The Queen’s Speech was a missed opportunity for the government to introduce legislation that would support people in the short term and improve living standards in the longer term.
The Independent Review of Administrative Law (IRAL) panel recently invited the submission of evidence on how well or effectively judicial review balances the legitimate interest in citizens being able to challenge the lawfulness of executive action with the role of the executive in carrying on the business of government, both locally and centrally. Our response emphasises the important role of judicial review in ensuring good governance and that decisions which affect some of the most vulnerable members of society are made in compliance with basic standards of good administrative decision making.
Prior to COVID-19, there were more than four million children living in poverty in the UK – that’s nine children in a classroom of 30. In London, that number rises to 11. While the full economic impact of the pandemic is yet to be seen, we know that low-income households are bearing the brunt, and for families living in the capital things are likely to get worse before they get better. Even prior to COVID-19, the high cost of rent, childcare and travel made it very difficult for London families on low incomes to cover basic costs. In addition, families with children have been hit the hardest by cuts to the social security system, squeezing family budgets even further. In the face of this, our public services have a crucial role to play in tackling child poverty and ensuring children and families recover from the pandemic.
Lots of attention is given to the number of children in poverty but as a society we do not only care about the rate of poverty but also the depth of poverty. If everyone in poverty is very close to the poverty line we should perhaps worry less than when millions of people are substantially below the poverty line. A good way to measure the depth of poverty is the median poverty gap, which indicates how far below the poverty line the average family in poverty is.
In the second in this series, our report looks at problems with understanding decisions, challenging errors and protecting the rights of people claiming universal credit (UC). It outlines some of the problems claimants experience when they try to challenge a decision about their UC award. These problems have been identified by analysing case studies received via CPAG’s Early Warning System (EWS).
CPAG, the Church of England, Women's Aid, Turn2Us and the Refugee Council have published a new report looking at the impact of the two-child limit. An estimated 160,000 families have already been affected by the two-child limit to date; the majority are working families and the majority have just three children. More than 800,000 families and three million children could eventually be affected by it, while a third of all children will be affected in many constituencies across the country.