X

Create an account to continue reading.

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles
For unlimited access to The Spectator, subscribe below

Registered readers have access to our blogs and a limited number of magazine articles

Sign in to continue

Already have an account?

What's my subscriber number?

Subscribe now from £1 a week

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
 
View subscription offers

Already a subscriber?

or

Subscribe now for unlimited access

ALL FROM JUST £1 A WEEK

View subscription offers

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Login

Don't have an account? Sign up
X

Subscription expired

Your subscription has expired. Please go to My Account to renew it or view subscription offers.

X

Forgot Password

Please check your email

If the email address you entered is associated with a web account on our system, you will receive an email from us with instructions for resetting your password.

If you don't receive this email, please check your junk mail folder.

X

It's time to subscribe.

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access – from just £1 a week

You've read all your free Spectator magazine articles for this month.

Subscribe now for unlimited access

Online

Unlimited access to The Spectator including the full archive from 1828

Print

Weekly delivery of the magazine

App

Phone & tablet edition of the magazine

Spectator Club

Subscriber-only offers, events and discounts
X

Sign up

What's my subscriber number? Already have an account?

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

Thank you for creating an account – Your subscriber number was not recognised though. To link your subscription visit the My Account page

Thank you for creating your account – To update your details click here to manage your account

X

Your subscriber number is the 8 digit number printed above your name on the address sheet sent with your magazine each week. If you receive it, you’ll also find your subscriber number at the top of our weekly highlights email.

Entering your subscriber number will enable full access to all magazine articles on the site.

If you cannot find your subscriber number then please contact us on customerhelp@subscriptions.spectator.co.uk or call 0330 333 0050. If you’ve only just subscribed, you may not yet have been issued with a subscriber number. In this case you can use the temporary web ID number, included in your email order confirmation.

You can create an account in the meantime and link your subscription at a later time. Simply visit the My Account page, enter your subscriber number in the relevant field and click 'submit changes'.

If you have any difficulties creating an account or logging in please take a look at our FAQs page.

Coffee House

Saving the children? Another child poverty report misses the bigger picture

5 September 2012

9:06 PM

5 September 2012

9:06 PM

Yesterday’s reshuffle isn’t the only story in town. Save the Children, a global charity, has today started to fundraise for children in Britain whom it says are affected by the government’s cuts. It is now run by Justin Forsyth, an ex-aide to Gordon Brown, who will have understood the political implications of the research: that coalition policies are making child poverty worse. The problem is that this analysis mistakes the nature of poverty in Britain, and – worst of all – the ways of alleviating that poverty.

The root problem is a confusion of low income as a cause of these issues, rather than the symptom of wider social failings it often represents. This basic failure has characterised political programmes and grand government schemes for years.  The starting point has been that poverty (and child poverty) means living below an arbitrary income line – set as it currently is at 60 per cent of the national median – and, accordingly, the way to fight poverty is to redistribute wealth in order to move households just above said line.

Based on this measure, a family can go to bed on a Monday night ‘in poverty’ and wake up on a Tuesday morning out of it, thanks to minor spreadsheet tweaks to welfare and tax credits made in Westminster.  Ministers get their headline and people get a few extra pounds, but what for example would have changed for the child of a drug-addicted parent?  Nothing at all.

Even more absurd is the fact that during a recession, poverty on this measure is often reduced as national average incomes fall and benefits tend to remain stable.  Recent child poverty figures revealed hundreds of thousands of children were ‘lifted’ out of poverty as a result of the latest recession, for example.

[Alt-Text]


Unsurprisingly this ‘poverty plus a pound’ approach has failed to change lives.  Look no further than the previous Government.  Labour ministers spent an eye-watering £150 billion on tax credits between 2004 and 2010 in an attempt to chase targets and lift people above the so-called poverty line.  The result?  A one percentage point reduction in the proportion of children living below the poverty line.

Such a simplistic approach fails because it takes no account of the many damaging social problems that cause low income – such as family instability and breakdown, educational failure, drug and alcohol addiction or mental ill-health.  As our team at the Centre for Social Justice has travelled to the poorest parts of the UK to meet and listen to those in poverty, we have been struck by how this breakdown ruins people’s chances of avoiding or escaping poverty.  Much of it is documented in our report Breakthrough Britain.

Some of the Save the Children report is insightful. Stories of financial hardship should move us to urgent action. But if government spending was the solution to child poverty, it would indeed have been eradicated under the last government.

The conclusion calls for certain responses that unfortunately, as with countless other child poverty reports over the years, fail to tackle any of the root causes of poverty. Recognising and confronting these root causes of poverty would be a much better place to begin.  A family’s level of income matters, but so often it is determined by factors politicians have ignored for too long.

Becoming fixated with helping families to stay together, enabling parents to find and progress in work to become self-reliant, and delivering inspirational education for children in the most disadvantaged neighbourhoods should be our starting point.  A stable family with two parents in work is much less likely to live in poverty.  If we want to reduce the number of children caught in a cycle of disadvantage, we have to start by asking what sends them there in the first place.

Christian Guy is Managing Director of the Centre for Social Justice.

Give something clever this Christmas – a year’s subscription to The Spectator for just £75. And we’ll give you a free bottle of champagne. Click here.


Show comments
Close