Labour's record on poverty in tatters
Ministers abandon targets for children as new figures reveal rising number on breadline
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
The full scale of Labour's failure to help the poorest in Britain was laid bare yesterday with revelations that hundreds of thousands of people were being plunged into deprivation even before the recession hit, and that the Government had been unable to make any impression on the numbers of children and pensioners in poverty.
Ministers were forced to admit that they had all but abandoned Labour's historic promise to halve child poverty by next year, telling The Independent that the state of the economy meant that saving jobs had to be the priority.
The admission came as official figures blew apart the Government's credibility on helping those struggling the most. They painted a bleak picture of worsening poverty in Britain even before the recession took root. The number of people living in poverty had climbed to 11 million by March 2008, a rise of 300,000 since 2006.
The poorest have seen their incomes drop, with 200,000 working adults falling below the poverty line last year. The Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS) said inequality had risen to its highest level since 1961, warning that the situation would become even worse during the recession. Alastair Muriel, a research economist at the IFS, said: "If history is any guide, average income growth is likely to slow even further across the population." Meanwhile, pensioner poverty had also stalled, with 2.5 million living in relative poverty, the same amount as the previous year.
Michelle Mitchell, charity director for Age Concern and Help the Aged, criticised the Government for its lack of "concrete" progress in reaching poor pensioners. "Two million older people were in poverty before the recession even started," she said. "Now, after facing last year's rocketing inflation, pensioners on low incomes are still struggling with high food and fuel prices, while watching their income from savings evaporate."
Labour earned significant political capital in 1999 when it pledged to eradicate child poverty by 2020 and halve it by 2010, with Gordon Brown describing it as a "scar on Britain's soul". But around 2.9 million children were still living in poverty in 2007-08, the same as the previous year. Children defined as living in poverty are those in households earning less than 60 per cent of Britain's "median income".
Stephen Timms, Financial Secretary to the Treasury, conceded that the perilous state of the nation's finances meant that other concerns had to take priority over meeting the 2010 pledge. He said: "The short-term focus does have to be on maintaining and safeguarding employment."
Another measure suggested that child poverty was now on the rise. The number of children eligible for free school meals slightly increased this year in both primary and secondary schools – an extra 17,370 pupils qualify for free meals than did last year, as the effects of the recession begin to bite. Children are given free meals if their parents are on benefits or earn less than £15,575 per year.
The breaking of the promise over child poverty has angered senior figures within the Labour Party. John McFall, chairman of the Commons Treasury Committee, called on the Government to act urgently. "It is more important, not less, in these difficult economic times that the Government maintains its effort to eliminate child poverty," he said. "That action was missing in this year's Budget."
Earlier this year, the IFS calculated that the Government would have to target poor families with a £4.2bn bailout if it wanted to hit the 2010 commitment. It found that far from eradicating child poverty, it would be back up over the three million mark if no significant action was taken. But Mr McFall said that neither November's £20bn fiscal stimulus package, nor the Budget announced by the Chancellor two weeks ago, contained any significant measures to kick-start progress in reducing child poverty.
Ministers say they are now focusing their efforts on meeting the even more ambitious target to eradicate child poverty by 2020. Children's minister Beverley Hughes admitted that meeting the 2010 target would be "very difficult", but that the Government remained "absolutely committed" to wiping out child poverty by 2020.
The absence of measures to lower child poverty in the Budget meant the Government had "no hope" of hitting the 2010 target, said Carey Oppenheim, of the Institute for Public Policy Research. "These figures also pre-date the recession so the number of children in poverty today is likely to be higher," she said. "Many more children will be growing up in poverty, and at greater risk of underperforming in school or missing out on employment opportunities in later life. Turning this around requires greater financial support.
Theresa May, the shadow Work and Pensions Secretary, said the promise to halve child poverty was one of many Mr Brown had failed to deliver. "It is a tragedy that the number of children falling into the poverty cycle is continuing to rise," she said. "The Government needs to wake up and get a grip of this problem. We must tackle the root causes of poverty, such as educational failure, family breakdown, drug abuse, indebtedness and crime."
Steve Webb, the Liberal Democrat work and pensions spokesman, said Labour was "losing the fight against poverty", adding: "What chance has it got of abolishing child poverty if it can't even get half way?"
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
i am in shock
----- ----- ----- -----
That's an easy thing for Beverley Hughes to say, given that she must know Labour won't be around to meet the 2020 target. Shameful stuff, but did anyone expect anything less from this discredited government?
ought to have been even more bent on delerious
social engineering and control, like the eastern bloc of yore
so CCTV, id cards, dna database
and EVERYONE guaranteed a higher than average salary
[note to party - might sell from Holyrood]
Just another landmark in the twelve years of wasted opportunity under the financial leadership of Golem Brown.
