Dr John H. McKendrick

Poverty in ScotlandCommunity opportunities in troubled and uncertain times?

Community Learning and DevelopmentWesterwood Hotel, Cumbernauld

October 30, 2015

Outline of talk

• Where I stand

• Falling in love with poverty

• Poverty in Scotland: direction of travel

• Understanding attitudes to poverty and welfare

• Towards a community action agenda

• Lessons for tackling poverty

Where I stand

Poverty in Scotland: Community opportunities in troubled and uncertain times?

Maybe I exaggerate … but just a little

Vision of the optimist

Poverty is an inevitable (but unproblematic) social ill -----

Poor people are to blame

Our anti-poverty interventions have not been sufficiently effective to tackle poverty in Scotland

Vested interests create and maintain poverty

Falling in love with poverty

Poverty in Scotland: Community opportunities in troubled and uncertain times?

‘Falling in love’ means increasingly serving a purpose

• Means to an end • Blaming the feckless - Punitive / Consequence • Agencies related to the anti-poverty sector

• Return to the past not likely (Thatcherism and ‘no poverty’)• Devolution• New Labour and UK national consensus • Strong anti-poverty sector• Making sense of poverty has been a keen concern of those

concerned with the re-balancing of the State from provider to facilitator in post-austerity UK

• Poverty has been lurking prominently in the background throughout the Referendum and UK election debates

Making the connection?

A Scottish connection?

Poverty in Scotland: direction of travel

Poverty in Scotland: Community opportunities in troubled and uncertain times?

No shortage of Scottish Government interest

1. Social Justice Milestones (1999-2004)– Ten long-term Targets and twenty-nine Milestones across five

population groups

2. Closing the Opportunity Gap (2004-2007)– Three Aims, Six Objectives and Ten Targets

3. Achieving Our Potential (2008 … )4. Scottish Child Poverty Strategy (2011-, refreshed 2014)

5. Independent Adviser on Poverty and Inequality (2015-)6. Fairer Scotland 2030 conversation (2015-)

Growing Scottish Local Government Interest

1. Renfrewshire2. Falkirk3. Dumfries and Galloway4. West Lothian5. Dundee (Fairness Commission)

6. Local Government Committee Forum Against Poverty

Impact on education

• Children in poverty nine months behind in terms of “school readiness” by age three (Centre for Longitudinal Studies, 2008)

• by age 5 gap of 10 months in problem solving and 13 months in vocabulary development (GUS 2011, in JRF 2014)

• by S2 pupils in areas of low deprivation twice as likely to be performing well on numeracy, with 16 percentage points difference in reading (JRF 2014)

• school leavers from areas of high deprivation – lower attainment tariff score - half that of least deprived– less likely to enter positive destinations – 22% don’t,

compared to 5% of least deprived (Scottish Government 2012)

• attainment gap remains stubbornly wide

A universal problem

Necessarily complex concept

Absolute income poverty– Number and proportion of children in households whose equivalised income before housing

costs is below 60 per cent of inflation adjusted GB median income in 2010/11. This is a measure of whether the poorest families are seeing their incomes rise in real terms.

Relative income poverty– Number and proportion of children in households whose equivalised income before housing

costs is below 60 per cent of GB median income in the same year. This is a measure of whether the poorest families are keeping pace with the growth of incomes in the economy as a whole

Material deprivation and income poverty– Number and proportion of children that are both materially deprived and are in households

whose equivalised income before housing costs is less than 70 per cent of the GB median in the current year. This is to provide a wider measure of children’s living standards.

Persistent income poverty – Reduce the proportion of children that experience long periods of relative poverty (that is to

reduce the percentage of children who live in households that have a household income of less than 60% of the median household income for three years out of a four-year period) with the specific target percentage to be set at a later date.

In pounds and pence

Where we are heading (children BHC)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 814

16.3

18.2

20.221

22 22.4

23.2

25.9

14.814.9

15.8

16.3

16.9

17.8

18.9

20

Absolute Relative

Axis Title

Axis Title

How we got where we are

1994/95

1995/96

1996/97

1997/98

1998/99

1999/00

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2009/10

2010/11

2011/12

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

V1: Absolute Poverty %

V2: Absolute Poverty %

Relative Poverty %

V1: Material Poverty and Low Income %

V2: Material Poverty and Low Income %

2014 (2012/13) as the ‘turning point’?

