Feminist social movements and policy change: Devolution, childcare and domestic violence policies in Wales

29 (2006) 172–183www.elsevier.com/locate/wsif

Women's Studies International Forum

Feminist social movements and policy change: Devolution, childcareand domestic violence policies in Wales

Wendy Ball a and Nickie Charles b,⁎

a Department of Sociology and Anthropology, University of Wales Swansea, Singleton Park, Swansea SA2 8PP, Wales, UKb Centre for the Study of Women and Gender, Department of Sociology, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK

Available online 23 May 2006

Synopsis

This paper focuses on recent developments in Wales in order to explore the extent to which changes in the gendering of politicalinstitutions create new opportunities for social movements to influence policy change. We develop a conceptual framework whichincludes a consideration of the political and discursive opportunity structure, the way issues are framed, and the challenge posed bysocial movements in terms of redistribution. Using this framework, recent developments in Wales in the context of devolution areanalysed. Particular attention is paid to the influence of social movement organisations on the policy-making process in relation tochildcare and domestic violence, to the new political and discursive opportunity structures within which social movements areoperating, and to the ways in which reframing of key issues within feminist social movements results in their incorporation into thepolicy agenda but, at the same time, marginalises more radical feminist voices.© 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

In 1997 a Labour government was elected in the UKcommitted to constitutional reform which included thedevolution of government to Scotland, Wales andNorthern Ireland. In Wales an Assembly was proposedwith powers to develop and implement policy in anumber of key areas including education and training,health, housing, social services and local government.Central government retained control over other areassuch as employment, social security and financial andeconomic issues and, unlike the Scottish parliament, theWelsh Assembly was to have neither legislative norrevenue raising powers. In 1999 the first elections to theNational Assembly for Wales were held and anunprecedentedly high proportion (40%) of womenrepresentatives was returned. In 2003 this proportionincreased to 50% which was hailed by the Guardian

⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 2476 528428.E-mail address: [email protected] (N. Charles).

0277-5395/$ - see front matter © 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.doi:10.1016/j.wsif.2006.03.003

newspaper as a ‘world record’ for a legislative body(Watt, 2003). This new gender balance in politicalrepresentation created a huge surge of optimism amongstwomen activists within Wales and raised their expecta-tions about the developments of policies which wouldaddress women's issues; expectations which seemed tobe confirmed when the Assembly adopted a statutoryduty to promote equality of opportunity. These devel-opments raise questions about the relation betweenincreased representation of women in political institu-tions and opportunities for feminist social movements toinfluence the development of social policies. In whatfollowswe outline a conceptual framework within whichto understand the impact of social movements on socialpolicy. We then put it to use in analysing the extent towhich policy developments in Wales can be understoodas a result of changes in the gendering of the politicalopportunity structure; we focus specifically on policiesrelating to childcare and domestic violence.

mailto:[email protected]

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wsif.2006.03.003

173W. Ball / Women's Studies International Forum 29 (2006) 172–183

Conceptualising social movements and policy change

Since the feminist movements of the 1970s therehave been significant changes in policies relating towomen and gender equality in Britain at local andnational level. The demands of the women's movementhave, to a large extent, been incorporated into socialpolicies, albeit in different ways from those originallyintended (Charles, 2000). Moreover there has been asignificant increase in the proportion of women politicalrepresentatives both at Westminster and in the devolvedgovernments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland(Dobrowolsky, 2002). These developments suggest thatsocial movements have an effect on policy, indeedpeople get involved in social movements and popularprotest because they want to make a difference andbelieve that they can. However, although there is agree-ment in the social movement literature that social move-ments bring about change, and that they have politicaland cultural effects which are both intended andunintended, a conceptualisation of the causality ofchange remains underdeveloped (Giugni, 1998).

In attempting to understand the relationship betweensocial movements and policy change the concepts ofpolitical opportunity structure and framing have beenboth influential and contested (Benford & Snow, 2000;Jenkins, 1995; Kriesi, Koopmans, Dyvendak, & Giugni,1995; Tarrow, 1994). Different movement outcomeshave been explained with reference to differences inpolitical opportunity structures, as have differences inthe emergence and character of social movements(McAdam, 1996). The concept of political opportunitystructure has, however, been labelled ‘an all-encom-passing fudge factor’ which is defined differently bydifferent scholars and ‘may ultimately explain nothing atall’ (Gamson &Meyer, 1996, p. 275). Moreover it givesexplanatory power to the structures within which socialmovements operate thereby neglecting the importanceof agency and, in many accounts, rendering culture ofno significance. In response to such criticisms attemptshave been made to define the concept more clearly, bynarrowing it down to strictly political factors such as thenature of the state (whether it is open/closed, strong/weak, corporatist/pluralist) and the strategies it adoptstowards challengers (incorporation/repression), the sta-bility of ‘elite alignments’, and the ‘presence or absenceof elite allies’ (McAdam, 1996). Conversely it has beenargued that cultural and discursive elements should beincluded in an expanded understanding of the politicalopportunity structure as ‘Policy change involves a newrhetoric of justification and possible reframing of issuesas well as changes in organisational practice and the

distribution of resources’ (Gamson & Meyer, 1996,p. 282; Kriesi et al., 1995). This attempt to delineatepolitical opportunity structure moves beyond thepolitical and, arguably, requires new nomenclature toreflect the combination of structural and culturalelements of a movement's environment. We prefer touse political opportunity structure in its ‘narrow’ senseto refer to the political and institutional arrangementswhich provide the context for social movement activity(Stevenson & Greenberg, 2000). This, however, meansthat the link between structure and culture has to beconceptualised by means other than broadening theconcept of political opportunity structure.

