Community Links

Community Links blog

Posts Tagged ‘Poverty’

New ‘neets’ research challenges ‘layabouts’ label

Friday, July 16th, 2010

Window Image Last week the Audit Commission’s “Against the Odds” report revealed that Young people not in education, employment or training (NEET) at 16-18 have poorer life chances than their peers and are more likely to be a long term cost to public finances.

In a time of austerity, government can ill-afford the estimated £13 billion in public finance costs that will be incurred by the 2008 NEET cohort over their lifetimes. The blight on individual lives is even more appalling, young men who were NEET are three times more likely to suffer from depression, and five times more likely to have a criminal record, than their peers.

This week Community Links publish our new survey of young people not in employment, education or training. Our research suggests that the vast majority want a job and are actively looking for work.  All but two of thirty five NEET young interviewed were keen to work and actively looking for a job. A significant number were also highly qualified but struggling to find work in an increasingly competitive employment market.

“I’ve applied for loads of jobs but I’m up against people with lots more experience who are going for the same jobs as me,” said one young man with ten GCSEs, three ‘A’ levels and a BSC in Computing and Business. “I’ve been to graduate careers fairs where I’m competing for entry level positions with people who have been made redundant from Lehman Brothers and other big firms. It’s incredibly hard to get your foot on the ladder.”

The label NEET covers a diverse group; whilst just over a quarter of the young people interviewed had five or more grade A-C GCSE’s, a similar number had no qualifications at all. More than half of those with no qualifications had been excluded from school.

Only half of the young people who took part in the survey were claiming benefits, relying instead on support from family and friends. The absence of the most basic level of financial support made it extremely difficult for some to stay in education.  One 17 year old described how he had enrolled on a full time course but could not find the £20 per week needed to pay his travel costs. Poverty had a big impact; there have recently been calls to reduce or cut benefits for young people who refuse work or training. But a lack of cash is the very thing causing some young people to fail. Some who simply could not afford the cost of travelling to college, for instance, were abandoning education as a result. One 20 year old woman described how she had been unable to complete a Business Studies degree because she was sharing a two bedroom flat with eight other family members. “Five of us sleep in one room,” she said. “There was just nowhere to work or think and after 18 months I had to leave the course.”

Others from poor backgrounds were giving up on higher education because they were afraid they would be unable to repay high levels of debt accrued to cover tuition fees and living costs.

A more generous level of support for young people in education and training could cut the risk of young people becoming unemployed for extended periods, and reduce the long term cost to society. Taking away financial support by cutting benefits or other punitive measures is likely to have precisely the opposite effect to that intended and lead to greater demands on public finances in the long term.

Read the full report.

Being Poor and Being Powerless

Monday, June 14th, 2010

Henry Tam Henry Tam is Visiting Professor at Birkbeck College, University of London. He has written extensively on the subject of democratic citizenship, and actively championed the development of inclusive communities. In this guest blog post he outlines the analysis from his recent book Against Power Inequalities.

If in the land of the blind, the one-eye man is king, then in the realm of trillionaires, even those with merely a millionaire status would languish at the bottom of the heap. Power – visual power, purchasing power, military power – whatever form it takes, is inherently relative. It makes no sense to talk about someone being powerful or not without making a comparison with someone else’s ability to make things happen. And since poverty is in essence about the lack of power, we should never lose sight of the need to combat it by limiting the concentration of power in those who can already pretty much do what they want.

Yet, it is not an uncommon suggestion that people should not worry about what others have got. Perhaps the visibly wretched should be given clothes, shelter and food. But beyond that, we are often told; people should look after their own needs and leave others to get on with their lives. Where they have a common interest in cooperating, they can voluntarily do so; otherwise just let people mind their own business. This sanguine outlook has one critical flaw. It ignores what entrepreneurs have tirelessly demanded as the level playing field, or diplomats have for centuries sought as the balance of power – in short, a power structure where no one has a predominant capacity to subdue, intimidate, marginalise, or take unfair advantage over others.

