Woman's Hour - The cost of being single, Zara Aleena's murder & probation service failings, menopause and the workplace

Episode Date: January 24, 2023

An independent review into Zara Aleena's murder found a catalogue of errors by the probation service. HM Chief Inspector of Probation Justin Russell who conducted the review joins Nuala McGovern along with Zara Aleena's aunt Farah Naz. According to new research being single comes at a price. Single people pay, on average, £860 a month more than people living in couples. So why does it cost an extra £10k per year to live as a single person? And is the independence and freedom that some single people feel worth the price tag? Nicola Slawson is a journalist and founder of The Single Supplement. There's been a long running campaign for working women going through the menopause to get better protection. This morning the government has announced it won't make the menopause a protected characteristic, in the same way things like age and sex are - despite a recommendation from MPs that it should be. The government is commissioning more research into the subject, and cheaper and better access to HRT. But is this enough? Reporter Melanie Abbott gives us the full details of the government's response to calls for more protection. And campaigner Helen Garlick from Henpicked tells us she is calling for more action. A new study will examine the disproportionate number of female teachers developing asbestos related diseases. Backed by teaching unions, it’s hoped the findings will put more pressure on the government to take action on asbestos in school buildings. Nuala will be talking to Joint General Secretary of the National Education Union, Dr Mary Bousted, and one woman who lost her mother – a teacher for many years - to asbestos related lung cancer, mesothelioma. Presenter: Nuala McGovern Producer: Lucinda Montefiore

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. I'm Natalia Melman-Petrozzella, and from the BBC, this is Extreme Peak Danger. The most beautiful mountain in the world. If you die on the mountain, you stay on the mountain. This is the story of what happened when 11 climbers died on one of the world's deadliest mountains, K2. And of the risks we'll take to feel truly alive. If I tell all the details, you won't believe it anymore. Extreme. Peak danger. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.

BBC Sounds. Music, radio, podcasts. Hello, this is Nuala McGovern and you're listening to the Woman's Hour podcast. You're very welcome to the programme. Good to have you with us this morning. Well, we are going to revisit a very sad story. A young woman, Zara Alina, was murdered by Jordan Maxwini when he was on probation and had breached three mandatory supervision appointments. A review was ordered following Zahra's death

to try and understand how Maxwini was in a position to walk the streets freely and carry out this horrific crime and also how a man

with his criminal history was deemed medium risk. So we're going to bring you the findings and speak to Alina's aunt Farah Naz who's here with us

to get her reaction. And she is joined by HM chief inspector of probation, Justin Russell. So that's coming up in just a moment. Also, did you see the analysis that said single people are forced to spend £860 more a month on the cost of living than those in couples? So we're looking at more than £10,000 per year. Now, I'm sure there are many single people among us that think being single is actually worth the premium. But £10,000, is it worth that?

Well, I want to hear your stories on where you see the difference to those in a couple and is it a price you're willing to pay? Yes, I realise you may not be single by choice, but how about the extra pounds then paid out? Talk me through it. Let me know your experience. Some of you already getting in touch.

Let me see. Single wage, yes, but you've still got to heat the house. That's from El Culland. Thanks for that. Let me see. This is Lisa. Says, yes, you only have one income, so you won't have the spare income to spend on breaks

and other stuff plus you're probably paid less than a man if you want to get in touch the number on text is 84844 text charged

at your standard message rate social media we're at BBC Women's Hour or email us through our website we also have

WhatsApp and voice notes going that number is 03700100444 and as usual dated charges may apply depending on your provider so use Wi-Fi if you can. Terms and conditions on

our website. You probably also heard in the bulletin there in addition to the story of Jordan McSweeney about the menopause, that it will not be a protected characteristic is one of the recommendations of the Women and Equalities Committee. They were looking for it to be a protected characteristic,

but that's been rejected outright by the government. We're going to look at the reasons given on why they've said no to that and also to five other proposals, including piloting menopause leave. And one other one I want you to be aware of that we will be covering. There's a new study that's getting underway. It'll look at

the number of female teachers developing asbestos related diseases. So it's going to focus on women in their 40s to their 60s and we're going to explain why the National Education Union is pushing for it and particularly for women in this age bracket.

If you have something to say on any of those stories, please do get in touch. We want to hear from you throughout the next hour. But let me turn indeed to that sad story. Nine days after being released from prison, Jordan McSweeney sexually assaulted and murdered 35-year-old aspiring lawyer Zara Alina. This was as she was walking home from a night out

on the 26th of June last year in Ilford in East London. The 29-year-old was sentenced in December to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 38 years. Zara's aunt was with us previously, telling Woman Zara that the family had been completely destroyed. At the time of the offence, Max Sweeney had been in and out of prison since he was 16.

