Ending child poverty

Les Allamby, Director, Law centre (NI)

One of the government’s most laudable policies has been its public commitment to end child poverty by 2020 and to cut it in half by 2010. A progressive aim with an unequivocal and clearly stated target is refreshing and uncommon for political parties in power. Figures released earlier this year revealed significant progress with more than 700,000 children lifted out of poverty in Britain. Nonetheless, the milestone of reducing child poverty by a quarter by the financial year 2004/2005 was missed. In Northern Ireland, around 150,000 children remain in poverty according to recent research published by Save the Children. The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, John Hutton has recently gone on record to renew the commitment to end child poverty.

In this context, the recently published Henshaw report on Recovering Child Support: routes to responsibility and the government’s response, A Fresh Start: Child Support redesign make interesting reading. The Henshaw report makes a number of important and practical recommendations including disregarding Child Support up to a high threshold in calculating Income Support, reconfig-uring advice services to ensure Child Support information is properly integrated and the creation of a new organisation to administer Child Support. Arguably, given the ratio of maintenance collected to administrative cost, the Child Support Agency has made more impact as a job creation scheme than in supporting children. The inequity in treatment between those on the new scheme (post March 2003), who receive the child maintenance premium, and those under the old scheme, who do not, is indefensible.

The government response accepts much of the Henshaw report’s analysis and his recommendations. However, the response makes no direct reference to tackling child poverty while stressing the importance of parental responsibility. Great play is made of initiatives to encourage lone parents into starting or resuming work. The recent Welfare Reform Green Paper provided similar emphasis. A target of achieving a lone parent employment rate of 70 per cent by 2010 sits alongside increasing the general employment rate to 80 per cent by the same date. While it is clear that families in work are less likely to be poor, a child poverty strategy needs to be multi-faceted. Reading recent government documents leaves an impression of a golfer with just one club in the bag.

The targets set are ambitious with lone parent employment rate currently sitting at 55 per cent. A fear remains that too much of the child poverty strategy revolves around payment of tax credits to augment the income of low paid families. Those families unable to find work through ill-health, caring responsibilities or lack of child care risk being left behind. Moreover, the increasing emphasis on new obligations for lone parents claiming means-tested benefits needs careful monitoring. Positive support and general encouragement to find work is far more welcome than conditionality and compulsion.

Allowing lone parents on means-tested benefits to keep significantly more of the maintenance paid by former partners is an important step. It is one which recognises that eliminating child poverty is about tackling inadequate incomes of families both in and out of work. How much maintenance a lone parent on benefit will be able to keep will make the government’s Autumn White Paper on Child Support worth following with close interest.