Between 2011/12 and 2012/13 …Total Numbers (AHC, unless stated)

• Poverty on the increase (again)• 1 million now living in relative poverty (19%)• Increase of 140,000 in relative poverty is highest rise in poverty

in a single year (since records 1994/95)• Third annual rise in total number living in absolute poverty• Third annual fall in the median equivalised weekly household

income for children, WAA and pensioners• Highest recorded levels of in-work poverty (45% of all; 59% of

children; 52% of WAA in household with at least one adult in employment) … BHC

Uncertain times

1994/95

1995/96

1996/97

1997/98

1998/99

1999/00

2000/01

2001/02

2002/03

2003/04

2004/05

2005/06

2006/07

2007/08

2008/09

2009/10

2010/11

2011/12

2012/13

2013/14

10

15

20

25

30

35

Total Children WAA Pensioners

Children in poverty in Scotland

140,000 more than half in working families

(or 210,000, AHC)

Children in poverty in Drumchapel

55.6% FSM in Camstradden (40th highest for PS in Scotland)

38.9% FSM in Drumchapel High (6th highest for SS in Scotland)

Understanding attitudes

Poverty in Scotland: Community opportunities in troubled and uncertain times?

Sticks and Stones … ?

• We are brought up to believe that verbal abuse shouldn’t bother/harm us

• We are brought up to believe that other abuses (physical) are more important

Sticks and Stones may break my bones …

• But words will cause me psychological damage

• But words perpetuate misunderstanding

• But words shape the context within which it is possible to make decisions / transitions to improve people’s lives

Surely it’s all about the action …

• Against a backdrop where there was no public outcry about poverty

• New Labour introduced concrete measures to tackle child poverty in the 1990s

• Did not champion this for fear that it would not garner public support

• … was that part of the problem? Do we need to win ‘hearts and minds’ in order to sustain action (particularly when times are tough)

How do we know what Scots think?

• Collecting evidence of social attitudes toward poverty and other issues for over 30 years

• SCOTPULSE survey of 2013 for STV Appeal 2013

• PSE-UK work of 2011 and 2012 determining what are necessities

Scots accept that child poverty exists in Scotland

There is no child poverty in Scotland today

There is very little child poverty in Scotland today

There is some child poverty in Scotland today

There is quite a lot of child poverty in Scotland today

I don't know

I would rather not say

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

0.8%

4.1%

34.1%

55.4%

5.4%

0.1%

Scots think that it is important to tackle child poverty

Don't know

Not at all important

Not very important

Quite important

Very important

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

0.6%

0.3%

1.4%

15.9%

81.8%

Scots estimates are not always accurate. 3. Trends in next five years

Increasing Decreasing Staying at about the same level I don't know

Scots have mixed opinions on welfare reform

Don't know

The cuts are necessary as we need to reduce the budget deficit

I agree with the reforms as we spend too much on welfare

Although cuts are necessary, these cuts are too deep and too soon

We should not be reducing the money available to the poorest in society

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

9.1%

10.5%

15.5%

25.3%

39.7%

Scots think that welfare reform will damage children

Don't know

Strongly disagree

Disagree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

Strongly agree

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

4.7%

5.3%

12.1%

18.0%

30.6%

29.3%

Scots think many have a role to play in tackling CP

Rather not say

Don't know

Other groups

Local businesses and employers

Voluntary organisations and community groups

Friends/relatives of people in poverty

People living in poverty (eg parents)

Local government (eg local council)

UK government (eg Parliament)

Scottish government

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

0.5%

1.5%

7.1%

20.4%

29.6%

34.5%

46.5%

62.6%

72.5%

74.8%

Scots don’t know about the CPSS

No

Yes, but I haven't read it

Yes, but I haven't read it fully

Yes, I have read the whole strategy

I don't know

What Scots think should be done1. Strategy

Strategic Goal%

Ensuring that work-related training and sufficiently well-paid work is available to the parents of children living in poverty