He had a history of violence and was under the supervision of the probation service. The Justice Secretary, Dominic Raab, ordered an independent review into the case and findings have been laid bare today. There was a catalogue of errors by the probation service

from being wrongly assessed to missed opportunities to recall him earlier back into custody. HM Chief Inspector of Probation Justin Russell, who conducted the review joins me now. Good morning. Good morning Nuala. Along with Zahra

Zahra Lina's aunt Farah Niles. Welcome back to the programme Farah. Thank you. Let me start with you. The 35 page report, no doubt you were looking at it. I'd like to know your reaction and also how you're doing this morning. Well, it's an extremely distressing report. It's 35 pages revealing a litany of errors and it reveals that the errors are not necessarily down to lack of resources or overwork but more down to incompetence, leaders not putting recommendations from previous reports

that have repeated the recommendations, that have repeated the errors. The leaders not putting those into place. Poor management. One instance in the report says that sick staff were off on leave, not sick leave, off on leave at one point. So public safety was at stake. Well, it clearly was at stake. Not following good practice and release planning, not following timeline protocols and recall procedures,

not taking into account history of offences and assessing incorrectly, not taking into account his behavior and non-compliant throughout his adult and teen life poor communication prison an officer at one point a probation officer mentions not having the time to read the history which points to how is data presented it should be easy to read. There's a list of his offences that shouldn't be difficult, shouldn't take longer than a minute. The report repeatedly points to a lack of professional curiosity. This is not a service that's doing its best with inadequate resources. This is a service that is incompetent and has the failures by people at the top to ensure a quality service need to have been pointed out in this report.

You know, the thing that gave me pause and no doubt did you as well, Farah, I'm sure it made for distressing reading, was the chronology of events. That actually goes down through three pages. Everything from every crime that had been committed and particularly those fateful days in June when the recall did not happen in time. So he was not recalled into custody after missing three supervision appointments, as I understand it. His first custodial sentence, just to give our listeners some background, was at 16. He had 28 previous convictions for 69 separate offences

over 17 years. There was burglary, there was assault, there was a history of violence towards ex-partners, also a restraining order for an offence against a woman in 2021. Justin, Farah has outlined some of the issues and we can pick up on them, but how could he have been assessed as medium risk? My inspectors were puzzled by that. In our view, he was very clearly a high risk of serious harm to the public and to other people he associated with. At the time he was released in June of last year, he'd already served nine prison sentences.

One of the big issues was that the prison service held a lot of information and intelligence on his violent behaviour in prison, his use of weapons, his threats to other prisoners and staff. That wasn't communicated to the probation service in the community and wasn't taken account of when they did their risk assessment. The other problem was there was very little opportunity to do proper planning when he was released. He was only transferred to the probation service in the community nine days before he was released which meant that the probation officer didn't have time to review the risk assessment or to properly prepare for his going back out into the community. And he was released without a known address.

And all sorts of things should have been sorted out by that. How could he be released without a known address? How can you follow up on a person if you don't know where they are? It's a very good question. We certainly flagged there was potential to put a GPS tag on him, for example, so that he could have been tracked. That opportunity was missed. It's not unusual, sadly, for people to be released without a known address.

30% of the cases that we inspect across England and Wales are very transient in terms of their accommodation. A significant number are released literally street homeless. And let's pick up on some of the points that Farrah made, because you feel instead it wasn't so much the resources, but incompetence, lack of professionalism. If I'm quoting you correctly, Farah, do you think that's what's at the heart of it? There were certainly errors of individual practice by the probation officers and the line managers involved in this case, and we flagged those. But there are also broader systemic issues with the probation service two-thirds of the cases that we've inspected across england and wales we we rate as unsatisfactory in terms of their assessment of risks of harm of people on probation that's just not good enough but when it comes uh to this issue the recommendations which are laid out here

um and i can get into some of them specifically but you've been here before Justin you have made recommendations before and it hasn't changed obviously the system considering the crimes that we're looking at today why not? Well it is worrying I mean the probation service are investing in recruitment there's over 2,000 trainee probation officers

in training at the moment they are spending more money but that's not translating into better quality practice on the ground there was a big hit from covid but we feel probation officers need to be reminded of the basics they need to be retrained in how you distinguish between a medium and a high risk case they need systems which automatically flag if there's been a delay in recall back to custody. Let me talk about recall, because with the new recommendations, the probation service say they're enhancing the recall process. This is part of the statement from the prison and probation minister, Damien Hines.

The probation service is enhancing the recall process to ensure that all recalls are submitted within 24 hours. What do you think of that time frame? Let me start with you, Farah. Do you think of that timeframe? Let me start with you, Farah. Do you think that's appropriate? Well, that's something that I can't comment on. I think if you have a protocol, you've got to work to it. And the report actually highlights that the protocol wasn't actually worked to. So there are a number of protocols that weren't followed. And that does suggest to me that there are levels of incompetence here. What about that, Justin, the 24 hours? Do you agree with that? I think it depends on how high risk the person is. If someone is high risk, then there

should be greater urgency about recalling them. As Farah says, the target is to turn around recalls in 24 hours. What happened in this case is it actually took 48 hours to sign off the recall. So by the time it had got to the Ministry of Justice headquarters and they'd revoked Jordan McSweeney's licence, that was only 36 hours before Zara was murdered. Had the recall been activated earlier, that would have maximised the opportunities for the police to find and arrest McSweeney and bring him back into custody. Yes, talking about the chronology of events, it makes for very distressing reading

when you see all the missed opportunities that there were with this particular case. But it is the second time in less than a week that there have been reports of serious failings by the probation service. There were failings found at every stage in the case of Damien Bendall, who was deemed suitable to live with his pregnant partner, Terry Harris, and her two children. He murdered them along with another child in Derbyshire last year. I suppose the question is, I know Farah you think not, but to

you Justin, is probation service fit for purpose? I think the way that it assesses, manages and reviews risk of harm is not fit for purpose and that think the way that it assesses, manages and reviews risk of harm is not fit for purpose. And that is a key function for the probation service. It should be one of its priorities. And I'm urging the service to act to put those failures right and make sure that it improves that critical aspect of public protection and the work that it does. And I think with these two cases, people will be asking, are there other Jordan Maxwini's or Damien Bendel's out there? Can the probation service be trusted to keep the public safe, in particular women and girls, Farah? Well, I think not.

