Devolution and Child PovertyDevolution Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 1 and Child Poverty Policies A Four Nations Perspective Martin Rogers November 2019 Devolution and Child Poverty Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 2 Contents Preface 3 1.0 Introduction 4 2.0 Overview 5 2.1 Definitions 5 2.2 Numbers and trends 5 2.2.1 Absolute low income and absolute poverty 5 2.2.2 Evolution of poverty measures 7 3.0 Mapping UK nations approaches to child poverty 8 3.1 The Child Poverty Act 8 3.2 England 9 3.3 Wales 9 3.4 Scotland 10 3.5 Northern Ireland 11 4.0 Analysing poverty figures and policies 12 4.1 UK figures 12 4.2 England 13 4.3 Wales 15 4.4 Scotland 16 4.5 Northern Ireland 17 5.0 Discussion 19 6.0 Conclusion 20 7.0 Bibliography 21 Devolution and Child Poverty Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 3 Preface The British Academy has undertaken a programme of work that seeks to re-frame debates around childhood in both the public and policy spaces and break down academic, policy and professional silos in order to explore new conceptualisations of children in policymaking. The purpose of the policy case studies is to explore differences in approaches to policymaking around childhood taken by the governments of the four UK nations over the past 30 years. The subjects of the case studies (Young People Leaving Care and Child Poverty) have been selected because they exemplify some of the differences in the drivers of policy development across the four UK nations. These differences are variously reflected in legislation, policy statements, and in approaches to practice. The Childhood Poverty Case Study seeks to summarise the policy priorities of the four UK nations for this group of young people, review outcomes for which data is publicly available, and discuss a number of areas where policy differences can be identified. More information on the Childhood programme can be found at www.thebritishacademy.ac.uk/programmes/childhood Devolution and Child Poverty Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 4 Chronology 1.0 Introduction Introduction Overview Mapping UK nations approaches to child poverty This case study explores the key policy differences between the four nations in relation to poverty policies (policy mapping) and the impact these different policies have had on Analysing poverty figures and policies child poverty outcomes (policy analysis). It outlines the policy and legislative framework in each nation, presents figures for each and notes the challenge of assessing the causal Discussion impact of these policies. Conclusion Bibliography As the greatest cause of child poverty is living in a household in poverty, the concepts of poverty and child poverty are often taken together throughout this piece. The most common measure of poverty is Households Below Average Income which measures the number of households with equivalised income below 60 per cent of the median (For more information see (Department for Work and Pensions, 2018). The devolved nations of the UK have varied degrees of freedom over policy areas that can impact poverty (Lodge, Henderson, & Davies, 2015, p. 5). Scotland has the most freedom over social security and fiscal policy while Wales has the least power to diverge from the UK default. Overall, the policy area with the greatest impact on poverty is the economy, powers over which are largely reserved (Welsh Government, 2015, p. 8). However, several things which impact poverty over the longer term are devolved such as early years provision, schooling, adult skills, housing and public health (McCormick, 2013). Exploring the approaches that devolved nations have taken to the issue of child poverty highlights different conceptions of poverty and the different policy responses of each nation. There are many, equally valid, definitions of poverty utilised by the different nations of the UK. These include absolute and relative poverty, relative and absolute low income, persistent poverty and other, wider measures which look longer term at things like educational attainment. Policies to prevent or cure poverty will then reflect the chosen measure and the predominant definition in any one place and at any one time. This is a political choice. The definition of poverty used is significant because policy is largely driven by what is measured (Stewart & Roberts, 2018, p. 18). Evidence as to the causal impact of policies on poverty can be inconclusive and must be treated with caution (McCormick, 2013). Overall, child poverty rates fell in the UK nations prior to the economic crash of 2008 but have since worsened (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2014, p. 13). While government policies can be impactful, other factors such as the global economy matter greatly and are beyond the control of governments (Lodge, Henderson, & Davies, 2015, p. 58). One of the most important impacts on child poverty rates over recent years has been cuts to benefits, some of which are devolved and some