In the absence of a Cromwell, I vote for a state of emergency that involves disolution of the houses of snouts and bombing of Iceland on the Thames and the Bank of England - to begin with.
Was "Brown" in government then? "Brown" is in a hopeless position faced with an impossible task without the assistance of (or replacement by) a Cromwell. Loom at his own troops for example, let alone the slippery toff who has been appointed to replace him {by those who lok at you over shoulders opf both of them). The likes of Harperson, Straw, Balls and the minister for legalised child abuse et al, with their personal responsiobility for the fact that not only is the above state opf affairs ongoing, but it is aggravated by their mutilation of ECHR as a micky mouse hum an rights Act refsual to ratify Protocol 12.
Meantiome of course dootiful mass meeja, plays the game by attributing scandalous (and suicidal) kinderfeindlichkeit to "Labour" (precisley who what is this mythical "Labour" , can anyone tel us?) as a brianwashing tactic to prepeare the herd for a 'new' wave of herd management wearing a new brand of face paint, led by said slippery unprincipled toff. Note the evidential mass perceptual engineering as complete absence of meeja mention of Davis, who comitted political suicide by displaying principles and conviction as dsitinct from the level of slipperyness that is a high profile characteristic of stooges and quislings.
To me they are all snouts as dross of self-serving organised political gangs, that should be swept away and replaced by democracy, but there are within their ranks varying levels of 'fit' in relation to the quisling job description. "Brown" is a bad fit. Quite apart from the occasional noises he has made about obstructing the flow of wealth from the poor to the well off, his acting ability is atrocious to the detriment of overall circus performance. *That* is why he is doomed in favour of the slippery toff.
Getting back to the topic, you can have all of the fiddling, fumbling and new 'initiatives' in the world, but they will all produce either nothing, or worse, unless there is :
a) change to the underlying law;
b) wholealse re-education (or sacking and wholesalwe replacement) of the anti-social cerebral prostitutes (who god help us are such joly good chaps that we allegedly don't need civil law reform) employed by society sit as civil case judges - it will not happen unless enforced, as is shown by the former LCJ's (Woolf) completely failed attepts to do so - and his replacement by Balir with obligingy 'conservative' Phillips who openly:
c) vilified people, including children, who although denied legal aid by the sociopath who appointed him, have the temerity to approach the court seeking civil rights enjoyed in more civilised States , without being represented by a leech;
d) caused the writing of new "CP" (regulations to non leeches) designed to deny access to justice by others than leeches;
in reinforcement of fraudlent ratification of UNCRC, refusal to ratify Protocol 12, mutilation of the HR act, etcetera - as though commissioned to enable society, by abusing its own young, to quietly commit suicide
The first need is of a ruthless sweeper, the second need is that the sweeper will hold the cleaned ground for long enough for democracy to put down rots.
- War in Iraq
- War in Afghanistan
- 42 Days detention
- Banning Gurkha's
- Expenses claims
- Cutting 10p tax rate for low earners
All of the above have kept the Labour Party and the Labour Government busy but the most basic needs of their core constituency, have been ignored.
"All I believe and all I try to do comes from the values that I grew up with: duty, honesty, hard work, family and respect for others." (Gordon Brown)
Talk is cheap, can Gordon and the Labour Party tell us why, after more than a decade in office, a time when the tax receipts in the UK are at a record high level, they have not devoted the time or the money to eradicating child poverty in the UK?
You really need to study your history a little more closely. The recession and 15% base rates were at the beginning of John Major's government, not at the end! In fact the long period of growth that Brown usesd to boast about started under a Conservative government - four and a half years of it! During that time, the balance of payments, unemployment, the public finances and inflation all improved and were on a continually improving trend. These trends continued for some years more. Try looking at the figures and plotting them on a yearly basis and you will see what I mean!
"Growth" of a goverrnmentally promoted concept of the good citizen, as a mindless, anti-social, rat-racing, part-time parenting, planet-busting, gluttonous consumer of anything and everything in sight.
"Growth" in Britain's banarepublicanisation to the the extent that it is now a bankrupt bana republic with no bananas to sell because its customers are busted and can't buy expensive money laundering services.
"Growth" in corporate welfare and perpetration of corporate welfare wars.