I think it's clear that actually women and girls are not safe if probation is not doing its job. Key is assessment, as Justin has said a few times now. And if assessment is undertaken incorrectly, then licenses will be incorrect. And then on top of that, if we're not looking at what's happening in prisons, if communication isn't adequate between prisons and probation, if housing isn't adequate between prisons and probation, if housing isn't adequate, if we give a license to someone and say, here you go, you've got to meet these conditions. And if you don't, actually, we'll come pick you up. But if they don't have a fixed abode, you can't do anything about it. So actually, there are people given a license to do what they want

on our streets. So actually, we're not safe. What about that, Justin, the safety and also how confident are you that more cases like this are not going to emerge? Well, I think terrible stories like this will hit public confidence in the probation service. There are thousands of high risk offenders that the probation service is supervising at any one time and they need to get all of those cases right and at the moment our inspections are casting serious doubt about that. I just want to read a little more of the statement by the Prisons and Probation Minister Damien Hines. He says this was a despicable crime. I apologise unreservedly to

Zara Lina's family for their unacceptable failings in this case. We're taking immediate steps to address the serious issues raised by Jordan Maxwini and Damien Bendel cases. This includes mandatory training to improve risk assessments, implementing new processes to guarantee the swift recall of offenders, which I mentioned, and we have taken disciplinary action where appropriate. We're also investing £155 million a year into the probation service to recruit the thousands more officers who will deliver tougher supervision, protect the public and ensure these sort of tragedies

can never happen again? Well, we need much more than an apology. And these recommendations have been made before and people have been promised that they're going to be followed. So actually, what we need is action. And we need is action and we need accountability and we need accountability not just from people on the front line. These are managers, these are leaders that have failed here because if assessment isn't correct it means the leaders are making mistakes. What stood in the way of any of your previous recommendations getting implemented Justin? Some of them have been implemented. I mean, recommendations we made in the Bendall report last week have already been acted on in terms of additional staff to check police records and a mandatory ban on curfew

orders being given out unless police checks have been done. There are huge resourcing issues with the probation service. When we inspected London probation last summer, we found over 500 vacancies. Only a quarter of London probation staff felt that their caseloads were manageable. So you have to fill those vacancies. But as Farah says, you've also got to deal with individual practice and make sure individual probation officers are doing the right thing. Even though there's lots of recruitment going on, there's over 2000 probation officers being trained, you need to hang on to the more experienced staff as well. Those are the people that are leaving and you need being trained, you need to hang on to the more experienced staff as well. Those are the people that are leaving and you need their experience,

you need their mentoring for the newly qualified staff that are coming through. But coming back to these instances, nobody has lost their job, as we heard there as well. There's only been disciplinary proceedings. Is that appropriate? Decisions on disciplinary proceedings are for the probation service rather than myself as an inspector to take where action is necessary that has to be taken.

But my point is that these are broader systemic issues that we're seeing with risk assessment and risk management right across England and Wales that need to be dealt with by the service. Yes, I understand the systemic, but there are individuals involved as well. Farah, for you, that it's only been disciplinary? If they don't have the right tools for assessment, then they're going to mis looked at. But I do think we have ministers that haven't responded to previous recommendations and they are answerable here. We have people higher up who are answerable. And when it comes to the justice, of state justice Dominic Rab and also of course

minister for probation the head of probation service we have asked for each of those to come on this program but nobody was available we are happy to speak to them at any time Justin what response have you had from the justice secretary, Dominic Raab? Well, the government has accepted all 10 of our recommendations. You've seen the statement from Damien Hines. I had an opportunity to talk Damien Hines through our findings, and I hope they take him seriously and act on it. And the proof in the pudding will be when our local probation inspections are showing significant improvements in assessment and management of risk.

So far, we're not seeing much sign of that. You know, I read there, Farah, that Damien Hines as prisons and probation minister apologised unreservedly. What interaction have you had with that service or indeed with the Justice Department? Well, that was the first I'd heard of it was when I read it this morning myself. So we haven't had a personal apology. We've read it in the paper. Would that mean something? That's totally inappropriate, actually,

because we've lost a member of our family and a loved member of our family for absolutely nothing. So it would make a difference to you? Would that be correct to say? Of course it makes a difference. but we need it backed up. And that's, you know, I'm not here to display my emotions. I've done that before. I'm here to campaign.

I'm here to speak up and to give a voice for my family and for everybody else, for everybody who would like to see better services and service provision. And that's what you're looking for. And that's what I'm looking for. I'm looking for change and accountability. Do you think there'll be change after this?

I sincerely hope so. I mean, it's very distressing that it takes stories like this to get probation in the news. But once they are in the news, let's really hope that it leads to concrete action on the ground. And Farah, because the young woman at the middle of this is our Alina, for people who didn't know her, would you like to tell us a little bit about her? Well, there's so much to say. This is a very difficult time for us. She was the complete antithesis of this man that was given a license to walk the streets freely.