This link has been understood in terms of therelationship between political opportunity structuresand framing processes within social movements (Gam-son & Meyer, 1996) and has been used to explain thesuccess of social movements, both in terms of buildingsupport (Diani, 1996) and in terms of influencing policydevelopment (Ferree, 2003). Framing is defined as aprocess of constructing meaning (Benford & Snow,2000), the struggle over meanings being part of thecultural work of social movements (Ferree, 2003). Thereare problems, however, with the concept of framing in sofar as it does not incorporate an understanding of powerrelations. In order to address this issue, and to situate ‘theconstruction and interpretation of frames within thebroader discursive and institutional context’ (Naples,2002, p. 244), it has been suggested that dominantdiscourses are ‘anchored in key political institutions’ andconstitute the discursive opportunity structure withwhich social movements have to engage (Ferree, 2003,p. 308). Social movements use elements from alreadyexisting discourses to frame issues, thereby creating newmeanings and ways of understanding the world whicheither resonate with or challenge dominant discourses(Eyerman & Jamison, 1991; Ferree, 2003). Indeed ‘bothmovements and states construct discourses, collectiveidentities and representations’ (Whittier, 2002, p. 294).In its early days the feminist movement, for instance,framed domestic violence and childcare in terms ofgender. Thus male violence was defined as a structuralproblem deriving from unequal gendered power rela-tions and unequal access to resources. Similarly child-care was framed as a right which would enable a moreequitable gender division of parenting, domestic labourand caring. However, feminist definitions are incompetition with others and, although they may disruptthe hegemony, they may not gain enough support (withinpolitical institutions or in the media for instance) to shapepolicy. This may lead social movements or parts of themto reframe issues so that they have more legitimacy and

174 W. Ball / Women's Studies International Forum 29 (2006) 172–183

‘resonate’with dominant cultural frames (Diani, 1996, p.1065; Pollack & Hafner-Burton, 2000). Thus in feministand other social movements discourses of rights, justiceand equal opportunities have been particularly effectivein gaining support (Benford, 1997; Benford & Snow,2000). Domestic violence has been reframed as aninfringement of women's rights and an economic drainon society while childcare has been reframed as anequality and economic efficiency issue. This process ofreframing can result in marginalising more radicalframes and ways of understanding social reality andmay even render gender invisible (Ferree, 2003). InSweden, for instance, the institutionalisation of a dis-course of gender equality has marginalised feministarguments based on difference and made it more difficultfor feminists arguing that women have specific needswhich differ from those of men to influence policy(McMillan, 2003).

It is also important to take into account that socialmovements and the environments within which theyoperate are gendered; this has an impact on the ability ofsocial movements to bring about policy change (Taylor,1999; Whittier, 2002). Thus political parties, tradeunions and the state (local and national) are dominatedby men and this affects the outcome of struggles wagedby women (Ferree & Roth, 1998). Moreover while po-litical and discursive opportunity structures conditionthe emergence of social movements and their ability tobring about policy change, social movements them-selves have an impact on structures (Gamson & Meyer,1996). This has happened in the UK through feminists'active involvement in political parties—especially theLabour Party (Caine, 1997; Graves, 1994; Harriss,1989; Spender, 1983; Whiteley, Seyd, & Richardson,1994); through women's struggles for greater represen-tation in the formal political realm (Lovenduski, 1996;Perrigo, 1996), and through their involvement in stru-ggles for constitutional change (Dobrowolsky, 2002).During Labour's period out of office from 1979 to 1997,for instance, Women's Committees and Women's Unitswere set up at local government level to develop ini-tiatives to further gender equality (Button, 1984;Halford, 1988). The impetus for this came from feministactivists within the Labour party at local level and awider network of grassroots women's organisations(Edwards, 1995; Goss, 1984; Riley, 1990). During thelate 1980s and 1990s the work of the Women's Commi-ttees was absorbed into equal opportunities work asarguments were advanced for ‘mainstreaming’ genderequality. This had the effect of stripping equalities workof its more radical aims and reframing it so that it wascompatible with market forces (Bruegel & Kean, 1995);

indeed by 1995, the Women's Committees had all butdisappeared (Stokes, 1998). Thus feminist social move-ments can influence political and discursive opportunitystructures but, in the process, their more radical aims canbe reframed and transformed.

At national level the Labour government that wasreturned to Westminster in 1997 was committed toconstitutional reform, specifically the devolution ofpowers to Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, and theactivities of feminists within it resulted in a parliamentwith an unprecedentedly high proportion (18%) ofwomen MPs. These two developments, devolution andhigher political representation of women, have changedthe political opportunity structure and can be seen asopening a ‘policy window’ for feminist activists(Marshall, 2000). The higher representation of womenis particularly significant because, once elected, womencan make a difference in policy terms especially if thereis a critical mass of women in political institutions(Mackay, 2001). There is evidence, for instance, thatLabour women MPs have sought to transform the poli-tical agenda so that it incorporates women's concerns,although how successful they have been remains unclear(Childs, 2001, 2002).

It is not only the political but also the discursiveopportunity structure that can be changed through theimpact of feminist social movements. Indeed the influxof feminist activists into political parties and the relatedphenomenon of femocrats can be understood as one ofthe mechanisms whereby feminist social movementsinfluence policy development. Furthermore the newways of framing political issues associated with socialmovements may influence dominant definitions therebyhaving an effect on the discursive opportunity structure.Thus cultural change in the form of shifts in values,meanings and definitions, which are often brought aboutby social movements, can create a climate both insideand outside political institutions which is conducive topolicy change.

As well as political and discursive opportunitystructures, it is also important to consider the extent towhich social movements are pressing for a redistributionof resources when analysing their ability to influencepolicy development. This has been conceptualised interms of role equity and role change issues (Gelb &Palley, 1982). Role equity issues, which can be acco-mmodated within the discourse of liberalism and whichdo not involve a redistribution of resources, do notchallenge basic societal values or threaten to redistributepower and resources; in contrast role change issues do. Inother words claims for equal pay and opportunities arenot so challenging (on the face of things) as demands that


women should be able to control their own fertility andthat care work should be de-gendered. And in order toreduce the challenge of–and hence opposition to–feminist demands they may be reframed by socialmovement actors in terms such as equal rights, socialjustice and equality which are acceptable within thedominant discourse of liberalism.

In the discussion that follows we build on theframework outlined here in order to explore changes inthe gendering of the political opportunity structure inWales, how political issues have been framed by dif-ferent social movement organisations, the relation offraming processes to the discursive opportunity struc-ture, and whether changes in the gendering of the politi-cal opportunity structure have created new opportunitiesfor social movements to influence the development ofsocial policy. Our focus is the content and shaping ofpublic policy texts in the fields of childcare, domesticviolence and gender equality. We have chosen thesepolicy issues because they have become a major featureof New Labour's policy agenda and were named by thewomen's movement of the 1970s as feminist issues.Childcare and domestic violence were not even on thepolicy agenda in the 1960s when the women's move-ment emerged but now there is a national childcarestrategy and a strategy to combat domestic abuse. Bothissues present particular challenges for state interventionbecause of their association with the domestic realm andthe privacy of families. Both invite attention to ‘rolechange’ issues which, as we have pointed out, may beparticularly challenging to dominant discourses rootedas they are in the relations of ruling.

