exemption to the rule. These are activities heavily dominated by men from the middle and upper classes, and disappointingly, were given priority by the government.
Perhaps Boris Johnson, who has expressed his love for the sport, could have placed the same emphasis on ensuring PPE was provided in care homes, the livelihoods of low-paid women were protected, and A-level students received their rightly-deserved grades?
Sophie Henderson
Featured image courtesy of Kirsty Huth via Unsplash. Image license found here. No changes were made to this image.