And a good human being, a community member, very active in the local community, known in all her neighborhoods, loved by all of us dearly, funny, clever, beautiful and a real lover of life. Thank you so much for sharing your memories as well of your beloved niece. Have you spoken, I know I was talking about Damien Hines there and the apology, but has the Justice Secretary spoken to you? They have agreed to talk to me. So I'm looking forward to that conversation. Okay, perhaps we'll chat again. I want to thank both of you for coming in.

And I know this is a very sad and sensitive time for us. Farah Naz, the aunt of Sarah Lena, and also HM Chief Inspector of Probation, Justin Russell, on those findings that have come out today, laying bare some of the issues and missed opportunities when it came to the probation service. I want to move on now in one month's hour to an issue that so many of you have been getting in touch with us this morning. Let's talk about being single. Apparently it comes at a price. There's new research out.

These are by brokers, Hargreaves, Lansdowne. Did you see it? It found that single people pay on average £860 a month more than people living in couples. And that figure includes typical expenses from rent,

energy bills, groceries, Wi-Fi and even TV subscriptions. So why does it cost almost twice as much to live as a single person? And is the independence and the freedom that some people enjoy worth that price tag? Nicola Slauson is a journalist and founder of The Single Supplement, a weekly newsletter exploring the highs and lows of being single and joins me now. You're very welcome.

Hello, lovely to be here. So just looking at some of the figures here, Nicola, the average couple spends £991 per person. They're talking about per month. Single people pay an extra £860 on top of that, so almost double. Will change, of course, if there's kids in the picture. But what did you think when you saw some of that analysis well i've been thinking it for a long time because if you have a one bedroom flat for example it's going to cost the same to heat whether there's two people living there or just one it's going to cost the same in rent or your mortgage um but to see the figures

sort of laid out like that, I was quite shocked. But in a way, it did actually make me feel better because I had been beating myself up and not being able to afford fancy holidays abroad, like some of my friends. And also, I'm still renting as I'm struggling to get on the housing ladder. So now I'm like, okay, my friends have, you know, on average, £10,000 extra a year than me. So it was quite shocking for me and a lot of the members of the community that I run as well. So the rent is a big one. I'm just seeing some of the messages that are coming in in the past couple of minutes are text 84844. The cost of living for single people living on your own is surely a luxury.

What do you think? Well, I agree. I actually love living on my own, but it's so expensive. And the only other options for single people are to live in house shares. I'm 38 and I think I should be able to live in a house of my own at my age.

I know people who are part of the single supplement community who are well into middle age and are stuck in house shares. Some people have been forced to move back in with their families. So in a way, it is a luxury, and I do feel extremely lucky that I can afford it. But I don't have nearly as much disposable income as some of my friends. And I actually earn more than some of my friends. And yet they're able to buy houses and have cars in their driveways. And I have neither. I see Sally was in touch. She says holidays for single people. The single

supplement is outrageous. And also going back to Stephanie, who says it could be a luxury. She was saying when she was young in the 70s, no ordinary people without money did this. We all shared. We had lodgers, another couple, even after we were married. Sharing helps young people get on with others and share chores, etc. It isn't easy, but I think it's helpful. But you do say at your age that you feel you're done with that part. Yes, I did a lot of that. Catherine said, to your other point,

spent the last five years living with my wonderful parents to save a deposit, have managed to buy a house and understand that it's a privilege, but now petrified. I won't be able to afford bills, et cetera,

on my single but decent income. Let me go to another aspect. This is Teresa in Cambridge. Supermarkets don't cater for single people, she says. Buy one, get one half price is fine if you can eat double portions and only work aspect this is Teresa in Cambridge supermarkets don't cater for single people she says buy one get one half price is fine if you can eat double portions and only work if you have the income to bulk buy yeah everything comes in packages made for two or four people and if you get a recipe

and it requires you to buy things like spices or jars of things you can't buy half pack of that you have to buy the whole thing and you end up wasting a lot of food actually if you can't buy half pack of that you have to buy the whole thing um and you end up um wasting a lot of food actually um if you can't get through it all um and I know some people will say well bulk you know cook in bulk and freeze but I I rent in a house that's got a tiny freezer so I do that as much as I can but it's not feasible for every person um and so yeah it's not feasible for every person. And so, yeah, it's really, that's, people think, oh, two heads are, you know, cheaper to feed than one. But it's not as simple as that, really.

Yeah, and how many people are we talking about? My quick look at statistics says about 35% over the age of 16. Here's one. What about the scandal, this is Caroline, of single person supplements in hotels or on cruises? What is the logic of charging someone more who uses less resources than a couple? Surely we should be charged less. Very happy to pay for a double room for myself, but not a supplement for the pleasure of being on my own. I have never understood this.

Well, yeah, I mean, that's where the name for my newsletter came from, from that outrage. But it's expensive, whether the supplements on there or not. You know, one of the members of my community went to a wedding, and their room was 75 pounds, and their cousin who was married paid 80 pounds for the same size room um so you know we're just paying extra for every single thing so it really adds up um so actually that figure of 860 a month could be could be more potentially especially when you think about things like netflix even the national trust you have to live at the same property to get a joint membership um and lots of people you know go to walk their dogs they might walk their dog with their mate and they don't live in the

same house but they always go together so why can't they have a joint membership doesn't really make much sense to me um and I know that some people could say well you could move back in with your parents to save for a deposit but not everyone has parents who have space for them. My parents don't have space for me. And it's a huge lifestyle change. Exactly. I don't know your parents. I'm not casting any aspersions. I did. I did live with them during the pandemic for the first four and a half months. And it was an experience, but it wasn't all bad. But yeah, I couldn't wait to have my own space again after that. And they may be feeling the exact same way. I think they were. Do you think your friends that are partnered off understand that penalty that you're paying?