If we really care about helping the poor, the powerless, all those who are vulnerable to the whims and commands of others, then we need to make sure they can stand up to the powerful. In my new book, Against Power Inequalities, I look back on history and find that over centuries, across the world, a similar pattern emerges with those in powerful positions seeking to strengthen their grip even further by constantly changing the rules in their favour, and progress in making communities more inclusive only achieved when reformists and citizens have managed to redistribute power more fairly. Along the way, there are of course many twists and turns. Some claim to fight for the powerless and end up just grabbing power for themselves. Others express deep concern for the poor while they consolidate economic arrangements which will continue to benefit the rich at the expense of everyone else. But sustained change for the better is possible.

We are not talking about some utopian end point, but a constant effort to moderate excesses. The civil service has now been told that its highest earners should not be earning 20 times or more than the lowest. The same message needs to be repeated for society at large – at present, the top 10% in the UK have 100 times more wealth than the bottom 10%. At the global level, the challenge is even more severe. The richest 1% of adults own 40% of the world’s assets, while the bottom 50% barely own 1% of the world’s wealth.

To adapt the homily about not just giving a hungry man a fish, but teaching him the art of fishing, there is no point in teaching him how to fish if he is unable to stop the multinational fleet of trawlers taking away the entire fish stock.

Henry Tam’s new book, Against Power Inequalities, provides a short guide to the contest for power redistribution across the centuries, and draws out the underlying causes of disempowerment which are still with us today.  It is available for  free download from the Equality Trust, or from Henry Tam’s own blog Question the Powerful.

First thoughts on Frank Field’s review on poverty and life chances

Monday, June 7th, 2010

http://comlinks.beepweb.co.uk/linksuk/wp-content/images/FrankFieldMP.jpgWe were  pleased to hear the PM announce plans for a new review on poverty and life chances, led by Frank Field, and considering, amongst other aims how to develop services that “nurture children”.

He will:

  • examine the case for reforms to poverty measures, in particular for the inclusion of non-financial elements
  • generate a broader debate about the nature and extent of poverty in the UK
  • explore the effect of a child’s home environment
  • recommend potential action by government and other institutions to reduce poverty and enhance life chances for the least advantaged.

We will be blogging on other aspects of the review in the weeks ahead but note now Fields specific commitments to consider how grass roots groups can transform children’s lives, to learn from others and to producing an action programme.  He told the BBC: “I hope we will have a programme of action, …which the government can actually act on. ……I don’t think we need lots of brilliant new ideas, lots of people have done work, we now need to bring that together and shape it in a way which leads to action.”

With the right community interventions at an early stage we could be doing much more to enable all children to fulfil their potential.   We know some of what works. We do it everyday at Community Links across a network of more than 60 projects in East London and it isn’t rocket science.  Its warm and friendly places where young people can be safe and free to play and learn and grow. Its committed and empathetic staff  that children can trust and respect and it’s the deep value relationships that grow from reliable and constant understanding between service user and provider.

When we were reviewing the Council on Social Action’s unfinished business  before the election we suggested to party leaders  that  a national community support strategy for children and young people, rooted in such approaches,  should be a priority for the new government.  We advised that an effective independent  contribution to developing such a strategy would learn from the successful working process of the Council  and would combine advice and recommendations to government with  concurrent, cross sector action on the ground.  Above all it would seek to understand and, where appropriate, support and develop existing good practice.

The brief for the Field review is not quite the same and as yet we don’t know exactly how it will work but there are clearly many connections. We particularly welcome  the positive commitment to learning from what works and to generating a practical action programme.

We look forward to contributing to the learning and, especially, to the action.

Challenging the perception that poverty doesn’t exist in the UK

Thursday, March 18th, 2010

Nigel Moores and Ian Mather are from Rhyl in North Wales. They will be posting throughout the week. Nigel works for the West Rhyl Community Company, and is one of the founder members of West Rhyl First. Ian is Chair of Anti-Poverty Network Cymru.

Having spent many years working in West Rhyl, the most deprived ward in Wales, I have come across poverty on a daily basis. From people sleeping on the streets to children begging for food. This is reality on a daily basis for a large number of people both young and old.

However, the general perception is that poverty does not exist in the UK. Poverty is in third world countries. Starving children in Africa, people living on rubbish tips in India and child labour in China. Perceptions we see in the media on a daily basis. The media do not show the people living in poverty in the UK. It wouldn’t look good, not on our own doorstep, best left hidden away. Is it not far better to read about celebrities and millionaire footballers.

