At the end of March, the latest figures from the Department for Work and Pensions revealed that 31 per cent of all children in the UK are living in relative poverty. That equates to a record 4.5 million children—100,000 more than the previous year. These stark figures have provided the backdrop for the Ministerial Child Poverty Taskforce which is currently gathering insights as it prepares its cross-government Child Poverty Strategy, currently expected some time this summer.
This upcoming publication and the urgent topic of how to end child poverty in the UK were the subject of a recent panel discussion hosted by Prospect editor Alan Rusbridger and attended by sector experts, policymakers, campaigners and members of government.
Chris Webb, Labour MP for Blackpool South, opened the discussion with a picture of the current situation in his constituency. “Almost 90 per cent of those spoken to in my recent research said that financial strain was damaging their children’s enjoyment of childhood,,” he explained. “We know that this needs to change.”
The panel noted a significant shift in the circumstances of families struggling to make ends meet—with poverty now an “in work” as well as an “out of work” problem and deepening, with rising numbers facing more and more severe hardship. “In the policy environment, there has always been a focus on work as the best route out of poverty,” said Alex Beer, programme head, Nuffield Foundation. “Recent conditionality has gotten people into work quickly but it has been part-time and low-earning—bringing nothing in the way of long-term impact.”
The right policy is an essential and powerful tool for positive change
The benefit system has made an impact in times of increased resources, but has suffered at the hands of cuts, the group said. Beer made the point that neither the two child limit nor the benefit cap had met their stated aims of encouraging families to have fewer children or work more hours, “highlighting how policy assumptions can clash with the everyday experiences of families.” The only tangible impact of the two child limit, it was agreed, has been to push yet more children into poverty.
However, it was agreed that the right policy is an essential and powerful tool for positive change: “The really hopeful thing about child poverty is it is incredibly amenable to policy,” said Helen Barnard, the director of policy, research and impact, Trussell Trust. “There are lots of challenges facing the country where it is very hard for a government to make a difference. Child poverty is not one of those.”
The panel stressed that for any strategy to work, it needed to be cross-departmental—with child poverty being influenced by many different factors touching on health, housing, education and more. Barnard called for a reshaping of four different markets in a bid to better serve children and families—the labour market, housing, energy and childcare. “We pour money into childcare and somehow we have a sector where parents can’t afford it, workers are incredibly low paid and it’s not great quality,” she argued, later suggesting widespread profiteering was partly to blame.
Examples of best practice were discussed in relation to previous governments, as well as actions from other countries. The Danish system, which “invests generously in benefits for families with young children” was cited. Closer to home, Scotland’s Child Payment was praised for reducing the child poverty percentage across the country to 24 per cent, “showing what you can do if you are politically determined and able to spend relatively modest amounts of money,” said Andy Harrop, director at Public First.
Here in the UK, the previous Labour government’s Sure Start programme, which has suffered at the hands of cuts more recently, was mentioned as a successful route to improving children’s educational attainment and decreased hospitalisation. Universal Free School meals were praised for improving health outcomes.
Universal Credit was also highlighted as a useful tool for any future policy changes. “It’s a very flexible system,” remarked Harrop. “You can pull a lot of levers in Universal Credit to make a lot of people’s lives better.”
The panel agreed that one of the sticking points from the past has been the ability to get broad public buy-in on child poverty measures. There was no political price to pay when Sure Start and benefits were massively cut, according to Barnard, “in real contrast to our position on pensioners, which means it is now politically toxic to even touch the triple lock.”
Harrrop made the point that the answer to this may lie in a system that broadens the number of people getting support, not simply those struggling— such as an extension to Universal Credit that supports all parents with a sliding scale of payments, “therefore it’s harder to cut in the future.”
With the government’s coffers at a well-publicised limit, the looming issue of budget and the ability to fund any of the policies necessary to end child poverty was mentioned a number of times. Gavin Oldham OBE, chair and founder of the Share Foundation, suggested that philanthropy had a role to play in plugging financial gaps. “One logical solution is to empower disadvantaged young people with some of the assets left behind by wealthy old people,” he said. The Share Foundation, he suggested, could introduce a new, targeted form of the Child Trust Fund scheme, funded by donations.
The conversation started to conclude with Webb questioned on taxes and the role they will need to play in creating meaningful change. The MP believes any backlash from the public about tax rises could be alleviated with some explaining: “I think the public are up for it if we say, ‘you’re going to pay a little bit more and in doing so, eliminate child poverty.’ They just want to see where the money is going.”