Well, a lot of my friends have heard me sort of banging on about being single because of the newsletter that I run. So they're actually really sensitive about it. But I think before that, they probably didn't really consider it at all I think people just think oh you're one person so it must be cheaper and I sometimes think when I see you know friends of mine who don't have kids and I don't have kids so it's comparable going on like three or four holidays abroad a year and i just don't think they realize how lucky they are to do that um i haven't been abroad since i think 2019 um so and and you do bring up though that other point about kids because of course this picture change

changes even further if you have a single parent and 90% of single parents are women, they are, of course, the person that is paying all these bills. They may get some child benefits, but it still is are more likely to use food banks than people in relationships. But when you look at the government data, they don't ever take into consideration relationship status when they look at poverty so they'll take into consideration things like employment race disability but they don't take into consideration whether there's two incomes in that household or not um when they look at poverty and i just think that that's that's really wrong um and obviously that's something that does affect single parents or single mums um the most and i have quite a few of those in the community as well um and also people who've been widowed and things like that um and then you get people saying really insensitive things or just ignorant because everyone assumes that everyone is coupled up um I went to the doctor yesterday I've got a trapped nerve in my neck uh the doctor suggested

that my partner massage it every day and when I said I was single, she said, oh, well, you'll have to get a massage therapist, pay a massage therapist to do that. Which doesn't come cheap, as we know. And we also know the tax system can be set up as well to favour those that are in civil partnerships or indeed married. So we're talking about 10k. You say at the moment you're living alone uh is there a price tag you'd put on it of what it's worth oh yeah because i mean i i know people who are stuck in relationships unhappy relationships and they simply can't afford to move out um which you know makes me feel so lucky that i'm happy i'm safe at home. And lots of people are not safe or not happy. So in a way, it's priceless to feel safe and happy and comfortable in your own home.

But at the same time, it does great on you. And it does mean that you miss out on a lot of things that your coupled up friends get to do. Nicola Slauson, journalist and founder of The Single Supplement. Thanks so much for speaking to us. Lots of people getting in touch as well. 84844. You can keep those messages coming in and I'll continue to pepper them throughout the programme. Thanks for spending some time with us. Thanks so much. We're also on social media at BBC Woman's Hour if you'd like to get in touch with us that way either. Okay, I want to move to another story. You might have heard a little

of it in the bulletins this morning. There's been a long-running campaign for working women who are going through the menopause to get better protection and this morning the government has announced it will not make the menopause a protected characteristic in the same way that things like

age or sex are. That's despite a recommendation from MPs that it should be. Melanie Abbott has been following this for us. Good morning. Good to have you with us. So it is back in the news and I suppose really this long-awaited response. Talk us through what's been said. Yeah, that's right. A response to an inquiry that was held by the Women and Equalities Committee at Parliament. Now, the MPs on that inquiry sent the government a list of recommendations, including, as you said,

making the menopause a protected characteristic. Currently, if you want to bring a case, you're going to have to go for age or sex discrimination, or maybe disability discrimination. Now, many are uncomfortable with the menopause being classed as a disability. And some experts think there is a gap in the protection if it doesn't fully recognise that some people might be excluded from the workplace because of a part of their life cycle. I spoke to Marion Bloodworth. She's an employment lawyer with Deloitte who gave evidence to the MPs on behalf of the Employment Lawyers Association. It isn't always easy to bring your claim within that legislation and sometimes claims can fail because there are all the protection that it could to those people who were experiencing the menopause in the workplace and found they were being disadvantaged as a result. But how simple would it be to spell out a protected characteristic for the menopause and for the law to understand that?

Yes, that is a really good question. And we accepted and acknowledged that, as again, did others who gave evidence. The existing law may not be right, but putting in an alternative is not without its challenges. And a lot of that would be around meeting the definition, et cetera, and setting thresholds. But a point I made to the committee last year when I gave evidence was that just because something is difficult, that's not necessarily a reason not to do it. But we did appreciate that it would require quite a lot of thought and work. And that was why, if you see in the report, that the committee called for a consultation. What would have been the benefits of having a consultation, particularly if it was then decided that this wasn't going to go ahead? I think the benefits of a consultation, and obviously depending on how the questions were framed, would have been to give all interested

parties, they will have views on how a protected characteristic could work. And that's what a good consultation does. It goes out with questions and it asks respondents to come up with suggestions and ideas and even ways to mitigate any of the challenges that it could have presented. So I do think that is one thing that a consultation could have achieved, even if, as you say, at the end of it, you know, the conclusion may have been this isn't going to be workable from a legal perspective. The government says that it is doing a lot already to raise awareness of the menopause, to improve access to HRT.