46.1%

Improving educational outcomes to ensure that all children have a better chance of avoiding poverty when they become adults

44.3%

Supporting those families with children who are living at or just above the poverty line

40.7%

Directly providing services to children living in poverty in order to improve their quality of life

39.1%

Providing adequate social protection to families with children living in poverty

30.1%

Don't know 4.9%

What Scots think should be done2. Actions

Holidays

Something else

Access to computers/internet

Sports facilities

Safe play areas

Nursery places

Community centres/clubs

Mentoring services

After school care

Food and clothes

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

4.2%

6.0%

15.7%

22.6%

36.7%

46.1%

49.9%

53.6%

59.7%

81.1%

Why poverty exists

ReasonEng 2009

Wal 2009

Scot 2009

Scot 2013

Their parents suffer from alcoholism, drug abuse or other addictions

68% 65% 82% 87%

Their parents have been out of work for a long time

48% 46% 52% 74%

Their family cannot access affordable housing

27% 24% 33% 41%

Because of inequalities in society 24% 23% 25% 41%

There are too many children in the family 46% 33% 30% 45%

Their parents do not work enough hours 21% 14% 11% 28%

Why poverty exists: MAIN reason

ReasonScot 2013

Their parents suffer from alcoholism, drug abuse or other addictions 29%

Because of inequalities in society 16%

Their parents do not want to work 13%

Their parents have been out of work for a long time 10%

Their parents work does not pay enough 8%

Their parents lack education 6%

Conspicuous in its absence from the top table

ReasonMAIN

Scot 2013

Social benefits for families with children are not high enough 4%

Community agenda?

Poverty in Scotland: Community opportunities in troubled and uncertain times?

Seven action points

– Understand poverty statistics

– Understand poverty statistics on the ground

– Know your population

– Convince people that poverty exists

– Convince people that poverty is a problem that must be addressed

– Understand the nature of area poverty

– Make a difference through local action

1. Understand Poverty Statistics

• Definition impacts on estimates• 730,000 people in Scotland are living in poverty using a before housing costs

measure, compared to 940,000 using an after housing costs measure • Understand UK Government Child Poverty Measure (for now)

• Absolute low income• Relative low income• Material deprivation and low income combined

• Know key statistics• the number of people living in poverty• the proportion of people living in poverty• recent trends in the number of people living in poverty• differences in the prevalence of poverty among children, adults of working age

and adults of pensionable age• incidence of poverty in their Government Office Region (GOR) and how this

compares to other GORs.

2. Understand Poverty Statistics on the ground

• Use robust means to directly compare local and regional/national incidence of poverty• Area deprivation measures, rather than counts of the number living in poverty

using official measures • Recognise that poverty counts UNDERestimate poverty

• Parents/Guardians may divert resources from themselves to provide for their children (exacerbating the poverty of parents/guardians)

• Household debt may reduce the income that is at the disposal of those living in poverty

• Recognise that poverty counts OVERestimate poverty• Extended family (and friends) may provide financial support and resources in

kind to those living in poverty (particularly children)• Household income may be supplemented by income earned in the “hidden

economy”

3. Know Your Population

• Incidence of poverty varies across localities• 17% in Soroba ROA / 33% in Calton-Glasgow East End ROA

• At-risk population varies across localities• 30% children in Soroba / 17% in Calton-Glasgow East End • 1% children in Callander High Flats (Falkirk) / 37% in Northfield (Aberdeen)

• Problems of poverty vary across localities• Worklessness higher than Scottish average for all age groups in Calton-Glasgow

East End, but rates of worklessness are lower than Scottish average for younger and older in Soroba

• Achievements in Maths at S4 for boys is much lower in Soroba than for Calton-Glasgow East End

= Poverty is not a universal experience / Poor areas are not all alike

4. Convince people that poverty exists

• Many people do not think that poverty is widespread• Many perceive that there is “very little” poverty in Britain today