Methodology

The research discussed here derives from two se-parate studies both of which are based on an analysis ofkey policy texts. In each case we have attempted toanalyse policy change and the competing discoursesembedded in policy and to identify those involved in themaking of policy, their reasons for claiming a stake inthis policy arena and their impact on the policy process.We also explore how they framed issues in relation todominant discourses and whether this framing affectedtheir ability to influence policy development.

We approach policy texts as ‘attempts at persuasion’that represent a particular construction of social reality(Sparks, 1992) and pursue a feminist methodology thatplaces the interests of women at the core of our readingof the texts. Marshall (1997, 2000) has argued that tra-ditional policy analysis has been based on models andmethods that generally serve to support the status quo

rather than to challenge it. In its place she offers a modelof feminist critical policy analysis defined broadly as:

research that conducts analyses for women whilefocusing on policy and politics. This perspectiveasks an often neglected question of every policy orpolitical action: how is it affected by gender roles?(Marshall, 1997, p. 2)

In reading policy texts the issue of gender is central toour analysis and feminist scholarship has been used to askcritical questions of policy and the arenas that shape it.According to Marshall the role of the critical researchercan be to make the most of their role as an ‘outsider’ topolicy arenas and examine the role of insiders in creating‘master narratives’, how interests and values shape policyand how key stakeholders justify particular decisions.

To move beyond the master narratives, to be critical,the analyst must do something, must report, act toenfranchise and to disrupt and dismantle oppressivepolicy directions. (Marshall, 1997, p. 10)

Thus it is possible to read policy texts with theintention of identifying master narratives or frames, toconsider their implications for gender politics and toexpose potentially harmful consequences. This is whatwe seek to do in the following critique.

Our analysis of childcare policy inWales is based on adetailed search of the web site of the Welsh AssemblyGovernment for policy documents and debates pertainingto gender equality and childcare. The proceedings of theWelsh Affairs Select Committee on Childcare in Wales(1999) were read in full as a starting point in illuminatingpotential tensions in the policy processes surroundingthis issue. In contrast to published policies these pro-ceedings enable us to identify the written and verbalevidence presented by specific individuals and organisa-tions and to explore how members of the Select Commi-ttee responded to competing claims. This documentaryanalysis represents the first phase of on-going doctoralresearch into childcare in Wales. Analysis of domesticviolence policy in Wales has relied on social policy do-cuments available in the public domain and focussed onthe ways in which issues are framed and the policyimplications of such framing. It also draws on findingsfrom an earlier piece of research (Charles, Gilkes &Symonds, 2001).

A changed political opportunity structure

There is no question that there have been significantchanges in the gendering of the political opportunity


structure since 1997 and that these changes have raisedexpectations about the possibilities of change (Betts,Borland, & Chaney, 2001). In this sense they can be saidto have contributed to a perception of the political oppor-tunity structure as open to influence and opened a ‘policywindow’ which can be taken advantage of by feministactivists (Marshall, 2000). Indeed the impact of women'sactivism is evident in the increased number of womenMPs at Westminster since the 1997 general election andin the devolved Scottish parliament and the Assembliesin Wales and Northern Ireland. It is important, however,to put the National Assembly for Wales in its politicalcontext. It has been observed that the establishment of aRegional Fund by the European Community ensured that‘regional interests’ were organised into ‘the institutionalstructures of the embryonic EC’ and that this expandedopportunities for those pressing for a devolution of po-wers (McAdam, 1996, p. 35). In Wales the Labour Partyled the campaign for devolution. Their proposals weresupported, with varying degrees of enthusiasm, by PlaidCymru (the Party of Wales) as well as by the WelshLiberal Party. Women in Plaid Cymru, together withwomen in the Labour Party in Wales, were active intrying to ensure increased representation of women inany new tier of government that was introduced. DuringLabour's time out of office between 1979 and 1997,sections of the feminist movement had directed theirenergies towards increasing women's participation, bothwithin political parties and as political representatives(Dobrowolsky, 2002). They had been particularlyconcerned to ensure that in the new, devolved levels ofgovernment there would be 50:50 representation ofwomen and men and, to this end, had campaigned for theadoption of a policy of ‘twinning’ in elections to thesenew bodies. There had also been pressure for propor-tional representation to be adopted rather than the firstpast the post system by which MPs are elected to theparliament at Westminster. The Labour Party was electedto government in 1997 committed to constitutionalreform, part of which was the devolution of powers to‘the regions’ (including English regions) and part ofwhich was electoral reform. A referendum was held inWales in 1997 which voted narrowly for devolution and,in 1999, the first Assembly government was electedunder a combination of first past the post andproportional representation. In addition a policy oftwinning was adopted by the Labour Party in Walesand Scotland. This ensured that for every pair of twinnedconstituencies the Labour Party selected two candidates,a woman and a man, thereby ensuring an equal genderbalance in the candidates they fielded and contributing tothe election of an Assembly in which 40% of members

were women. This contrasted with the representation ofwomen in local government inWales which continued tohover around the 20% mark (Feld, 2000) and with theirrepresentation at Westminster which was 18%.

As well as working to bring about an improvement inwomen's political representation, women were also ac-tive, particularly in the Labour Party and Plaid Cymru,in working for cultural and policy change. As a result theLabour Party, while in opposition, developed its tradi-tional discourses of equality, which have a particularresonance within Wales, to include gender equality anda discourse of diversity. It is in this sense that devo-lution, the National Assembly for Wales and its gendercomposition, together with New Labour's commitmentto equality, social justice and diversity, created a policywindow for social movements in Wales.

