Asked by
To ask His Majesty’s Government what action they are taking in
response to the fact that 4.3 million children lived in relative
poverty in 2023, according to data published by the Department
for Work and Pensions on 21 March.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work
and Pensions () (Con)
My Lords, these statistics cover 2022-23—a year when war in
Ukraine and global supply chain challenges led to unexpected and
high inflation rates, averaging 10% over the year. These factors
are reflected in the statistics. The Government have since taken
firm action to support those on the lowest incomes, including
through uprating benefits by 10.1% from April 2023, increasing
the national living wage from April 2023 and providing cost of
living support worth £96 billion over 2022-23 and 2023-24.
(Lab)
My Lords, we have a record number of children in poverty, of whom
two-thirds are considered to be in deep poverty, and an annual
increase even on the Government’s preferred measure. Plus more
food insecurity means more hungry children and reliance on food
banks. So what was the Secretary of State’s response? “The plan
is working”—working for whom? When seven in 10 children in
poverty have at least one employed parent, parental employment
can be only a partial answer. Welcome as it is, benefits uprating
is really the minimum we should be expecting. Will the Government
therefore now accept that it is high time for a new plan, which
scraps the social security policies that drive worsening child
poverty and sets out a comprehensive, cross-government child
poverty strategy?
(Con)
Setting such a strategy and targets can drive action that focuses
primarily on moving the incomes for those just in poverty—just
above a somewhat arbitrary poverty line—while doing nothing to
help those on the very lowest incomes or to improve children’s
future prospects. Therefore, we have no plans to reintroduce an
approach to tackling child poverty focused primarily on
income-based targets. Having said that, perhaps I can reassure
the noble Baroness that my Department for Work and Pensions
consistently works across government to support the most
vulnerable households.
(CB)
My Lords, does the Minister agree that this figure from the
department graphically indicates the importance of the school
meal service? Would it be better to go back to a position in
which the head teacher, rather than some large external body that
is unknown to the school, is responsible for the quality and
delivery of the service?
(Con)
I note that the noble Lord has raised this point in the House in
the past, and the Government certainly support the provision of
nutritious food in schools. It ensures that pupils develop
healthy eating habits and can contribute to concentrating and
learning in the classroom. As he will know, we have extended free
school meal eligibility several times and to more groups of
children than any other Government over the past half a century.
We provide free meals for 2 million disadvantaged pupils through
the benefits-related criteria.
(Lab)
My Lords, the Minister was quite selective in the figures he gave
in his Answer because, in fact, by every official measure, child
poverty has been rising faster in the UK than in most OECD and EU
countries, many of which have actually reduced child poverty
during this period. It is the fastest rise we have seen for
almost 30 years, and this is not an accident; it is the direct
consequence of the Government’s political decisions, taking money
away from the poorest families to benefit the better off. Does
the Minister not agree that it is now imperative that the
Government bring forward the sort of comprehensive plan to which
my noble friend referred, to start to restore the incomes of
these families and children and take them out of poverty?
(Con)
I beg to differ with the noble Baroness, because analysis shows
that the Government’s cost of living support prevented 1.3
million people falling into absolute poverty after housing costs
in 2022-23. That includes 300,000 children, 600,000 working-age
adults and 400,000 pensioners. The £96 billion I alluded to
earlier included £20 billion for two rounds of cost of living
payments for more than 8 million households on eligible
means-tested benefits. I gently say to the noble Baroness that
she should bear these very important initiatives in mind.
(CB)
My Lords, I draw the House’s attention to the 200,000 children
who represent 14% of the children who are eligible for free
school meals, even on the very small amount of money their
parents are allowed to use, who are not registered. They are not
registered because there is no automatic registration, which can
happen extremely easily once people are handed out universal
credit. I have asked the Government this many times: why does
automatic registration not happen? This is 200,000 kids today,
right now, who did not get a meal that we pay for.
(Con)
I have certainly taken note of the point raised by the noble
Baroness, but I say again that we have extended eligibility
several times and to more groups of children than any other
Government over the past half a century. Free meal support is
also available to around 90,000 disadvantaged students in further
education, so an awful lot has been happening in that space.
(LD)
My Lords, the fact that nearly one in three children in the UK
are living in relative poverty is the logical outcome of years of
starving social services and funding for the most vulnerable in
our country. At worst, that translates into empty tummies, cold
homes and even no bed to yourself. I am sure the House would be
interested to hear the Minister’s excuse—surely not Ukraine
again. In an election year, I have to tell him that the British
people will neither forget nor forgive what this Government have
done to our children.
(Con)
I think that is a little unfair from the noble Baroness. She will
recognise, as I think the House does, that Ukraine has played a
part. In the previous Question we heard about our role as a
country, which is continuing, and we have had support from the
Opposition on that. We have set a clear and sustainable approach,
based on evidence of the important role that parental employment
plays in reducing the risk of child poverty. We have a huge
number of initiatives in my department to encourage more people
to get into work. That is why, with more than 900,000 vacancies
across the UK, our focus is firmly on supporting parents into and
to progress in work, which helps directly with poverty.
(Lab)
My Lords, the Minister challenged my noble friend and cited
statistics on absolute poverty, which, as we know, is the
Government’s favourite measure. The last time we discussed this,
on 28 February, the Minister told me that the Government prefer
absolute poverty rather than relative poverty as a measure. He
said:
“The absolute poverty line is fixed in real terms, so it will
only ever worsen if people are getting poorer and will only ever
improve if people are getting richer”.—[Official Report, 28/2/24;
col. 1028.]
Since the latest official statistics show that 600,000 more
people, half of them kids, are living in absolute poverty, does
the Minister accept that the Government’s policies are now
pushing children into poverty? If so, what are they going to do
about it?
(Con)
I have already spelled out what we are doing about it. Do not
forget that these figures are one year out; they are
retrospective figures. In my opening Answer, I spelled out what
we had taken action on. The noble Baroness is right; we do prefer
absolute poverty, because relative poverty can also provide
counterintuitive results, as it is likely to fall during
recessions due to falling median incomes. Under this measure,
poverty can decrease even if people are getting poorer.
(CB)
My Lords, I wonder whether the percentage of children in absolute
poverty in this country is higher or lower than in France or
Germany. I wonder whether this Government have some lessons to
learn from our neighbours.
(Con)
Indeed. I do not have any figures to answer the noble Baroness’s
question, but she makes an important point, which other Peers
have raised, about the importance of bringing as many children
out of poverty as possible. I happen to cover the Child
Maintenance Service in government, and I feel very proud that
every year we take 160,000 children out of poverty by ensuring
that the money flows from the paying parent to the receiving
parent—it is very important.
Baroness O'Grady of Upper Holloway (Lab)
My Lords, is the Minister aware of TUC-commissioned research from
November 2022 that showed that more than a quarter of children
whose parents had paid jobs in social care are growing up in
poverty? That is a scandal—220,000 children of parents who do
work that I am sure noble Lords will agree is vital, skilled and
valuable work for this country. Can the Minister tell me whether
the picture in respect of the children of workers in social care
has got better or worse since 2022? If it is worse, what are the
Government going to do about it?
(Con)
I have already mentioned many of the things that we are doing. I
have also been quite open by saying that the war in Ukraine and
the pandemic have had an effect. Those are not the only factors,
but it is important to recognise that. To support people in work,
the voluntary in-work progression offer is now available in all
jobcentres across Great Britain, providing an estimated 1.6
million low-paid workers on universal credit access to
personalised work coach support to help them increase their
earnings. The department is working at pace with a number of
important initiatives to encourage more people into work, which
takes more children out of poverty.