• Many people have an austere understanding of poverty• Many perceive that “someone in Britain is in poverty if they had enough to eat

and live, but not enough to buy other things they needed

5. Convince people that poverty is a problem that should be addressed

• The reasons many people think cause poverty are not amendable to policy interventions• Only a minority attribute poverty to social injustice

• Fatalistic reasons are more popular ( ‘poverty is inevitable’ and ‘poor are unlucky’)

• Laziness or lack of willpower among poor is main reason for much of the public

• The era of year-on-year reductions in the number of children and pensioners experiencing poverty in Scotland is over

6. Understand the nature of area poverty

• Collective financial burden• School trips tend to ask for parental contribution

• Parental contributions are increasingly important in funding such activities

• Children are not prevented from participating due to parents’ inability to contribute to the cost

• So,• Financial responsibility of non-poor in poor areas increases

• Less opportunities are provided

7. Make a difference through local action

• Move beyond the national tackling of causes versus local amelioration of symptoms polemic

• Scottish Government is using local strategies to tackle national poverty• Previously CtOG targeting

• E.g. Target A: Reducing economic inactivity in the areas of highest economic inactivity (number of workless people dependent on DWP benefits in Glasgow, North & South Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire & Inverclyde, Dundee, and West Dunbartonshire by 2007 and by 2010)

• Local child poverty strategies

• Child poverty is amenable to local action• Tackling material deprivation

• E.g. Swimming at least once a month / / having A hobby or leisure activity / Going on a school trip at least once a term for school-aged children

Lessons for tackling poverty

Poverty in Scotland: Community opportunities in troubled and uncertain times?

Progress can be made

Real progress: • between 1997 and 2011 • 160 000 fewer children in poverty in Scotland • positive impact on measurable child wellbeing

Policy works: at UK and Scotland level: – commitment to eradicate child poverty by 2020– investment in child benefit and tax credits, – childcare, including Working for Families– employment – NMW, parental rights, employability

support– income maximisation – affordable housing

What are the options?

• Enabling people not living in poverty to increase the opportunities for more people to live a poverty-free life

• Reducing the number of people living in poverty • Preventing people on the margins of poverty from falling

into poverty• Enabling people living in poverty to increase their chance

of living a poverty-free life

• Protecting those living in poverty from the worst excesses of living with poverty

Aiming to reduce the number of people living in poverty is a

problematic goal for community anti-poverty strategies

What is the problem with aiming to reduce the numbers living in poverty?

• Nothing (in principle, or for those with control over the key levers)

• The local state (and indeed the Scottish Government) cannot control this

• Reducing numbers tends to be interpreted as a work-first approach and … – Work, per se, does not eradicate poverty– (Job) supply is insufficient to meet demand – Local state is scaling back on the number it employs

What works for a local strategy?

Core aims should be to:

• Protecting those living in poverty from the worst excesses of living with poverty

• Enabling people to increase their and others’ chances of living a poverty-free life

Why?

It is already what you do– It would give more explicit acknowledgement of tackling

poverty activity– More likely to engender wider internal support for

tackling povertyIt may, by default, become the most important function of the current tackling poverty interventions of the local state

– Rising demand for core services– Contraction of activity in employment/employability

It is within the realm of local control– No confounding/intervening factors (it could be argued)

… and grounded in a rights perspective

• stronger framework than welfarist/social justice arguments for tackling child poverty … when child rights are used directly as a rationale for tackling child poverty

• Check against pre-occupation with instrumental focus on targets

• Means to embed tackling child poverty in wider children’s agendas (as opposed to wider welfare/work agendas

• Means to refocus the child poverty debate to lend greater urgency to efforts to eradicate child poverty

• Tackling povertyism

Some food for thought …

• There is an opportunity, must be aware of the threats

• Need to win the battle of public opinion

• There is the basis for what could be public support for tackling poverty: disconnect between attitude and policy strategy

• Need to rethink the role of community action in light of changes to the local state

Thank you for listening.

Dr John H. McKendrickGlasgow School for Business and Society @ GCUj.mckendrick@gcu.ac.uk