Philip Hammond gave no funding to social services in the Budget but decided to give the banks a break

It’s thought that a major reason for the increase in children coming into care is the cuts to local authority funding, which has resulted in a 40 per cent reduction in resources used for early intervention 

John McDonnell
Tuesday 28 November 2017 17:42 GMT
Comments
Children’s charities and local councils wrote to the Chancellor before the Budget to explain that children’s social care is ‘being pushed to breaking point’
Children’s charities and local councils wrote to the Chancellor before the Budget to explain that children’s social care is ‘being pushed to breaking point’ (tzahiV)

Last week’s Budget was a missed opportunity for the Chancellor to act. But he fudged it.

He provided only £1.6bn extra for the NHS, which is less than half the £4bn experts say is needed to resolve the immediate crisis. The £177m for schools is close to derisory, set against the £1.7bn funding cut that will see the first real-terms decline in per pupil funding since the 1990s. A quarter of teachers who have qualified since 2011 have left the profession, and headteachers across the country are already reduced to begging for cash from parents.

It is also truly shameful that the Budget failed to act when we have 77,240 households living in temporary accommodation because councils simply don’t have anywhere to house them.

Additionally, in the sixth richest country on earth, over 120,540 children are without a home to call their own – and this is up 60 per cent under the Tories. This is the sharp end of our housing crisis and the Budget did nothing to alleviate it.

But in all the clamour surrounding the Budget last week, there was a group of voices that went completely unheard by the Chancellor. They were the voices of some of the most vulnerable children in our society.

Last year over 72,000 children were taken into care. The number of serious child protection cases had doubled in the last seven years, with 500 new cases launched each day. More than 170,000 children were subject to child protection plans – double the number ten years ago. The rise in referrals we are seeing is genuinely shocking.

Children’s charities and local councils wrote to the Chancellor before the Budget to explain that children’s social care is “being pushed to breaking point”.

Barnados looked at a sample of the characteristics of the children coming into care. Many had been referred to social services as a result of sexual exploitation, often in addition to violent behaviour, self-harm and experience of domestic violence or drug use.

It’s thought that a major reason for the increase in children coming into care is the cuts to local authority funding, which has resulted in a 40 per cent reduction in resources used for early intervention to support children and their families. Central government funding for early intervention has been cut by 55 per cent over the last seven years, representing a cost of £1.7bn.

Corbyn heckled while speaking on social care: "The uncaring, uncouth attitude of certain members...has to be called out"

Sir Tony Hawkhead, Chief Executive of Action for Children, said recently that crippling funding cuts have left local councils with no option but to close these services, which are designed to spot signs of abuse and neglect.

The irony is that the failure to intervene early simply racks up the cost of later intervention, as the circumstances of the child and family deteriorates.

To add to the concern, councils have confirmed that children’s services are rapidly becoming unsustainable, with a £2bn gap in funding expected by 2020. It has also been the most deprived council areas that have been hit the hardest.

The Chancellor was asked by councils and charities to give some priority to funding children’s services in the Budget before, to quote Sir Tony Hawhead again, “this crisis turns into a catastrophe”.

Distressingly, the Chancellor allocated no additional money in the Budget for children’s services – though he could have found up to £4.7bn if he had decided not to continue cutting to the bank levy.

At the Treasury Question in the House of Commons today, I reminded him of his flawed choices last week, but he again failed to even acknowledge this crisis, let alone address it.

What can be read from this? Well, put bluntly, it seems that protecting the banks is a greater priority for this Government than protecting children.

John McDonnell MP is the Shadow Chancellor

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in