A duty to promote equality

One of the developments which can be cited asevidence of this policy window is the adoption by theNational Assembly of a statutory duty that it should:

make appropriate arrangements with a view to se-curing that its functions are exercised with dueregard to the principle that there should be equalityof opportunity for all people. (Government of WalesAct 1998, Section 120)

This duty to promote equality is enshrined in thestructure and operations of the Assembly and can beseen as a result of successful lobbying by equality cam-paigners including those active in the women's move-ment (Chaney & Fevre, 2002; Dobrowolsky, 2002).Wales is unique in the UK in embracing a legal duty atgovernment level to promote equality of opportunitywhich is ‘singular in its non-prescriptive phrasing andall-embracing scope’ (Chaney & Fevre, 2002, p. 8). InScotland there is an Equality Unit and a requirement that‘all executive bills include a statement of their potentialeffect on equal opportunities’ and in England a Womenand Equality Unit assesses ‘the impact of policy onwomen’ and formulates ‘policies that promote equality’(Dobrowolsky, 2002). In Wales, however, all policiesand practices have to be reviewed by the NationalAssembly to ensure that they fulfil the equality duty.Furthermore, the National Assembly for Wales has setup an Equality of Opportunity Committee and an Equa-lity Policy Unit. Initiatives to promote gender equalityinclude the establishment of consultation mechanismsand the development of outreach work to foster linkswith organisations with a gender interest (NafW, 2001).The National Assembly is also required to communicate


with the Equal Opportunities Commission in Wales andthe other statutory equality organisations, the Commis-sion for Racial Equality and the Disability Rights Co-mmission. This means that there are a number of newand continuing access points within the political op-portunity structure through which equal opportunitiesactivists may operate and which can be seen as‘mobilising structures’ for the articulation of issues re-lating to equality (Pollack & Hafner-Burton, 2000).

There is also a commitment to mainstreamingequality of opportunity and gender equality across theNational Assembly for Wales and all policy develop-ments (Rees, 2002; Williams, 2001). To this end theEquality Policy Unit works alongside the Assembly'sdivisions in the development of equality action plansand there is a training strategy to support equalityawareness. There have also been efforts to improvediversity in public appointments. However, the conceptof mainstreaming is open to competing interpretationsand can be examined in relation to the distinction bet-ween role equity and role change issues referred toearlier. Indeed it may be limited to the issues of equalpay and equal access associated with a liberal feminist(role equity) agenda. This will not go far enough formany feminists committed to more far-reaching rolechange initiatives entailing ‘a far more radical approachtowards employment practice and service deliverywhich seeks to undo the raft of disadvantages ex-perienced by women … as a result of the breadwinner/home-maker gender contract that sets patriarchal rela-tions in law, custom and practice’ (Rees, 1999, p. 179).

These changes in the political and discursiveopportunity structures suggest a state that is open toinfluence from social movements, including women'sorganisations. Indeed they have generated a lot ofoptimism from the women Assembly Members andfrom many women's organisations thereby increasingthe expectation that the Assembly is likely to be res-ponsive to external pressure. In order to explore theextent to which they have created new opportunities forsocial movement organisations to influence policydevelopment we look first at childcare policy and thenat policies relating to domestic abuse.

Childcare policy

Childcare policy in Wales has been shaped by NewLabour's agenda for childcare. In May 1998 the UKgovernment announced the national childcare strategy(DfEE, 1998) and in October of the same year the GreenPaper, Supporting Families, (Home Office, 1998) wasissued for consultation. Both these papers reflect some

of the wider priorities of New Labour in relation tocombating poverty, promoting social inclusion andinvesting in children (Millar, 2003). Indeed the nationalchildcare strategy is an essential component of theagenda for welfare reform alongside other governmentstrategies. Following devolution, policy makers inWales have been free to develop their own agenda forchildcare but within limits. Some of these limits are aresult of the reserve powers of the UK government inareas such as taxation, benefits and maternity rights.Other limits come from the power of dominant dis-courses to structure what can be imagined. By tracingthe process of policy change in this area it is possible tosee which social movement organisations sought toinfluence policy and how the political and discursiveopportunity structures influenced the framing of theirarguments.

In June 1998 The national childcare strategy inWales was published (Welsh Office, 1998). Thisconsultation document attracted considerable criticismfrom interested parties and according to the WelshAffairs Select Committee (1999, Introduction, Para-graph 1) ‘was a disappointment to many’. Criticsclaimed that it remained too close to the Englishstrategy in the proposals, did not reflect Welshdifferences and did not incorporate views put forwardduring consultation in Wales and by the Childcare Stra-tegy Task Group that had been set up by the WelshOffice. As a consequence the Select Committee onWelsh Affairs undertook an inquiry into childcare inWales. Their report was published in May 1999. TheSelect Committee provided an opening in the politicalopportunity structure at a crucial point in the history ofWales—shortly before the transfer of power to theNational Assembly. Social movement organisationswith an interest in childcare had an unprecedentedopportunity to express their views at a time of con-siderable optimism about the future of Welsh politics.Here we consider those organisations which gave evi-dence, how their arguments were framed and their sub-sequent involvement in the policy-making process.

A wide variety of organisations took the opportunityto submit evidence including organisations from thevoluntary sector, industry and employment, early yearseducation and childcare. There were three submissionsfrom bodies with an obvious concern with genderequality issues. These were the Equal OpportunitiesCommission (EOC) in Wales, Chwarae Teg (Fair Play)and the Minority Ethnic Women's Network (MEWN).The Equal Opportunities Commission was set up by theSex Discrimination Legislation in the 1970s and is aquasi-governmental organisation. Chwarae Teg was


established in 1992 with the aim of improving theeconomic circumstances of women in Wales. It hassought to expand childcare provision and has beeninvolved as a manager of various childcare projects.MEWN was established in 1991 on the initiative of thethen director of EOC Wales and the Welsh Women'sEuropean Network in order to redress the lowrepresentation of minority ethnic women in thevoluntary sector. The other organisation which wasvery influential in the development of childcare policywas the Welsh Local Government Association(WLGA). Feminist activists were key to these organisa-tions, either because they had been involved in settingthem up (as with Chwarae Teg) or because they oc-cupied key positions within them. And, with the excep-tion of WLGA, there is a sense in which they emergedfrom social movement organisations or were establishedas a result of social movement activity; thus althoughthey play key political roles they are positioned withinthe political opportunity structure as both insiders andoutsiders.

The EOC's submission frames childcare within anequal opportunities discourse and relates it to economicneeds; its main focus is on the achievement of genderequality through participation in the labour market. Thiscan be seen as an example of strategic framing, witharguments being articulated in a way that will resonatewith dominant cultural frames and consequently have achance of influencing policy development. ChwaraeTeg's submission concentrates on making an economiccase for childcare and its interest in gender equality isexpressed in terms of removing barriers to womenentering paid work. In both these submissions childcareis framed within a role equity discourse in relation topaid work and the needs of the economy. MEWN wasthe only organisation that framed childcare in relation tothe specific and different needs of women. While theorganisation would not describe itself as feminist, itdoes support and provide women-only training as part ofa positive action strategy. In its submission it outlines itsinterest in the provision of women-only training inchildcare to meet the ethnic and religious preferences ofsome Muslim women. Its arguments were thereforeframed in a way that did not resonate with the dominantdiscourse of gender equity and mainstreaming. Theframing of childcare needs in terms of gender differenceand separatism poses a challenge to dominant discoursesof equality and MEWN encountered some resistancefrom members of the Select Committee. In this instanceMEWN were only able to sustain an argument thatwomen may have needs that are different from menthrough reference to cultural and religious differences.

