Data we obtained via a freedom of information request reveals that a third (34 per cent) of people subject to the benefit cap, which the government claims is a work incentive, are not expected to seek employment because their circumstances prevent them from working. Rather than being a work incentive, it is pushing children deeper into poverty.
Several government ministers have churned out a line about work being the best route out of poverty, but does it hold any truth? The evidence submitted to the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Poverty for its report suggests that this is far from the case.
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.
London is one of the greatest and richest cities in the world. But for too many Londoners and their children, proximity to the city’s affluence does not mean sharing in this wealth – adequate employment, affordable housing and fit-for-purpose childcare are often out of reach. In fact, after accounting for housing costs, London has the highest rate of child poverty of any region in the UK. We asked our London Calling panel what they want their councillors to prioritise. They highlighted five main themes: childcare, free school meals, housing, children’s activities and community engagement.
Universal credit (UC) is now the main working-age benefit in the UK. Since its inception, UC has been plagued with administrative issues and budget cuts and, as a result, its early promise to reduce poverty has yet to be realised. When the pandemic hit, swift changes were needed to make UC fit for purpose including an increase in the amount of financial support provided and a relaxation of some of its most punitive rules. However, the vast majority of these positive changes have already been reversed, or are due to be reversed in the coming months.
This report draws on evidence from studies of minimum household costs in London to comment on the size of differences in children’s costs in various categories. This analysis builds on new research on a ‘Minimum Income Standard for London’.
In August, Child Poverty Action Group and the Church of England published a report, Poverty in the Pandemic, which offered a glimpse into the lives of low-income families trying to survive the impact of the coronavirus pandemic. This report provides an update on how families with children are managing financially, based on an additional 393 online survey responses received in the period since the last report was published, up to the end of November 2020.
The year 2020 has put unprecedented pressures on families bringing up children. Parents across the world have taken on new challenges due to the coronavirus pandemic in keeping their children healthy and safe as well as properly fed, educated and entertained at a time when they have been required to stay at home, and when many families’ livelihoods have been threatened. Our cost of a child report looks at what items families need to provide a minimum socially acceptable standard of living for their children in 2020.
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.