New child povery data reveals true extent of ‘levelling up’ challenge

  • More than half of children living in some constituencies are living in poverty after housing costs are factored in.
  • Highest rates of child poverty in London and Birmingham
  • Sharpest increases in child poverty in Midlands and northern cities.
  • Local authority and constituency data available below.

Child poverty has risen most sharply in parts of the Midlands and Northern towns and cities in the past four years, according to research published today by the End Child Poverty coalition showing the scale of the challenge faced by government if it is to realise its ambition to build back better and level up opportunities for children across the UK.

The research by Loughborough University shows that, before the pandemic, in some parts of the country the majority of children were growing up in poverty, once housing costs are taken into account.

The greatest concentrations of children living in poverty are in London, with London boroughs and parts of Birmingham dominating the list of local authorities where child poverty is highest. In a dozen constituencies in London and Birmingham, more than half the children are living below the poverty line.

Yet the research also shows that the problem is not confined to the UK’s two largest cities. In the last four years, child poverty has risen fastest in parts of the Midlands and Northern towns and cities. Middlesbrough and parts of Tyneside have seen child poverty rates soar by over 10 percentage points since 2014/15.

In the past, low incomes in these areas were counteracted by cheaper housing costs, but during the five years leading up to 2018/19, rents in other parts of the country have risen by the same amount as in the capital, so in places where incomes are being depressed, this is less likely to be offset by falling relative housing costs.

Many of these families find, that once their housing costs are paid, they do not have enough money to meet their children’s needs and are left no option but to turn to crisis help, like food banks, and are increasingly reliant on free school meals.

The impact of poverty on children is well documented with children from low income families more likely to experience worse physical and mental health; do less well in school; and have fewer opportunities in the future.

The coalition is calling on the Government to recognise the scale of the problem and its impact on children’s lives. They are urging the Government to set out an ambitious plan to tackle child poverty encompassing not only social security spending but the high cost of housing and childcare and investment in children’s services.

The report is based on data published by the Department for Work and Pensions in March 2020, and on estimates of the effect of housing costs on poverty rates produced by the Centre for Research in Social Policy  at Loughborough University, based on survey evidence.

Earlier this year, Boris Johnson was rebuked by the statistics watchdog for his repeated misuse of child poverty statistics. The Statistics Authority upheld a complaint from the End Child Poverty coalition judging that on three separate occasions his statements on child poverty were ‘incorrect’.

Anna Feuchtwang, Chair of End Child Poverty which commissioned the research, said: “The Government can be in no doubt about the challenge it faces if it is serious about ‘levelling up’ disadvantaged parts of the country.

“This new data reveals the true extent of the hardship experienced by families on low incomes – the overwhelming majority of which were working households before the pandemic. The children affected are on a cliff edge, and the pandemic will only sweep them further into danger.

“The Prime Minister must urgently admit to the true extent of child poverty in our country rather than resorting to his own inaccurate statistics. An ambitious plan to   put this shameful situation right would be transformational for millions of children.

“As a matter of urgency we are calling on the Chancellor not to go ahead with planned cuts to Universal Credit which would see families lose out on £1000 a year. Given today’s data, this cut is unconscionable.”

End Child Poverty is calling for an urgent Government plan to end child poverty including:

  • Uprating of housing assistance in line with inflation;
  • Retain the £20 uplift in Universal Credit introduced at the start of the pandemic, which the Government has indicated will end in April 2021(a move supported by over 63k people and counting who have signed a petition to the Government);
  • End the benefit cap and the two-child limit on benefits;
  • Invest in all children with an increase to child benefit
  • Extend Free School Meals to all families in receipt of Universal Credit and those with No Recourse to Public Funds

The full report ‘Local indicators of child poverty after housing costs, 2018/19’, as well as tables with local data, are available at: www.endchildpoverty.org.uk

THE PICTURE IN SCOTLAND

Child poverty has risen in nearly every Scottish local authority and Westminster constituency since 2014/15, according to research published today by the End Child Poverty coalition.

The new data shows the scale of the challenge faced by UK, Scottish and local government if commitments to end child poverty in Scotland are to be met and the promise to level up opportunities for children across the UK realised. 

The research by Loughborough University shows that, even before the pandemic, levels of child poverty in Scotland ranged from one in  seven children in the Shetland Islands to nearly one in three in Glasgow, once housing costs are taken into account. The varying impact of housing costs on levels of child poverty in different parts of the country is highlighted.

