A country can't develop if women are left out

Since the Syrian civil war began, more than two million people have fled the war torn land. Among them are thousands of pregnant women. Two and a half thousand Syrians have given birth inside Turkish refugee camps, according to an estimate from the Human Relief Foundation, and 10 babies a day are being delivered in camps in Jordan. This is a common problem during humanitarian crises—following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti, for example, women were giving birth in cars and in parks. Some go into labour without medical aid, pain relief and sometimes even water; others suffer miscarriages as they make the journey across borders.

On Thursday I attended a reception at Speaker’s House to raise awareness of the gender equality (international development) bill, about to have its second reading in parliament. The bill aims to ensure that the promotion of gender equality and the needs of women are taken into consideration when providing foreign aid, in terms of both development and humanitarian assistance.

Formulated with help from the Great Initiative, the gender equality NGO, the bill states that when development assistance is provided it should, “as a means of reducing poverty, have regard to the reduction of inequality between men and women and between boys and girls.” It also states that when humanitarian assistance is provided following natural or man-made disasters, the arrangements should recognise the differing needs of men and women, which are easy to overlook in the rush to provide help.

“A country cannot fully develop when it only involves half the population,” said Secretary of State for International Development Justine Greening, speaking at the reception; it “instinctively” doesn't work. Not that women’s rights require an economic justification, but it also doesn’t work economically. It has repeatedly been shown that gender equality contributes to growth. A country cannot reach its full economic potential if, through lack of education or opportunities, half of its working-age population is locked out of the workforce.

The Department for International Development does already take care to direct funds towards projects for women, such as increasing girls’ education and improving maternal health (even outside of specific emergencies, the maternal mortality rate in some Sub-Saharan African countries is 200 times the rate in the UK). The United Nation’s Millennium Development Goals have also been important here, including aims to improve maternal health and empower women. Other goals, such as achieving universal primary education and improving access to clean water, have a disproportionate impact on women.

If the bill were to pass, it would guarantee that the reduction of gender inequality doesn’t slip off the agenda, and with the UN currently formulating its post-2015 development goals it’s a crucial moment to ensure this remains high up the priority list.

Sadly, the bill is 18 out of 20 on the ballot list (unusually, the ballot was drawn in reverse order this time - if it had been drawn normally, the bill would have been third), which means it’s unlikely to become law. But even so, Dfid could work it into its policies and guidelines, ensuring that the efforts already happening in this direction – efforts that are vital both morally and economically – continue.