It seems to think that things are in hand. What do you think? I think it's true to say that generally within society, a lot has changed. Even in the 12 months since I gave evidence to the committee, we are seeing a lot of employers who are addressing the issue internally. So we're seeing policies being introduced, we're seeing awareness raising initiatives, training, workplace champions around the menopause, etc. For anyone who isn't, whose workplace is not quite there, it's an indication, and this report shows that what the government thinks is important and the direction of travel is there. But if the government is expecting voluntary compliance and following

a good practice, that can't always, in all honesty, be guaranteed. Lawyer Marion Bloodworth. Now, the government in dismissing this idea of the menopause being a protected characteristic argues that men with long term medical conditions could lose out. It could create unfairness there. It didn't expand on this. And the MPs on the committee say that that makes no sense. That's interesting. What else do the MPs ask for? Well, they want menopause leave introduced, best practice work plague policies to cover the menopause. And they argue that women need to be better supported through the menopause by health care providers. They want GPs to have ongoing training in the menopause throughout their careers.

And they think the cost of HRT should be reduced. And the government, what are they saying on that? It says by next year, all medical students will get special training to include the menopause. And the government says GPs already do cover the menopause during their initial training. Now, on HRT pricing in April, there's going to be a new HRT prepayment certificate and you'll be able to get a year's worth for the price of two prescriptions, which is currently £18.70. And when it comes to best workplace practice, there is already a voluntary workplace menopause pledge, which has been signed by some big employers like the civil service and the NHS, and the government says that's enough.

And what do the MPs say? Well, it might surprise you to hear that, or it may not surprise you to hear that they don't agree. The committee has accused the government of complacency, pointing out that its menopause task force hasn't met since before the summer recess last year, and that a meeting of an industry roundtable on HRT, which has been in short supply, as we've reported, has been postponed many times. OK, let us look for any good news for those going through the menopause. Yeah, the government points out that its new 10-year women's health strategy, which was published last year, has set out ways to improve access to HRT

and to raise awareness of the menopause and to improve workplace support. It's also promised to commission new research into the menopause by this summer, it says, and the priorities for that will be looked at. It's also promised to commission new research into the menopause by this summer, it says. And the priorities for that will be looked at. But at the moment, research into testosterone is one of those on the list. There's also going to be a new menopause employment ambassador. We're going to wait to see who's appointed to that. And the government has agreed to promote flexible working. We definitely want to put an invite into whomever the new menopause employment ambassador will be and have them

on Women's Hour. But what evidence, Melanie, is there that women are discriminated against for the menopause? Well, there is evidence out there. It's not just anecdotal. There's been a survey carried out by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, which found that three in five menopausal women were negatively affected at work. And the Institute also says almost 900,000 women have left their jobs because of menopausal symptoms. Really interesting figures. It is England we're talking about. What about Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland? Yeah, well, the Equality Act is down to Westminster. So that would cover the whole country. But I did ask the other nations what they're doing. So Scotland says it's developing

a workplace strategy to cover the menopause and has published a fair work action plan to look at inequalities, but that is for anyone over 50. And in Wales, a menopause task force group is working on recommendations for supporting women through the menopause. I haven't heard back from Northern Ireland yet. Okay, Northern Ireland, give Melanie a call. We want to hear. Thanks so much for talking us through all that. And sitting beside Melanie is Deborah Garlick from the campaign group Henpicked. Good to have you with us. Good morning. And thank you very much for that summary. It's some interesting headlines that we're seeing. And I think from our perspective, we're seeing, well, I know the headlines are we didn't get this and we didn't get this, we didn't get this. But actually, there are some really good wins that have come through this report.

What would be your number one? My number one would probably be the GP training that we haven't necessarily covered a huge amount on. The GP training, we hear from individuals all the time that, you know, we hear from some that say my GP is a hero. And we hear from those that say I've been for an appointment first time, second time, third time, fourth time, and still not got the support that I want. So I'm looking on that as a big one, that mandatory training for all GPs, ongoing CPD would be a great improvement on what we already have. But also that it's going to be checked by the Quality Care Commission that practices are supporting people in the right way. So I think that's huge for people outside work and inside

work as well. When it comes to some of the no's, shall we say, the government says the existing Equality Act covers the menopause. Do you agree? Technically, the existing Equality Act covers menopause under age, sex and even discrimination, sorry, disability. However, that's probably mine that I would say, I wish we'd have got that one. That would have been the miss for me because whilst it's covered by those three protected characteristics, it would have been so much clearer, as your employment lawyer was saying, it would have been so much clearer

if menopause was the 10th protected characteristic. But, you know, the concern of the government is that the new menopause law would discriminate, this was their wording, against men with long term medical conditions. How do you understand that? I'm not sure how that shakes down. Well, I can't get my head around that one, because of course, there are nine protected characteristics. And menopause, we need to appreciate this is something that everybody can be affected by. Half of us firsthand, the other half through our relationships. And we've been training in workplaces now for into our seventh year. And we often hear from men about how they've been affected by their partner's menopause.

And we get so many men and young adults coming along to the training sessions as well. So, you know, I really don't know where that one's coming from. There's a huge number of menopausal people in work right now. So for me, it would have been a big symbolic gesture to recognise how many are affected and make it clearer for all. Christina got in touch on email. She says the menopause is a stage of life which is not in or off itself an illness or a disability. Some women have a relatively easy time. Others suffer sometimes developing other conditions

which may or may not need medical attention, which is available. Menopause leave is a step too far and very unfair. What's next, puberty leave, which is just another stage of life. I think I will agree with her. From our experience, there are around about three and four of us that experience menopausal symptoms. One in four of us, just knowing that your employer understands that you can talk about menopause without feeling embarrassed about it. Or perhaps have a day when you say, actually, I'm struggling today and be understood is enough.