The data shows London boroughs and parts of Birmingham dominating the list of UK local authorities where child poverty is highest – however the campaigners say that there can be no room for complacency in Scotland.

They highlight that the impact of poverty on children is well documented with children from low income families more likely to experience worse physical and mental health; do less well in school; and have fewer opportunities in the future.

The coalition is calling on the UK Government to recognise the scale of the problem and its impact on children’s lives. They are urging UK Ministers to set out an ambitious plan to use Westminster powers to tackle child poverty across the UK, and are asking the Holyrood government to build on the Scottish child poverty delivery plan already in place.

They welcome the new Scottish child payment which will see eligible children under six entitled to £10 per week additional support from February 2021, with all under 16s benefitting by the end of 2022.

However they say that just to stop child poverty rising will require a doubling in the value of the new payment, and that families need urgent cash support now to bridge the gap until it’s roll out.

The report is based on data published by the Department for Work and Pensions in March 2020, and on estimates of the effect of housing costs on poverty rates produced by the Centre for Research in Social Policy at Loughborough University, based on survey evidence.

Earlier this year, Boris Johnson was rebuked by the statistics watchdog for his repeated misuse of child poverty statistics. The Statistics Authority upheld a complaint from the End Child Poverty coalition judging that on three separate occasions his statements on child poverty were ‘incorrect’.

Speaking on behalf of members of End Child Poverty in Scotland, John Dickie, said: “The Prime Minister must urgently face up to the true extent of child poverty across the UK rather than resorting to his own inaccurate statistics. An ambitious plan to put this shameful situation right would be transformational for millions of children in Scotland and across the UK.

“As a matter of urgency we are calling on the Chancellor not to go ahead with planned cuts to Universal Credit which would see families lose out on £1000 a year. Given today’s data, this cut is unconscionable.”

Mr Dickie also called for more action from government in Scotland: “Here in Scotland the Holyrood government’s child poverty delivery plan and prioritisation of the new Scottish child payment are hugely welcome.

“But these new figures highlight the importance of keeping housing costs affordable, the importance of reviewing the value of the Scottish child payment and the urgent need to use existing payment mechanisms, like local authority school clothing grants, to provide extra financial support to families right now.”

End Child Poverty is calling for an urgent UK Government plan to end child poverty including:

  • Uprating of housing assistance in line with inflation;
  • Retaining the £20 uplift in Universal Credit introduced at the start of the pandemic, which the Government has indicated will end in April 2021(retaining the uplift is supported by over 63k people who have signed a petition to the UK Government);
  • Ending the benefit cap and the two-child limit on benefits;
  • Investing in all children with an increase to child benefit

The full report ‘Local indicators of child poverty after housing costs, 2018/19’, as well as tables with local data, are available at: www.endchildpoverty.org.uk 