(more…)

Poverty is not just about unemployment

Thursday, March 18th, 2010

Kate Bell is Director of Policy and Communications at Gingerbread

Gingerbread is the national charity working with single parents. Our new Lets Lose the Labels campaign seeks to challenge the myths and stereotypes that surround single parenthood. Over the past couple of weeks we’ve witnessed a spate of news stories that have shown just why this campaign is needed. We’ve seen single parents referred to as ‘welfare amazons’, reference to an ‘epidemic’ of single mothers, and to ‘growing numbers of mothers…choosing to live alone and relying on state benefits which encourage them “not to bother” settling with a life partner’.

(more…)

A wage to live in dignity?

Monday, March 15th, 2010

Donald Hirsch is head of income studies at the centre for research in social policy at Loughborough university.

Last week the Guardian published the article below in its opinion section and online. Like a lot of articles of this kind, it attracted strong online feelings, with opposite views coming from people who think that £7.14 an hour – my proposed living wage level outside London (the London version has been set at £7.60) – is far to low, and those who condemn any attempt to fix minimum wages which they say would destroy jobs.

(more…)

Building relationships is the key to tackling poverty, in London and elsewhere

Wednesday, March 3rd, 2010

The Evening Standard is running a powerful series of reports on poverty in London this week. They rightly identify some of the failures in government policy, but they’ve missed one of the most important ingredients in achieving change – building respectful relationships between individuals and communities.

There are some poignant stories of individuals – 18 year old Vincent who has applied for 32 jobs, would love to go to university, but can’t afford the £19 for a UCAS application form. 21 year old Jaydine, who has had an incredibly difficult start to life, movingly describes how her 11-month old baby “has taught me not to give up.”

At Community Links we know a lot of people with similar experiences to Vincent and Jardine, and we’ve spent 30 years supporting them. And the key to our success? Building relationships – treating people as individuals not problems, as people not targets.

Take our employment project, which helps people like Vincent into work. Despite running out of two slightly shabby offices in Newham and Tower Hamlets, we get more of our people into work than any other provider in London. We invest in people before furniture – our advisors really get to know every person, finding out what jobs they want to do, and supporting them to overcome problems. And then we get to know all the local employers, finding the right job for the right person.

Or look at our Ofsted registered school, for young people excluded from mainstream education. Youth workers, many of them who had difficulties at school themselves, get to know every young person, finding out what each individual needs and doing their best to support them.

And the main thing we’ve had constantly reinforced over all these years is that people in Newham, as in London, are and always have been hopeful, resilient, ambitious, generous, and honest. London might be a city divided by wealth, but not by the qualities that people possess.

Over to you – what are the most important issues around working age poverty?

Wednesday, February 24th, 2010

Did you know that of the seven million people deemed ‘economically inactive’ in the UK, two million would like to work? Or that last year 22% of women were in jobs earning less than £7 an hour? Or that many people moving off benefits into work end up no better off?

There are all sorts of reasons why people of working age end up living in poverty. Community Links and our partner Church Action on Poverty have won funding from the DWP for a project to uncover, raise awareness of, and begin to tackle, some of these issues. It’s part of the European Year Against Poverty.

At Community Links we’ve always believed that people who experience a problem understand it best, so we’re going to spend the next few months asking people experiencing poverty what needs to change. Once we’ve agreed on the most important issues, both perceptions that need challenging and policies that need changing, we’ll set about doing just that.

And we’d like to hear what you think.

(more…)

Welfare Commission: humanising decision making and appeals in the benefits system

Tuesday, February 9th, 2010

Today the Department for Work and Pensions Select Committee publishes its report on decision making and appeals in the benefits system, the headline press coverage reports that overpayments due to error had soared from £400 million in 2000, while overpayments due to fraud and mistakes by claimants dropped. As part of the solution the select Committee is calling for a Welfare Commission to be set up to simplify the benefits system. We welcome this news and believe that any redesign should place a one-to-one service to claimants at its heart; ensuring efficient and humanised service delivery. We have a few specific recommendations for the Commission to consider

  • Reduce the complexity of claim forms,
  • Make crisis loans more accessible and immediate,
  • Addresses the inconsistency of the earnings disregard across all benefits to ensure accidental fraud is not committed resulting in benefits being automatically stopped.