And putting the education, training and support in place is a huge step. Now, I know that we've already mentioned that the CIPD said how many people say it negatively affects them at work. But when we look at progress, it's five years since I first came on Woman's Hour talking about menopause at work. And during that time, we've seen a magnificent shift on inspirational employers taking action. The CIPD said three in four employers have taken, have got policy or have got something in place. This was October last year. And that's from a starting point. We couldn't find a policy in the whole of the UK back in 2016. So, you know, those inspirational employers are doing so much and we can all learn from what they're doing, even employers now being accredited as menopause friendly

because they've demonstrated the difference they've made for their employees' lives. So, you know, there's a lot in this report that we can really work with. I'd really like to go back to the protected characteristics again and say, is this something that we can do on that? Because it will just make it so much clearer. The government has sent a statement saying it recognised that menopause can be challenging. And that's why it introduced the Women's Health Strategy for England last year. And it has this ambitious programme of work with the NHS to improve menopause care. It wants employers to be compassionate, which you've just talked about, and flexible, and has consulted on making flexible working the default unless employers have a good reason not to.

Would that be enough? Would that be enough? One of the things that we've experienced is that all employers are different. So these employers that are putting in place awareness, education and support, reasonable adjustments, they need to, first of all, ask their employees what's getting in the way of you being your best at work and what can we do to help and build their campaigns around them. But yes, empathy, awareness, understanding, education and training go a long way. Deborah Garlick, thank you so much. And also to Melanie, who has been with us

talking us through Melanie Abbott, the latest about why this is in the news. Let's see what happens next. Not a protective characteristic and not piloting menopausal leave, but lots of other good things, as Melanie and Deborah were pointing out, which are still in the works

and expected to take place. I want to move on next in Woman's Hour to a new study. This is to examine the disproportionate number of female teachers developing asbestos-related diseases. So it's backed by teaching unions. It's hoped the findings will put more pressure on the government to take action on asbestos in school buildings. The number of women overall dying of diseases such as mesothelioma, a terminal lung cancer caused by asbestos exposure, they remain relatively low compared

to male deaths. But female death numbers have doubled since the 90s, while the number of men dying went up only by half. And figures from the HSE, the Health and Safety Executive, show that those working in buildings such as schools and hospitals, which would be teachers and nurses, predominantly women, are disproportionately affected by the disease. I'm joined now on the programme, we very welcome the Joint General Secretary of the National Education Union, Dr Mary Busted and Peggy Walker, whose mother, a former teacher, died from mesothelioma in 2018. First, Peggy, I'm very sorry for your loss.

Thank you. Thanks. You're both very welcome. Let me turn to you first, Dr. Busted, because I'm mentioning there there may be asbestos related deaths. And of course, everyone is incredibly sad, as Peggy knows. But with the grand scheme of things, the number of female teachers dying from mesothelioma are extremely small.

112, they say, in nine years, but only 19 of those born between 1955 and 1974. Why is this such a concern to you? Well, for two reasons, really. The figures that you're quite right are small, but female teachers are, you know, 40% more likely than other women to contract mesothelioma. And the figures may also be small because after the age of 75, it stops being recorded as an industrial disease because the idea is that by the time you're 75 it you know that it's not the that it's not the industry that's caused it but with mesothelioma it's a it's a cancer which

has a latency period i can have a latency period of decades so you can catch it and not know you've got it for decades and then it manifests itself and then once it has manifested itself, it's a death sentence. And the other issue and the reason why we think there are greater numbers of female teachers getting that is because school buildings built between 1945 and 1970 are riddled with asbestos. And they are the buildings which the DfE now say are in a critical condition. And we are concerned that the asbestos in those schools is either in a very poor condition and maybe leaking fibres or that it's not being properly managed. So we think that this is a growing concern. I will say that the HSE says all schools have an asbestos management plan in place, that they're currently running an inspection campaign in schools to make sure the plans are followed. The Department for Education says since 2015, it's allocated 13 billion pounds to the essential maintenance of school buildings, including asbestos removal, where that is the safest course of action. What would you respond to that?

Well, I would say that the HSE inspections are really about whether a school has an asbestos management plan. But we want inspections which actually targets the asbestos, the state of the asbestos, the quality of the air, and more than just whether a school has a plan or not, because

our concern is that too many schools have a plan, but they're not really clear where the asbestos is, and certainly not clear about how it's being managed. And of course, schools are uniquely unique institutions, if you can be uniquely unique, which you probably can't, which they're full of children, children are boisterous. Children bang against doors. They bang against walls. And, you know, they're overcrowded buildings. We build our schools too small. And so the danger in schools is that there could be,

and probably are in too many schools, far too high levels of asbestos fibres. And that's just simply not known about. We don't think, I mean, the HSE are doing the targeted study. That's a beginning. But really what should have been happening is there should have been proper HSE inspections in schools, particularly in the buildings

built from 1945 to 70 and those should have been targeted on asbestos. The latest study will focus on female teachers born between 1955 and 74, as I mentioned, so women in their 40s to 60s. And I'll come back to that in one moment, Doctor. But I want to turn to Peggy for a moment and I want to hear about your mother.