The WLGA argued for a child-focused policy whichlocated childcare within a wider package of initiativesfor children. The discourse they mobilised was one ofchildren's rights.

In most of the other submissions childcare was notlinked to questions of gender equality and/or the needsof women and those organisations that did state this as apriority were more likely to be taken seriously where thelink between childcare and gender equality was locatedin a role equity and economic efficiency discourse. It issignificant that feminists who had been active in thewomen's movement of the 1970s were amongst thoseframing the arguments for childcare both in terms ofequal opportunities and economic efficiency and interms of children's rights. Arguments framed in terms ofdifference, such as those advanced by MEWN, weresubsequently marginalised.

Following devolution the National Assembly forWales had to take the National Childcare Strategyforward and in February 2001 the Minister for Healthand Social Services, established a National ChildcareStrategy Task Force with a brief to develop a newchildcare action plan. A significant number of thoseorganisations that had submitted evidence to the SelectCommittee were represented as members of the TaskForce. Hence there is a sense of continuity in thekinds of organisations that have been able to influencepolicy development; those that framed childcare inways that resonated with a role equity discourse wererewarded with further incorporation into policy-making arenas.

The National Childcare Strategy Task Force pre-sented its report in November 2001 and this laid thefoundation for subsequent childcare policy in Wales(NafW, 2002; NafW, 2005). The report places emphasison putting the needs of children first as part of anextensive programme of measures for children. Thissuggests that the political and discursive opportunitystructure has been open to organisations which framedtheir arguments in terms of children's rights and/or interms of economic efficiency. This resonated with thediscourse of equality institutionalised within the Na-tional Assembly. Thus the Minister for Health andSocial Services, in her forward to the report, writes:

we continue to recognise that an effective strategyfor childcare can improve the opportunities of manypeople to access employment and training.Women inparticular–although not exclusively–are likely tobenefit in this respect. An adequate supply of goodquality childcare therefore helps to meet the Assem-bly's economic aspirations and promotes equality of


opportunity. (The National Childcare Strategy TaskForce Report, 2001, p. 2, our emphasis)

Here childcare is seen as enabling women to par-ticipate in the workforce. The link between expandedchildcare and opportunities for women is taken to be soself-evident that the difficulties and challenges involvedare glossed over. Childcare is seen as a means ofenabling mothers to combine caring for children withpaid employment and as a means of social inclusion. It isframed as an economic issue and as part of the welfare-to-work agenda of New Labour.

The discourses that have resonance within the newpolitical and discursive opportunity structure in Wales,therefore, are those of children's rights, equal opportu-nities and social inclusion through economic opportu-nity. The more radical discourse of women's rights andgender difference has been abandoned (see alsoDobrowolsky & Jenson, 2002 for an account of similarprocesses in Canada). Thus demands for childcare arenow framed in terms of children's rights, equalopportunities and the economic benefits of childcareby both femocrats within the National Assembly and byorganisations external to it. The voices of those, such asMEWN, who mobilise a discourse of difference, aremarginalised and a more radical framing of childcarewhich challenges domestic divisions of labour and thegendering of care work has been replaced by one whichresonates with liberal notions of equality and equalrights. Thus there is little sense that either devolution orthe statutory duty have encouraged childcare policy inWales to be thought about in ways that are distinctivefrom the New Labour vision.

Domestic violence policy

We now turn to the development of domesticviolence policy. New Labour's framework for domesticviolence policy is set out in the document Living withoutfear (Women's Unit, 1999) and, more recently, in itsconsultation paper, Safety and justice (Home Office,2003). In both documents domestic abuse is defined as acrime and New Labour's policies on violence againstwomen are situated firmly in the arena of crimereduction. Thus Living without fear commits fundsfrom the Crime Reduction Programme to ‘new projectsto reduce domestic violence, rape and sexual assault’,notes the economic costs of violence against women andsupports the setting up of inter-agency fora. A smallamount of space is devoted to the question of fundingfor ‘refuges, rape crisis and support centres’ and it isrecognised that ‘uncertainties about funding are one of

the biggest headaches for refuges’; however there is nocommitment to funding refuge provision. This docu-ment clearly defines domestic violence as a criminaljustice issue. In the more recent consultation paper,Safety and justice, reference is made to the govern-ment's capital investment programme in refuge buildingin England which is to be managed through the HousingCorporation. This does not, however, provide revenuefunding for refuge groups which is vital for them tosurvive and which remains precarious. Furthermorethere is no such commitment to capital spending inWales.

These developments in policies on domestic violenceand violence against women can be seen as the result ofmany years of campaigning by the feminist movement(Charles, 2000). But the incorporation of the issue ofdomestic violence by the state has been accompanied bya depoliticisation of it; a process of issue perversion.Male violence against women is no longer defined interms of gendered power relations. This definition hasbeen replaced by one which sits much more easily withthe crime reduction programme of New Labour. Thisrepresents a process of reframing which has taken placewithin the feminist movement and which, while beingcontentious (see for example Maguire, 1988), hasresulted in domestic violence assuming a high priorityin policy development and implementation. The presentgovernment is committed to preventing ‘domesticviolence happening or recurring, and to protect andsupport all victims of domestic violence’ (Home Office,2003, p. 6). It also recognises that domestic violence isgendered and that it is ‘predominantly women’ who areaffected. Thus although domestic violence is not dis-cussed in terms of gendered power relations, the fe-minist movement's goal of eliminating it has beenadopted by New Labour and policies developed accor-dingly: ‘strategically chosen… feminist discourses haveentered the mainstream’ (Ferree, 2003, p. 317). Domes-tic violence is now defined as both a criminal justice anda housing issue, thereby resonating with hegemonicdiscourses about justice and social welfare and being ofconcern to the repressive as well as the welfare sectorsof the state.