Last year the Community Links advice services were used by a total of 12,400 local people. At our drop-in advice sessions 37.8% were benefits related cases, of which 73% were a result of DWP error. Our advice services continue to be in high demand, services cost several hundred thousand pounds per year – funded by local authorities and the Legal Services Commission. This cost to the tax payer could be dramatically reduced by the simplification of the benefits system and increased competency with the administration process.

Research by AdviceUK in Nottingham reveals that 42% of the demand at advice agencies in the city is ‘failure demand’ – demand caused by failures in the system of public administration. Reducing this would save significant amounts of money and free up advisors to carry out valuable work with clients, supporting them to resolve their long-term problems.

Many of our clients have used our advice services in the past; some have had their benefits mistakenly stopped on more than one occasion. The knock-on effects are increased borrowing and debt, eviction problems and in many cases people falling into the informal economy, working cash-in-hand to cover costs as a last resort. Debt related advice has doubled, and our advisers believe this is in part due to the recession-related rise in claimant figures, and benefits being stopped or delayed as people struggle to find formal work.

Our campaign, Need NOT Greed has been calling for a simplified benefits system. A system which is easier to navigate could help prevent the rise of informal economic activity caused by people struggling to survive poverty. At the launch of the Need NOT Greed campaign in February 2009 Terry Rooney, chair of the DWP select committee said

“There is a treadmill of being in the informal economy out of Need NOT Greed. The striking thing is that the national benefits system is geared up to serve millions, but everybody is an individual – it’s how you can recognise everyone’s needs and requirements. You need a totalitarian system and there are enormous challenges – but ones that need to be faced and met.”

A local campaigner and user of our advice services said

“the system wears you down, I am constantly just surviving. Every time you pick yourself up and try to move forward the system lets you down again. It’s the same old problems for everyone and none of us round here trust it anymore. How can something you don’t trust be able to help you?”

Rising unemployment is increasing demand for welfare benefits at a time when public funding is under severe pressure. Spending time building productive relationships with people using services is time well spent; not an extravagance. These relationships are instrumental to efficient delivery of public services. We hope that a Welfare Commission is established as it is evident that change is necessary – but change must put the needs of the service user at the heart of the system.

The Tower Block of Commons and the “Internal Orient”

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

Last week we debated the portrayal of poverty in the media and touched on the poverty game show format – last night Channel 4 screened the first in the series the Tower Block of Commons following Members of Parliament as they spend a week living with families in Tower Block Estates across the UK.

The aim of the exercise was unclear. Was it to present to policymakers the everyday reality of their voters struggling through recession? To demonstrate how difficult it is to get by without a second-home allowance and a charge account at John Lewis? Or was the aim to portray the people living in social housing as workshy layabouts?

Just as the focus was unclear at the outset so was the documentary makers’ approach. At times hard-hitting exchanges, for example about drug misuse, provided a genuine insight to life on the estates. Yet the game show format meant challenging moments were  interspersed with exchanges which ridiculed stereotypes – the MP’s were each provided clothing by their hosts to make them fit-in resulting in a comedy costume competition.

Building one-to-one, personal contact enabled a couple of MPs to express real concern about improving the circumstances of their hosts.  However what did the MP’s think would happen to the damp, mouldy bathroom after “their” resident had been re-housed? It would simply be occupied by the next on the waiting list – without changing the underlying conditions.

Whilst warm relationships were established with individuals each of the MPs, to different extents, demonstrated their distance from the lives of some of the UKs neglected communities. The audience watching on TV were invited to participate in the “Us”  side of an “Us and Them” equation, gazing at the residents of the Tower Block as if they were aliens.

We have written before about the process of  “othering” and referred to Ruth Lister’s definition

‘Othering’: people in poverty are thought about, talked about and treated as ‘Other’ and inferior to the rest of society. A dividing line is drawn between ‘us’ and ‘them’ and the dividing line is imbued with negative judgements that construct ‘the poor’ variously as a source of moral contamination, a threat, an undeserving economic burden, failures in the meritocratic race, an object of pity or even as an exotic species to be studied.

There is a long history of people living in poverty being viewed as “other” dating back to melodramatic Victorians exploring the “Internal Orient” of London’s East End this TV programme reverts to simplistic stereotyping of people in poverty and, in reality, adds nothing to our understanding.