Home Secretary Jacqui Smith is launching a public consultation on behalf of the government to fight violence against women. This consultation will involve investigating the role of the police when dealing with domestic abuse and the perpetrators involved. The consultation also aims to find ways to improve women’s safety, both at home and in the public sphere.

Jacqui Smith not only hopes to provide more aid to victims of domestic violence, but also plans to tackle the ‘sexualisation’ culture in schools. The pressure for girls as young as eleven to dress ‘sexually’ is just one of the issues Smith will target. High street stores such as New Look offer a selection of high heels in their ‘Teens’ range. These shoes are being marketed for a section aimed at girls as young as nine. It would seem that the days when young girls used to play dress up and have fun with their mum’s high heels are long gone. The three month study will no doubt clash with many organisations and companies that will be accused of promoting an unhealthy, unrealistic image for the pre-teen girl.

Smith has been attacked for using ‘gimmicks’ and ‘spin’ at the launch of the government’s new campaign, ‘Together We Can End Violence Against Women And Girls’. Government plans to instigate a ‘register’, whereby a database of sexual offenders will be kept, have been ridiculed and brushed aside as yet another gimmick. Sandra Horley, Chief Executive of Refuge, an organisation which provides safety for victims of domestic violence, has accused the government of not dealing directly with this problem. She claims that “the majority of violent men don’t come to the attention of police and it won’t keep women safe. Police can’t be expected to monitor relationships and love lives of offenders.” In a recent article in the Guardian, Joan Smith, a columnist, novelist and critic, also disagreed with the register being used as a means to warn women that they may be in a relationship with a violent man. Smith argues that there is ‘an obvious risk of making a mistake, mixing up similar names and alarming a woman unnecessarily, but there’s also the question of what she is supposed to do with the information. Confront him and risk a beating? Seek protection from the police, even if the relationship is in the early stages and no crime has yet been committed?’ There seem to be many potential flaws that will need to be addressed with the consultation.

The aim is, however, that through asking these questions this will prompt those in authority to give answers regarding what is being done to keep women and girls safe. The way in which the Criminal Justice System deals with violence against women will most likely be Smith’s starting point. The strategy will also be asking the public how we can prevent violence against women and how friends, family and employers can identify signs of abuse. The question of how exactly we can stop men from reoffending and make women feel safe enough to leave a violent home will need to be answered.

The strategy hopes to encourage a national debate that will bring about  awareness of this issue. This is definitely a priority for coalitions such as Ending Violence Against Women which is more than aware of the fact that one in four local authority areas have no specialised support services for women in abusive relationships, such as refuges for women fromethnic minorities. Whilst Smith may have come under attack for the ‘gimmicky’ elements of the new proposal, domestic abuse organisations are no doubt encouraged by the public support and nationwide attention the campaign will attract.