This policy framework is important when consideringdevelopments in Wales as, despite devolution, responsi-bility for the criminal aspects of domestic violence remainwith the Home Office; this means that the Assembly canhave a relatively limited input into developing policy.There is, however, room for manouevre in relation torefuge provisionwhich has hitherto been amatter for localgovernment and housing associations. In 2002, the mi-nister for Health and Social Services announced the


setting up of a working group on domestic violence andviolence against women in Wales which was charged,amongst other things, with developing a domestic vio-lence strategy. Refuge movement organisations were rep-resented on this working group along with representativesof the criminal justice system, local government andhealth care. This was seen as a real opportunity to have aninput into the development of domestic violence policy;indeed the draft strategy was drawn up by the director ofWelshWomen's Aid. It is also significant that the ministerresponsible for setting up the working group is a formersocial movement activist who is now working within thestate, thereby contributing to a different policy agenda.The strategywas published inMarch 2005 and as with theWalesChildcareAction Plan (NafW, 2002) does not differsignificantly from the policies developed by New Labourfor England. This is not altogether surprising given thatthe Assembly government is itself New Labour. The stra-tegy is published by the Community Safety Unit and it isCommunity Safety Partnerships which are charged withdelivering the strategy; it is therefore an integral partof New Labour's and the Assembly's crime reductionprogramme.

One of the issues that was considered by the workinggroup was funding policies and whether they were‘achieving the best possible results in combating domes-tic violence’ (NAfW communication, 4/2/03). Fundingof refuge provision is a perennial problem (Charles,1991) and there was some hope from within WelshWomen's Aid that the Assembly would accept their pro-posals for a centralised revenue funding strategy. Theseproposals have not found favour, thereby ruling outcentral funding for the organisation and its network ofrefuges. The question of funding is crucial for the refugemovement and the working group represented anopportunity for refuge movement organisations tocontribute to the development of a more satisfactoryfunding policy in Wales. Moreover there was apossibility that it might have differed significantlyfrom the one taking effect in England. This has nothappened. And although one of the aims of the strategy isto ensure ‘adequate funding for domestic abuse services’(Welsh Assembly Government, 2005, p. 16) the onlycommitment made in the document is that funding willbe made available through the Supporting Peopleprogramme for ‘over 500 units of accommodation forwomen escaping domestic violence’ (Welsh AssemblyGovernment, 2005, p. 8). This money, although likely toincrease the income of refuge groups, will not solve theirfunding problems and they will have to continue to seekrevenue funding from local authorities and housingassociations. Defining domestic violence as a criminal

justice issue and introducing measures as part of thegovernment's crime reduction programme means thatthe only possibility of the Welsh Assembly developingits own domestic violence strategy is through definingdomestic violence as a housing and welfare issue anddeveloping appropriate policies. In the strategy docu-ment it is recognised that domestic violence is a socialpolicy issue as well as a crime, but this recognition has nopolicy implications beyond those already discussed.

There is some concern within refuge groups andWelsh Women's Aid that the cost of recognising do-mestic violence as a policy issue and its inclusion onNew Labour's policy agenda is to marginalise moreradical feminist voices in the arrangements which are setup to deal with domestic violence. This fear seems to bewell founded. In line with government policy, inter-agency fora are being set up throughout Wales but, aswith Community Safety Partnerships, they are domi-nated by the police and other agencies dealing withcriminal justice. Moreover the refuge movement itself ischanging in response to demands from funding bodiesand the state for accountability. Thus Welsh Women'sAid is undergoing a transformation from a collective,which it has been since its inception in the 1970s, to ahierarchical organisation. This change is supported byall the member groups of the organisation on pragmaticgrounds and is a response to the changed environmentwithin which it now has to operate. However there issome feeling that engagement with the new manage-rialism of the state has come at the price not only ofcollective but also of feminist organisation, there beingan equation in the minds of many in Welsh Women'sAid between the two. Some see this as a move awayfrom the feminist values that have hitherto formed thebasis of the organisation and a sign that its feministpolitics are in danger of being lost. Indeed one refugeworker said that Welsh Women's Aid has ‘just becomean organisation that runs a service’ and that it has beenpushed in this direction by the availability of fundingand the need to comply with the demands of the fundingagencies (Charles et al., 2001). This situation, and thefocus of government policy on inter-agency initiativesto combat domestic violence, means that the moreradical feminist voices and definitions of domesticviolence are being marginalised at the same time as theneed to combat domestic violence is being incorporatedinto government and Assembly policy.

The changed political opportunity structure createdby the National Assembly for Wales is providing newopportunities for refuge movement organisations tobecome involved in policy development. Their contactswith individual Assembly Members and their previous


close links with the Welsh Office (Charles, 1995) areimportant in bringing this about. But the extent to whichthose organisations have become service providers ra-ther than feminist political organisations will determinewhether some parts of the feminist agenda on domesticviolence are marginalised at the same time as refugemovement organisations are incorporated into theregional state.

Conclusions

It remains to be seen what relationship will developbetween social movements, the Welsh Assembly andsocial policy change and the extent to which socialmovement access and influence are facilitated by thegender composition of the Assembly. There is asympathetic administration and a lot of optimism, aduty to promote equality and a special relationship withthe voluntary sector as a way of reinvigorating civilsociety. But developments are contradictory. On the onehand social movements, such as the refuge movement,have contacts in the Assembly and some AssemblyMembers are the same people who were social move-ment activists. On the other hand New Labour's policies,which institutionalise, thereby transforming and redefin-ing, the demands of the women's movement, seem to behaving the effect of marginalising more radical feministvoices. This seems to be happening with both the refugemovement and childcare, in the case of the refuge move-ment through a process of incorporation and reframing,and in the case of childcare through the dominance of thewelfare to work agenda and a children's rights discourse.Such reframing can be seen as a result of strategic deci-sions by social movement activists who choose to use thelanguage that ‘conforms to hegemonic discourse’ and, asFerree has suggested, may be the underlying mechanismleading to cooption (Ferree, 2003). Thus parts of thefeminist movement defined childcare in role equity termsas a means of enabling women to participate in theworkforce on an ‘equal’ basis with men; it is this defi-nition which chimes with the equality discourse of NewLabour and the National Assembly. What this does notaddress is the role change issue of the unequal genderdivision of care work and domestic labour within thehome which was also a concern of the women's move-ment; it thereby minimises the need for a redistributionof unpaid labour (and consequently resources) betweenwomen and men. Similarly domestic violence is framednot in terms of gendered power relations but as a socialand family problem which can be treated by means oftherapy for individual men and/or as a criminal justiceissue; indeed working with perpetrators is a key element