  Children living in poverty, below 60% median income after housing costs, by Scottish local authority
Local authorityNumberPercentagePercentage point change (2015-19)
2014/152018/192014/152018/19
Aberdeen City6439747119.2%21.5%2.3
Aberdeenshire7622793815.6%16.1%0.5
Angus4253460821.6%24.0%2.4
Argyll and Bute2876305621.2%23.4%2.2
City of Edinburgh141451529518.8%19.5%0.7
Clackmannanshire2250240924.8%26.8%2.0
Dumfries and Galloway5610614123.4%26.2%2.8
Dundee City5812654024.5%27.3%2.8
East Ayrshire5250589924.8%27.9%3.1
East Dunbartonshire2899310915.7%16.1%0.5
East Lothian4188448922.3%23.3%1.0
East Renfrewshire2791294015.4%15.2%-0.2
Falkirk6555692923.1%24.5%1.4
Fife153901699324.0%26.3%2.4
Glasgow City261463182327.0%31.8%4.8
Highland8637905421.5%23.0%1.6
Inverclyde2904301322.1%23.8%1.7
Midlothian3713406822.8%23.2%0.4
Moray3480361721.0%22.4%1.5
Na h-Eileanan Siar76884717.3%19.5%2.2
North Ayrshire5895644825.2%28.3%3.0
North Lanarkshire155031652824.4%26.2%1.8
Orkney Islands69177919.8%21.9%2.1
Perth and Kinross5013540320.4%22.2%1.7
Renfrewshire6083695820.2%23.0%2.8
Scottish Borders4132454421.6%23.9%2.3
Shetland Islands54960812.8%14.4%1.6
South Ayrshire4167440423.3%25.0%1.7
South Lanarkshire120831279922.0%23.2%1.2
Stirling3168328520.5%21.3%0.8
West Dunbartonshire3861431024.6%27.4%2.8
West Lothian7632838021.7%23.7%1.9
Child poverty, % of children below 60% median income, before (BHC) and after (AHC) housing costs, by Scottish local authority
2018/192018/19 
BHC         AHCpercentage point difference
 between BHC and AHC
Aberdeen City14.9%21.5%6.6
Aberdeenshire10.4%16.1%5.7
Angus17.6%24.0%6.4
Argyll and Bute17.3%23.4%6.1
City of Edinburgh12.6%19.5%6.9
Clackmannanshire20.8%26.8%6.0
Dumfries and Galloway20.6%26.2%5.6
Dundee City21.4%27.3%5.9
East Ayrshire22.9%27.9%5.0
East Dunbartonshire10.4%16.1%5.7
East Lothian15.8%23.3%7.5
East Renfrewshire10.0%15.2%5.2
Falkirk18.1%24.5%6.4
Fife20.5%26.3%5.8
Glasgow City28.0%31.8%3.8
Highland16.7%23.0%6.3
Inverclyde17.7%23.8%6.1
Midlothian15.7%23.2%7.5
Moray16.1%22.4%6.3
Na h-Eileanan Siar13.4%19.5%6.1
North Ayrshire23.4%28.3%4.9
North Lanarkshire20.6%26.2%5.6
Orkney Islands15.6%21.9%6.3
Perth and Kinross15.7%22.2%6.5
Renfrewshire16.9%23.0%6.1
Scottish Borders17.6%23.9%6.3
Shetland Islands9.3%14.4%5.1
South Ayrshire19.2%25.0%5.8
South Lanarkshire17.2%23.2%6.0
Stirling14.9%21.3%6.4
West Dunbartonshire21.9%27.4%5.5
West Lothian17.1%23.7%6.6
Child poverty, % of children below 60% median income after housing costs (AHC), by Westminster constituency
Parliamentary constituencyNumberPercentagePercentage point change (2015-19)
2014/152018/192014/152018/19
Aberdeen North3334408722.0%26.5%4.5
Aberdeen South1925232213.9%16.0%2.1
Airdrie and Shotts4151441025.5%27.2%1.7
Angus3320364922.9%25.7%2.8
Argyll and Bute2809302120.6%23.2%2.5
Ayr, Carrick and Cumnock3913421226.2%28.6%2.5
Banff and Buchan3246336520.1%20.8%0.7
Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk3436388622.4%25.2%2.8
Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross2385254623.1%25.6%2.5
Central Ayrshire3630395924.7%27.0%2.3
Coatbridge, Chryston and Bellshill4294454824.0%25.9%1.8
Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East3398374521.3%23.3%2.0
Dumfries and Galloway3753405824.3%26.8%2.5
Dumfriesshire, Clydesdale and Tweeddale3014331021.2%23.8%2.6
Dundee East3385360721.5%23.1%1.7
Dundee West3236380124.6%28.2%3.6
Dunfermline and West Fife3887434221.1%23.2%2.1
East Dunbartonshire2289229216.2%15.6%-0.7
East Kilbride, Strathaven and Lesmahagow3242360218.3%20.3%2.0
East Lothian4172505822.2%26.2%3.9
East Renfrewshire3119332617.2%17.2%0.0
Edinburgh East2808308821.6%22.8%1.2
Edinburgh North and Leith2909311619.0%19.9%0.9
Edinburgh South2105218014.7%14.7%0.0
Edinburgh South West2884304918.6%19.2%0.6
Edinburgh West2432290014.3%15.8%1.5
Na h-Eileanan an Iar70079915.8%18.4%2.6
Falkirk4274459421.8%23.8%2.0
Glasgow Central3859556132.8%41.3%8.5
Glasgow East4316531327.1%30.6%3.5
Glasgow North2473288227.7%31.2%3.5
Glasgow North East4150485028.0%33.4%5.4
Glasgow North West3672428924.8%29.0%4.2
Glasgow South3820435026.4%30.8%4.4
Glasgow South West4549529828.0%31.8%3.9
Glenrothes4390485327.1%29.8%2.7
Gordon2098255011.5%13.5%2.0
Inverclyde2818292621.4%23.2%1.7
Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey3697391220.4%21.5%1.1
Kilmarnock and Loudoun4091462424.3%27.6%3.3
Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath4706529326.2%29.2%3.0
Lanark and Hamilton East3673386523.0%23.8%0.7
Linlithgow and East Falkirk4885517322.1%22.5%0.4
Livingston4580515221.2%24.2%3.1
Midlothian3497384321.4%21.8%0.4
Moray3367355220.4%22.0%1.6
Motherwell and Wishaw4518482126.2%27.7%1.5
North Ayrshire and Arran3957423724.8%27.6%2.8
North East Fife2158240218.9%21.1%2.3
Ochil and South Perthshire3790403121.2%22.5%1.3
Orkney and Shetland1346147017.3%19.0%1.7
Paisley and Renfrewshire North2954342118.7%20.8%2.0
Paisley and Renfrewshire South2817338019.8%24.8%5.0
Perth and North Perthshire3438369022.0%23.8%1.9
Ross, Skye and Lochaber2399247820.7%22.3%1.6
Rutherglen and Hamilton West4491472023.3%24.4%1.0
Stirling3099320220.0%20.7%0.7
West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine1904213910.2%11.4%1.2
West Dunbartonshire3867430524.7%27.4%2.7

