In
2000, British MP Dawn Primarolo’s campaign to reduce the VAT on tampons and
sanitary towels meant a reduction from 17.5% to 5%. Dubbed the ‘Tampon Tax’,
recent attempts to scrap the tax altogether have not been successful, with 305
to 287 voting against the motion. Had motion been successful, the change would
require unanimous agreement of all 28 European Union member states before the
tax could be scrapped. Some argue that the move may increase the end cost to
the consumer, because it would prevent manufacturers recovering manufacturing
costs*.
Adequate
nutrition, shelter and sanitation are perhaps the most basic human requirements
that enable us to live with dignity. If the move were to increase the cost of
tampons and sanitary products, this would be clearly counter-productive. Unlike
menstruating women, men do not have any natural bodily function specific to
their sex, which requires them to purchase specific products. In a society
which strives for equality across class, gender, race and other differences,
should women, by virtue of their natural bodily functions, have to pay extra
costs for sanitation?
There’s
an elephant in the room here: class. Women earn less than men, and women
account for 92% of lone parents with dependent children*. The poorest women
contending with these issues are already substantially more disadvantaged: an additional
cost, solely on the basis of sex is therefore an unfair disadvantage. We need
an equal playing field – if men don’t have to bear specific these costs,
neither should women by virtue of their sex.
In
order to equalise the playing field, the government needs to first consider the
impact of paying for sanitary products on the poorest and most vulnerable
women, let alone the ‘tampon tax’. If scrapping the ‘tampon tax’ will increase
costs to the end user, the government should consider subsidising sanitary products
minimise costs. Free condoms are available from the NHS, as is assistance with
dental costs, eye care costs, wigs and fabric supports through the Low Income
Scheme.
Considering
the several support mechanisms in place for the most disadvantaged in our
society, including free prescription medication, how can the government justify
not providing the most disadvantaged women in our society with free sanitary
products? If Britain
strives to be a country that considers the plight of disadvantage based upon
characteristics, then the government needs to re-consider its attitude to
sanitary products – this will help us move towards to a model of equality that
is more substantive.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34649495
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/family-demography/families-and-households/2011/sum-lone-parents.html