of the domestic violence strategy in Wales. Feministscampaigning on domestic violence have themselvescontributed towards its criminalisation as a way of ge-tting it taken seriously; defining it in this way resonateswith the government's concerns about crime reductionbut also depoliticises domestic violence. It also has fun-ding implications which, at the same time as makingmore funds available to combat domestic violence, mar-ginalise some feminist organisations. This reframing canbe seen as a strategic response on the part of the feministmovement to the political and discursive opportunitystructure and as the best means of ensuring that domesticviolence is taken seriously in policy development.However it reduces the challenge to the existing genderorder and also sidelines feminist responses to domesticviolence which aim to empower women and redistributeresources from men to women (Charles, 1995). Thismarginalisation is evident in the struggles of the refugemovement in Wales to reorganise itself in a way whichmany fear will weaken its feminist politics. Thus moreacceptable definitions of domestic violence, whichrecognise its gender dimensions but see it as a criminaljustice issue, have become dominant and have had amajor impact on policy development. Similarly, main-streaming equality represents the incorporation ofequality issues into the national and regional statewhere they are absorbed into liberal definitions of equa-lity. This marginalises arguments based on difference aswe have seen in the case of evidence presented byMEWN on childcare issues.

What our analysis shows is that changes in thegendering of the political opportunity structure in Waleshave created new opportunities for social movements toinfluence the development of social policy but, at thesame time, central government's tight control over thepolicy agenda and the limited powers of the Assemblymean that there are also significant constraints. Newopportunities are created by feminists becoming part ofthe political elite, i.e. ‘femocrats’, by the expectationsthat this creates within social movement organisationsfor their ability to bring about change, and by thecreation of new mobilising structures. This has hap-pened in the context of a destabilisation of traditionalpolitical cleavages based on class and the increasedsalience of gender and national and ethnic identities(amongst others) for political action. The influence offeminism within political parties, especially NewLabour, and the election of New Labour to governmentin 1997 and to the National Assembly in 1999, have alsoresulted in a changed discursive opportunity structurewith a commitment to a politics of social inclusion basedon equality of opportunity for all and a crime reduction


programme stressing justice for the victims of crimeincluding the ‘victims’ of domestic violence. Thesediscourses, or master frames, can be seen as a product offeminists working through political parties to bringabout policy change and have been associated withsections of the feminist movement reframing issues suchas childcare and domestic violence in terms of equality,equal rights and criminal justice, thus ensuring that theyresonate with culturally dominant meanings. In thisprocess the more radical (in feminist terms) dimensionsof these issues are downplayed–a sensible tactic giventhe unpopularity of feminism within British culture(Ward, 2003)–enabling issues like domestic violenceand childcare to become a central part of governmentpolicy. But in the process more radical feministdefinitions of the issues are marginalised and the goalof empowering women and challenging gendered powerrelations and the unequal distribution of resourcesbetween women and men is sidelined. Thus while theliberal democratic state may not be able to rejectarguments for gender equality couched in liberalism, itcan ensure that in implementing change disruption to thegender order is minimised.

Acknowledgments

This paper was first presented at the ninth interna-tional conference on ‘Alternative futures and popularprotest’ at Manchester Metropolitan University, UK,22–24 April 2003. We are grateful to the participants fortheir comments and discussion and particularly to ErnieZirakzadeh who chaired our session and was enthusi-astic that we take the paper further. We also thank MyraMarx Ferree and the two referees for helping us totighten up our analytical framework.

References

Benford, Robert D. (1997). An insider's critique of the social movementframing perspective. Sociological Inquiry, 67, 409−430.

Benford, Robert D., & Snow, DavidA. (2000). Framing processes and socialmovements: An overview. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611−639.

Betts, Sandra, Borland, John, & Chaney, Paul (2001). Inclusivegovernment for excluded groups: Women and disabled people. InPaul Chaney, Tom Hall, & Andrew Pithouse (Eds.), Newgovernance—new democracy? Cardiff: University of Wales Press.

Bruegel, Irene, & Kean, Hilda (1995). The moment of municipalfeminism: Gender and class in 1980s local government. CriticalSocial Policy, 15, 147−169.

Button, Sheila (1984). Women's committees: A study of gender andlocal policy formulation. School for Advanced Urban StudiesWorking Paper 45. University of Bristol.

Caine, Barbara (1997). English feminism 1780–1980. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Chaney, Paul, & Fevre, Ralph (2002). An absolute duty. Equalopportunities and the National Assembly for Wales. Cardiff:Institute of Welsh Affairs.

Charles, Nickie (1991). Funding women's aid services to thecommunity in Wales: Research report, Welsh office.

Charles, Nickie (1995). Feminist politics, domestic violence and thestate. The Sociological Review, 43(4), 617−639.

Charles, Nickie (2000). Feminism, the state and social policy.Macmillan.

Charles, Nickie, Gilkes, Madi, & Symonds, Anthea (2001). Evaluationof the organisational structure of Welsh Women's Aid. Cardiff:Welsh Women's Aid.

Childs, Sarah (2001). Attitudinally feminist'? The new labour womenMPs and the substantive representation of women. Politics, 2,178−185.

Childs, Sarah (2002). Hitting the target: Are labour women MPs“acting for” women? Parliamentary Affairs, 55, 143−153.

Diani, Mario (1996). Linking mobilization frames and politicalopportunities: Insights from regional populism in Italy. AmericanSociological Review, 61, 1053−1069.

DfEE (1998). Meeting the childcare challenge. London: StationeryOffice Cm 3959.

Dobrowolsky, Alexandra (2002). Crossing boundaries: Exploring andmapping women's constitutional interventions in England, Scot-land, and Northern Ireland. Social Politics, 9, 293−340.

Dobrowolsky, Alexandra, & Jenson, Jane (2002). Shifting patterns ofrepresentation: The politics of “children”, “families”, “women”.Paper presented at CAVA international seminar, collective interven-tions on the terrain of parenting and partnering. University of Leeds.

Edwards, Julia (1995). Local government women's committees. Afeminist political practice. Aldershot: Avebury.

Eyerman, Ron, & Jamison, Andrew (1991). Social movements: Acognitive approach. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Feld, Val (2000). A new start in Wales: How devolution is making adifference. In C. Anna (Ed.), New gender agenda. London:Institute for Public Policy Research.

Ferree, Myra Marx (2003). Resonance and radicalism: Feministframing of abortion in the United States and Germany. AmericanJournal of Sociology, 109, 304−344.

Ferree, Myra Marx, & Roth, Silke (1998). Gender, class, and theinteraction between social movements. Gender and Society, 12,626−648.