"Growth" in the level of blatant pseudo-democracy as nicely illustrated by the spectacle of sqealing bloodstained snouts jostling and snarling at each other for the best places at the trough...
http://www.allbusiness.com/banking-fina
http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.ph
Less than 60% of average income may not necessarily mean ''poverty''.
Curiously there are some on benefits who are not in this definition of ''poverty'' and some in work who are.
Of equal concern shoulds be those children without fathers or stable homes with prospect of poor attainment and joblessness.
The benefit system has not improved matters for these children- but what is the answer ?
One might have hoped that the emeerging parties, such as the Greens might offer new hope, but , as I understand it, they are proposing a pension of 109 pounds and no humiliatig hurdles. Will it be free organic carrotts. to make up the shortfall?
However, I wonder what will happen to the Child Poverty Bill?!
Labour have been appalling across the board for years and we badly need a change of administration. The next lot can't be as bad as this lot. If however they start to go the way of Major's tories and the current Labour party we can vote them out. Let's end this shameful chapter in British govts. and no excuses . . . do not vote Labour. Vote for your best local alternative and make people feel ashamed to want to vote for Labour. Supporting Labour should be seen as socially unacceptable like dogs fouling the pavement and smoking
I hope you maintain this tone of discussion with all your friends and your parents and anyone else that will be able to vote. Let's get rid of this lot at the polls
I think NuLab have had long enough to demonstrate their intentions, their abilities and their failings. making a statement like 'we commit to making child poverty a thing of the past' is nothing other than hot air. They are incapable of doing something like this. At best it's wishful thinking. This lot are incompetent
Unfortunately, that negativity is misdirected by the influence of a dootiful mass meeja, towards one faction of a class of apparatchiks and enablers of pseudo-democracy. As a result, there will be a ritual erection of the pseudo-democratic circus, the outcome of which will be replacement of the current dominant faction by a different one wearing different face paint - and the happy herd, with the help of dootiful mass meeja, will return to contentedly grazing, believing for the following couple of years before becoming discontented again), that it has accomplished change
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
a) full-time parents are second class citizens as non planet-busting, rat-racing, consumers;
b) women are an inferior sub-species of wimmin in the mould of dysfunctional parents Thatcher and Harperson (not forgetting Mrs WonderTone whose daughter is a telling illustration of the adage about daughters of families and societies).
"Poverty" isn't measured only in terms of spending power, nor does it just happen as an act of gawd or something found ubder a gooseberry bush - and as far as children are concerned it is largely a product, in this society, of being a tolerated nuisance or a fashion accessory - in compliance with pernicious misgovernment policy, tax-financed practice, and propaganda
By the way, unemployment is always a lagging indicator for both booms and recessions.
I would strongly recommend that you refrain from imputing motives and beliefs to people you do not know. You have no means of judging whether or not I am concerned about child poverty or its cuases. I am interested in the facts, and the facts do not support your misleading statements! Prejudice or inaccuracy is never a good basis for developing policy.
I suggest there is a fact-based reference file created - including Mandelson's fiddling, Byers spin, Blair's lies, right up to the latest "in the rules" troughing by Jacqui Slapper - so when elections are held - the true nature of these people comes to the fore.
Hold on - the flaw in this suggestion is - Mandelson isn't elected, Brown wasn't elected as PM - hey ho!
To put it another way, to eliminate poverty using that measure you'd need to take at least the following measures:
Ban multi-income households.
Ban self-employment
Ban people from holding multiple jobs
Pay all employed people exactly the same
Surely, since most of us don't want a communist country (which would have to be more extreme than any communist state that has yet to exist) but would like to help people living in poverty, some more meaningful measure should be devised?
Actually the real scandal is the increase in the number of people in deep poverty - i.e. those below about 40 per cent of median income. The 60 per cent of median income is almost exactly where the peak in the income distribution occurs!
Toyota reports first annual loss
LONDON (ShareCast) - Japanese carmaker Toyota Motor (Frankfurt: 853510 - news) stunned investors when it announced its first annual loss it expects even deeper losses this year. The group reported a bigger than expected net loss of 437bn yen ($4.4bn) for the 12 months and warned it would probably make a loss of about 550bn yen ($5.5bn) this financial year. It also announced a cash dividend for the full year of 100 yen per share, a decrease of 40 yen. Toyota blamed poor sales, especially in the US and Europe, and the strong yen for the loss.? The negative impact was a consequence of the significant deterioration in vehicle sales particularly in the US and Europe, the rapid appreciation of the yen against the US dollar and the euro and the sharp rise in raw materials," said president Katsuki Watanabe.
This is what the BIG auto says, what are we doing?
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla