1 / 26

Social Welfare in Britain

Social Welfare in Britain. A Widening Gap: Poverty, Inequality and Social Exclusion. Lecture aims:. Examine competing definitions of poverty and their policy implications Chart trends in poverty and analyse the growth of poverty to end of Conservative era

blue
Download Presentation

Social Welfare in Britain

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Social Welfare in Britain A Widening Gap: Poverty, Inequality and Social Exclusion

  2. Lecture aims: • Examine competing definitions of poverty and their policy implications • Chart trends in poverty and analyse the growth of poverty to end of Conservative era • Assess New Labour government’s progress in reducing poverty since then

  3. Key Sources Library Readings: Poverty – Alcock 1999, Giddens 2006 – follow hyperlinks in Module handout too Welfare to Work – Blakemore 2003, Blundell 2003, Finn 2001, Carpenter 2007

  4. Key Evidence Source: The Poverty Site www.poverty.org.uk Monitoring Poverty and Exclusion 2008 www.poverty.org.uk/reports/mpse%202008.pdf • Not a PRP but essential if evidence if you are doing one on poverty Key Facts from The Poverty Site: www.poverty.org.uk/summary/key%20facts.shtml See also CPAG Media Briefing 2007: www.cpag.org.uk/info/briefings_policy/CPAG_briefingHBAI_2006.pdf

  5. Want – a ‘giant’ slain? • Poverty now ‘miniscule’ according to Rowntree’s final 1950 survey of York • Mainly among old, could be dealt with minor adjustments • This attributed to full employment and implementation of (key aspects of) the Beveridge Report • The Times Leader 1950: we had achieved ‘the virtual abolition of sheerest want’ • Note of dissent: Peter Townsend 1952 definition of ‘necessities’ too narrow. • The 50s boom: ‘You’ve never had it so good’ (PM Harold Macmillan, 1959)

  6. Absolute poverty • Claims that poverty as something ‘absolute’ and scientifically de • Informed ‘less eligibility’ and Rowntree’s studies of York (1901), to BMA nutritional scales (1930s) and National Assistance scales (1948) • Equals = barest minimum necessary for human physical reproduction Joseph Rowntree

  7. “A family living on the scale allowed for must never spend a penny on a railway fare or omnibus. They must never go to the country unless they walk. They must never purchase a halfpenny newspaper or spend a penny to buy a ticket for a popular concern, and what is bought must be of the plainest and most economic description” (Rowntree, 1901)

  8. The search for an elusive minimum • Doubtful needs can be defined so restrictively: what about clothing and heating, etc • Cultural needs – vary with time and place – Adam Smith’s ‘linen shirt’ • Absolute definitions treat people as physical animals rather than social and cultural human being • Questions of human dignity, decency and participation in age of rising prosperity

  9. The ‘rediscovery’ and redefinition of poverty • Abel-Smith and Townsend (1965, 1979) criticised view that poverty had been abolished • Adopted relative definition of poverty • Defined then as 140% of National Assistance • Later, Townsend argued poverty ‘material exclusion from a customary standard of life’ • Evidence suggested that in 1950s relative and absolute poverty levels increased

  10. Defining relative poverty • Threshold – those who live below a level based on benefits (140%, Townsend) and/or average income (60%, DWP) • Consensual definitions – a ‘necessity’ is that ‘which all adults should be able to afford and why they should not have to do without’ (Middleton 2000; Gordon and Pantazis 1997) • Poverty is social exclusion – participation in wider society, not just economic

  11. Low Income Households (on or below Income Support levels) 1979 – 4.3 million 1994 – 9.8 million 2001 – 7.8 million Conservatives: low average income and inequality, not poverty (Source: CPAG, Poverty the Facts) Households Below Average Incomes 50% of mean income 1979 – 5 million 2000 – 14 million 50% of median income 1979 – 7.1 million 2000 – 13.3 million The Growth of ‘Poverty’ 1979-97 Government measure of poverty now 60% of median income

  12. unemployed (1 in 8 of total) Sick and disabled Low Paid (1 in 10) Couples with children (1 in 3) Lone parents (1 in 5) Pensioners (1 in 5) Women and Ethnic Minorities More than we think – poor are not static group (e.g. the underclass) but many over time move in and out of poverty Rowntree’s ‘poverty cycle’ Who are the poor? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/business/2005/breadline_britain/default.stm

  13. Child Poverty trends since 1960s • 10% in 1968 defined by 50% average income, up to 30% by 1995/6, most living in ‘workless’ households • 2/3 of children in lone parent families poor (not in Sweden – access to benefits and employment) • 25% where there are 2 parents • Bottom 20% of population spend no more in real terms 1995/6 than 1968 on children’s clothing, toys, fresh fruit • Child poverty linked to getting in trouble with law later on Source JRF, Child Poverty and Its Consequenceswww.jrf.org.uk/knowledge/findings/socialpolicy/389.asp

  14. Child Poverty Trends (HBAI)

  15. Why the growth in poverty? • Wages are the biggest source of household income, followed by state benefits • Economic Restructuring • Unemployment and Inactivity – structural and cyclical • Changes to the labour market – decline in demand for low skilled workers • Casualisation, ‘flexible working’, self-employment • Growing inequality • Plus age, gender, race, disability discrimination

  16. Policy and Politics • A neo-liberal ‘strategy of inequality’ (Walker 1992) • Growth unemployment and low benefits • Hold down wages for low paid workers (‘let markets decide’) • Some state benefits to support for low paid workers • Regressive taxation – lower income tax, higher National Insurance, VAT • Welfare benefits – Uprated by prices not wages tighten eligibility, means-testing

  17. New Labour (Child) Poverty Targets 1999 • First time a British government has set such a target • Reduce 25% 2004, 50% 2010, 100% 2020 • No of children in households 60% below the (median) average • Both before and after housing costs up to 2004, but only former after

  18. Poverty Discourses and Policy Strategies • MUD = Moral Underclass Discourse – poor are to blame • RED = Redistributive Discourse – social justice • SID = Social Inclusion Discourse – mainly welfare to work Source Levitas Not mutually exclusive • Conservatives mainly MUD – Charles Murray • New Labour – mainly SID, limited RED, but still some MUD

  19. The issue isn’t in fact whether the very richest person ends up becoming richer. The issue is whether the poorest person is given the chance that they don’t otherwise have … the justice for me is concentrated on lifting incomes of those that don’t have a decent income. It’s not a burning ambition of mine to make sure that David Beckham earns less money (Tony Blair, Prime Minister) For too long, we have used the tax and benefit system to compensate people for their poverty rather than doing something more fundamental – tackling the root cause of poverty and inequality … the road to equality of opportunity starts not with tax rates, but with jobs, education, and the form of the welfare state (Gordon Brown, Chancellor of the Exchequer) New Labour

  20. The carrots Inclusion through work (e.g. New Deal) Make work pay (e.g. minimum wage, Tax Credits, low income tax for poorest [initially]) Subsidy for child care through tax credits Targeted welfare for the ‘deserving’ (e.g. MIG for pensioners) The sticks Keep benefit levels low (continue to up-rate with prices) Tighten eligibility for benefits further (JSA) Extend the means test (Tax Credits) No overt redistribution Paid Work is the Answer

  21. Child Poverty Progress Guardian, 9.3.06

  22. Wider Inequality Trends (ONS figures)

  23. Increasing Equality of Opportunity? • In comparison to 8 European countries UK and USA have poor rates of social mobility • Actually worsened in US as middle class make more use of educational opportunities www.lse.ac.uk/collections/pressAndInformationOffice/newsAndEvents/archives/2005/LSE_SuttonTrust_report.htm

  24. Conservative move to the Centre? • Cameron has accepted government’s Child Poverty targets • ‘Broken society’ rather than economic disadvantage seen as main problem • Cultural explanations and remedies • Recent downturn has seen Cameron shift back to monetarist economics http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=MQzDPYBdjGg

  25. Conclusions • Government policies on Child Poverty and Pensions play some part in reducing poverty • Buoyant economy helped, implications of downturn negative unless benefits levels raised • Persistent problem of working poor, need to tackle class inequality • After 2006, child poverty has been increasing • Poor and worsening record on social opportunity • Government brave to set targets – less brave in implementing policies that would make real difference e.g. on Min Wage, tax, benefits, etc

More Related