She was a former teacher. Tell me her story. Yeah, she was a lovely mum, fun loving, very caring as a mum and as a teacher. This was a mum to me and my brother and a caring, loving teacher to, you know, countless pupils. And she is dead because of her job. And she was a teacher in a primary school, teaching children with special educational needs, teaching lots of people to read. She was diagnosed with mesothelioma when she was 64 and she died when she was 67. Her attitude to it all was very calm and accepting mostly because she was a very lovely

person, but I was and still am very angry about it because this is a known problem. This is a cancer. This is a cancer that is preventable. You know, a lot of cancers aren't preventable. Mesothelioma doesn't need to exist and it exists because asbestos is still in buildings. Did you get concrete evidence that her cancer was caused by one of the school buildings that she worked in? It's very difficult to know when you're exposed because, as Mary mentioned, you can be exposed to asbestos and not have a problem for 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years later. So she was a newly qualified teacher in Manchester

in probably the 70s, I would say. So she didn't know when she was exposed. But mesothelioma is that the vast mass massive all of the cases pretty much are caused by exposure to asbestos and we had to have an inquest and the coroner ruled that yeah she was killed by mesothelioma which is caused by exposure to asbestos at some point and then let me turn back to the women, really, that you're focusing on, Dr. Mary Busted, which are between their 40s and their 60s. Why them now? Well, we got asked to provide membership for the study. It's not a study that we're doing. out what the trends are now. We know that 75% of teachers are women.

Those women and indeed the children they're teaching in those schools built from 1945 to 1970, which will have a lot of asbestos. They are the ones which the Department for Education has set up the highest risk of crumbling buildings. If the buildings are not in good condition, then it is more likely that the asbestos is in danger of being exposed. That's a real worry towards us. I mean, the government's, you know, the state of the school estate now is, according to the National Audit Office, very, very bad. And the DfE has increased its risk of school buildings collapsing to critical very likely in the risk register. It's one of their biggest risks. Now, they're not saying that schools will collapse to the imminent danger

of children and teachers in them although a school did find its the ceiling to its dining hall collapsing without any warning but the the fact of the matter is school buildings are in a bad state and these schools which were built quickly after the war post-war quickly system-built schools riddled with asbestos it's really important we know what's happening there. A little more from the Department for Education. They say we take the safety of children and those who work in them incredibly

seriously, which is why we expect all local authorities, governing bodies and academy trusts to have robust plans in place to manage asbestos in school buildings effectively in line with their legal duties. Let me turn back to you Peggy. I mean, do you think this study would make a difference?

It feels like gradually more reports are coming out, but still nothing is being done, meaning that asbestos is still there. The health and safety health and safety executive saying that they know it's a problem. They know it's there,

but it's safe if it's undisturbed. But it does get disturbed and it will get more and more disturbed as these buildings deteriorate. I want to turn it back to you, Mary, as well, because we can't have you on the programme without touching on the imminent teacher strikes as we talk about schools by the National Education Union. You're planning seven days of strikes in February and March, the first being in both England and Wales. That'll be next Wednesday, the 1st of February. And people will be asking, why should pupils' education suffer

and also working parents have their lives disrupted again because your members want more money? Well, we don't want to disrupt children's education. We certainly don't want to discuss parents' lives. But the issue is this,

that when you have the chief inspector of schools amanda spillman writing in her annual report in december that there was a workforce crisis in schools because of teacher shortages and support staff shortages and that children are bearing the brunt of that crisis when you know that the government missed its second teacher training targets by 41% this year, and is looking to do the same next year. When you see the industrial scale of lessons being taught by teachers who are not qualified in the subject, modern foreign languages, maths, one in eight lessons taught by a non-specialist, somebody who doesn't have a degree in the subject, then you will realise that what's happening in schools every day now

is they're being held together by the goodwill and the excessive work of teachers and support staff and it can't carry on any longer. But that would sound like it's not about pay. Well, it is about pay. The reason why you have these shortages. It's absolutely to do with pay. The reason why you have these shortages is because of poor pay.

Teachers' pay has declined by, if you're taking CPI, 11% in real terms in the last 12 years. If you take increasingly uncompetitive pay and excessive workload, you come up with the worst-case crisis. Dr. Boustead, I have to leave it there. We'll talk to you again about it, but to you and Peggy Walker, thanks so much for joining us

on Woman's Hour. That's all for today's Woman's Hour. Join us again next time. One, two, one, back. That's work. What would happen if you tried to dig up all the bad things you've ever buried? Anything I tell you is a gospel story. This is a deathbed tape from a man who witnessed a crime so appalling

that he wants us to dig it up. You know what you should have to do? Put a ticker digger and dig it up. We're Dan Ashby and Lucy Taylor, and from BBC Radio 4, this is Buried, the story of the secret dumping of a million tonnes of waste near a UK city. We're sitting on a ticking time bomb. All I kept saying to you was, there's cover-ups, there's cover-ups. Subscribe now to Buried on BBC Sounds. I'm Sarah Trelevan, and for over a year, I've been working on one of the most complex stories I've ever covered.

There was somebody out there who was faking pregnancies. I started, like, warning everybody. Every doula that I know. It was fake. No pregnancy. And the deeper I dig, the more questions I unearth. How long has she been doing this? What does she have to gain from this?

From CBC and the BBC World Service, The Con, Caitlin's Baby. It's a long story. Settle in. Available now.