not (Portes & Reed, 2018, p. 18). These cuts have disproportionately impacted households with children (Portes & Reed, 2018, p. 24). The Child Poverty Act 2010 requires ministers in England, Scotland and Northern Ireland to publish Child Poverty Strategies and progress reports (Kennedy, 2014). Wales enacted legislation on this previously (Children and Families (Wales) Measure 2010). Devolution and Child Poverty Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 5 Chronology 2.0 Introduction Overview Overview Mapping UK nations approaches to child poverty 2.1 Definitions There is no single definition of poverty and the different policy approaches to tackling Analysing poverty figures and policies poverty reflect this. The most common poverty measures upon which governments have based their policies are relative or absolute, with the former dominant. Absolute poverty Discussion is defined as a lack of basic resources such as food and water (Mack, 2017). Relative Conclusion poverty measures those living in households with income below 60% of the median. Bibliography Some relative measures benchmark against a certain year (McGuinness, Booth, & Francis- Devine, 2019, p. 3). Another definition, absolute low income, measures those in poverty against 60% of income in a given year adjusted for inflation. This last measure then allows comparison over time. Poverty can be measured before or after housing costs and different devolved nations have taken different approaches to this. Scotland, for example, refers explicitly to the numbers in poverty both before and after housing costs in its outputs such as ‘Every child, every chance: tackling child poverty delivery plan 2018-2022’ (Scottish Government, 2018). Wales’ Child Poverty Strategy includes a measure of children living in relative income poverty after housing costs (Welsh Government, 2015, p. 36) but Scotland is otherwise unique in referring to housing costs. The impact of housing costs, and the wider costs of living, can make a significant on poverty, as can specific measures to address them such as tax credits and social security payments which are devolved to different extents in different territories (Johnson, 2019). Housing costs and the cost of living are particularly high in London. Looking at people of all ages before and after housing costs, the rate of poverty in London before housing costs is 14%, the tenth highest UK region. After housing costs London has the highest rate of poverty in the UK at 28%. For children, 17% live in households in relative poverty before housing costs in London, but 37% after housing costs (McGuinness, Booth, & Francis- Devine, 2019, p. 34). 2.2 Numbers and trends 2.2.1 Absolute low income and absolute poverty Across the UK around 2.2 million children were in absolute low income before housing costs in 2016/17, around 200,000 down on the previous year. This was around 16% of all children. Approximately 3.5 million children were in absolute poverty after housing costs, also down 200,000 from the previous year. This figure is then around 26% of all children (Department for Work and Pensions, 2019). Devolution and Child Poverty Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 6 Chronology % of children in relative low income Great Britain (1997/98–2001/02) and UK (2002/03–) Introduction Overview 50% Mapping UK 45% nations approaches to child poverty 40% Analysing poverty 35% figures and policies Discussion 30% Conclusion 25% Bibliography 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 97/98 99/00 01/02 03/04 05/06 07/08 09/10 11/12 13/14 15/16 After Housing Costs Before Housing Costs % of children in absolute low income Great Britain (1997/98–2001/02) and UK (2002/03–) 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 97/98 99/00 01/02 03/04 05/06 07/08 09/10 11/12 13/14 15/16 After Housing Costs Before Housing Costs Source: Poverty in the UK: statistics. (McGuinness, Booth, & Francis-Devine, 2019, p. 11) Devolution and Child Poverty Policies — A Four Nations Perspective 7 Chronology 2.2.2 Evolution of poverty measures The conception of poverty in all UK nations has evolved and become broader. This is Introduction reflected in the evolution of the measurement and policies to address poverty which no longer focus just on income. Scotland is an outlier in this regard as it has statutory income Overview targets. The government of England prioritises reducing worklessness (a household where Mapping UK no one is in work) and improving educational attainment, Wales the persistent lack of nations approaches to child poverty necessities while Northern Ireland’s Strategy contains no single definition. Wales, like England, targets worklessness and educational outcomes. Analysing poverty figures and policies As the definition of poverty varies between the UK nations, so do the policies which have Discussion been implemented to attempt to remedy poverty. Scotland has a statutory income poverty Conclusion target while Northern Ireland focuses primarily on wider economic growth.