Gamson, William A., & Meyer, David S. (1996). Framing politicalopportunity. In Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy, & Mayer N.Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gelb, Joyce, & Palley, Marian (1982). Women and public policies.Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Giugni, Marco G. (1998). Was it worth the effort? The outcomes andconsequences of social movements. Annual Review of Sociology,24, 371−393.

Goss, Sue (1984). Women's initiatives in local government. InMartin Boddy & Colin Fudge (Eds.), Local socialism? Labourcouncils and new left alternatives (pp. 109−132). Basingstoke:Macmillan.

Graves, Pamela M. (1994). Labour women: Women in British workingclass politics 1918–1939. Cabridge: Cambridge University Press.

Halford, Susan (1988). Women's initiatives in local government…where do they come from and where are they going? Policy andPolitics, 16(4), 251−259.

Harriss, Kathryn (1989). New alliances: Socialist-feminism in theeighties. Feminist Review, 31, 34−54.


Home Office (1998). Supporting families. Cm3991. London: Statio-nery Office.

Home Office (2003, June). Safety and justice: The government'sproposals on domestic violence. London: Home Office.

Jenkins, J. Craig (1995). Social movements, political representation,and the state: An agenda and comparative framework. In J. CraigJenkins & Bert Klandermans (Eds.), The politics of social protest:Comparative perspectives on states and social movements. London:UCL Press.

Kriesi, Hanspeter, Koopmans, Ruud, Dyvendak, Jan Willem, &Giugni, Marco G. (1995). New social movements in westernEurope: A comparative analysis. London: UCL Press.

Lovenduski, Joni (1996). Sex, gender and British politics. In JoniLovenduski & Pippa Norris (Eds.), Women in politics. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Mackay, Fiona (2001). Love and politics: Women politicians and theethics of care. London: Continuum.

Maguire, Sara (1988). “Sorry love”—violence against women in thehome and the state response. Critical Social Policy, 8(2), 34−45.

Marshall, Catherine (Ed.). (1997). Feminist critical policy analysis. Aperspective from primary and secondary schooling. London:Falmer Press.

Marshall, Catherine (2000). Policy discourse analysis: Negotiatinggender equity. Journal of Educational Policy, 15(2), 125−156.

McAdam, Doug (1996). Conceptual origins, current problems, futuredirections. In Doug McAdam, John D. McCarthy, & Mayer N.Zald (Eds.), Comparative perspectives on social movements. Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.

McMillan, Lesley (2003). Organising against a violent society:Women's anti-violence organisations in Sweden and the UK. PhDthesis, University of Edinburgh: Edinburgh.

Millar, Jane (2003). Squaring the circle? Means testing andindividualisation in the UK and Australia. Social Policy andSociety, 3(1), 67−74.

Naples, Nancy A. (2002). Materialist feminist discourse analysis andsocial movement research: Mapping the changing context for“community control”. In David S. Meyer, Nancy Whittier, &Belinda Robnett (Eds.), Social movements: Identity, culture, andthe state. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

National Assembly for Wales (2001). National Assembly for Wales:Arrangements to promote equality of opportunity 2000 – 2001.Annual report of the Committee on Equality of Opportunity.Cardiff: National Assembly for Wales.

National Assembly for Wales (2002). Childcare action plan. Cardiff:Welsh Assembly Government.

National Assembly for Wales (2005). A flying start. Childcare forchildren, parents and communities. The Final Report of the WelshAssembly Government Childcare Working Group. Cardiff: Na-tional Assembly for Wales.

National Childcare Strategy Task Force (2001). Report submitted toHealth and Social Services Committee, 21 November 2001.Cardiff: National Assembly for Wales.

Perrigo, Sarah (1996). Women and change in the Labour Party 1979–1995. In Joni Lovenduski & Pippa Norris (Eds.), Women inpolitics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pollack, Mark A., & Hafner-Burton, Emilie (2000). Mainstreaminggender in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy,7, 432−456.

Rees, Teresa (1999). Mainstreaming equality. In Sophie Watson &Lesley Doyal (Eds.), Engendering social policy. Buckingham:Open University Press.

Rees, Teresa (2002). The politics of ‘mainstreaming’ gender equality.In Esther Breitenbach, Alice Brown, Fiona Mackay, & JanetteWebb (Eds.), The changing politics of gender equality in Britain.Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Riley, Kathryn (1990). Equality for women—the role of localauthorities. Local Government Studies, 16(1), 49−68.

Sparks, Richard (1992). Television and the drama of crime: Moraltales and the place of crime in public life. Buckingham: OpenUniversity Press.

Spender, Dale (1983). There's always been a women's movement thiscentury. London: Pandora.

Stevenson, William B., & Greenberg, Danna (2000). Agency andsocial networks: Strategies of action in a social structure ofposition, opposition, and opportunity. Administrative ScienceQuarterly, 45, 651−678.

Stokes, Wendy (1998). Feminist democracy: The case for women'scommittees. Contemporary Politics, 4(1), 23−37.

Tarrow, Sidney (1994). Power in movement: Social movements,collective action, and politics. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Taylor, Verta (1999). Gender and social movements: Gender processesin women's self-help movements. Gender and Society, 13, 8−33.

Ward, Lucy (2003). Feminism: Outmoded and unpopular. TheGuardian Newspaper, 2nd July.

Watt, Nicholas (2003). Equality. Women win half Welsh seats. TheGuardian Newspaper, 3rd May.

Welsh Affairs Select Committee (1999). Childcare in Wales. ThirdReport of the Committee, Session 1998–99, HC156. London: TheStationery Office.

Welsh Assembly Government (2005). Tackling domestic violence: Theall Wales National Strategy, Welsh Assembly Government.

Welsh Office (1998). The national childcare strategy in Wales. Aconsultation document. London: The Stationery Office Cm 3974.

Whiteley, Paul, Seyd, Patrick, & Richardson, Jeremy (1994). Trueblues: The politics of conservative party membership. Oxford:Clarendon Press.

Whittier, Nancy (2002). Meaning and structure in social movements.In David S. Meyer, Nancy Whittier, & Belinda Robnett (Eds.),Social movements: Identity, culture, and the state. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Williams, Charlotte (2001). Can mainstreaming deliver? The equalopportunities agenda and the National Assembly for Wales.Contemporary Wales, 14, 57−79.

Women's Unit (1999). Living without fear: An integrated approach totackling violence against women. London: Cabinet Office.

Documents

Feminist social movements and policy change: Devolution, childcare and domestic violence policies in Wales