About End Child Poverty

End Child Poverty is a coalition of organisations from civic society including children’s charities, child welfare organisations, social justice groups, faith groups, trade unions and others, united in our vision of a UK free of child poverty. For more details visit: www.endchildpoverty.org.uk    

End Child Poverty members in Scotland include Aberlour, Action for Children, Barnardo’s Scotland, Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) in Scotland, Children 1st, Close the Gap, Engender, One Parent Families Scotland, Oxfam Scotland, Poverty Alliance, and Save the Children.

The 20 UK constituencies with the highest increases in AHC (after housing costs) child poverty 2014/15 -2018/19

Constituency% of children below 60% median income AHC
2014/152018/19%age point increase
UK28%30%2%
Middlesbrough31.2%47.2%16.0%
Newcastle upon Tyne Central31.7%45.2%13.5%
Birmingham Hodge Hill40.5%53.8%13.4%
Bradford West34.9%47.8%12.9%
Birmingham Ladywood41.8%54.5%12.7%
Birmingham Yardley32.4%44.7%12.4%
South Shields28.2%39.3%11.1%
Bradford East36.4%46.9%10.5%
Newcastle upon Tyne East27.1%36.8%9.7%
Bolton South East37.1%46.7%9.6%
Sedgefield23.5%33.0%9.5%
Hartlepool27.6%37.1%9.5%
Oldham West and Royton38.5%48.0%9.4%
Gateshead26.0%35.3%9.3%
Blackburn38.1%47.3%9.2%
Jarrow23.5%32.6%9.1%
Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland24.2%33.2%9.0%
Manchester Gorton38.6%47.6%9.0%
North Durham24.3%33.3%9.0%
Easington25.8%34.6%8.8%

The 20 UK constituencies with the highest AHC compared to BHC (before housing costs) poverty rates, 2018/19

Constituency% of children below 60% median income AHC
AHCBHC%age point difference
UK30%20%10%
Bethnal Green and Bow60.6%30.1%30.5%
Hackney South and Shoreditch52.0%23.9%28.1%
Bermondsey and Old Southwark50.3%22.3%28.0%
Holborn and St Pancras47.9%19.9%28.0%
Vauxhall49.7%22.2%27.5%
Poplar and Limehouse52.4%25.1%27.3%
Islington South and Finsbury46.2%19.4%26.8%
West Ham52.5%25.9%26.6%
Walthamstow50.8%24.5%26.3%
Tottenham50.2%24.0%26.2%
East Ham51.3%25.5%25.8%
Camberwell and Peckham46.1%21.1%25.0%
Hackney North and Stoke Newington44.6%19.6%25.0%
Greenwich and Woolwich45.9%21.0%24.9%
Mitcham and Morden48.5%23.8%24.7%
Leyton and Wanstead46.0%21.3%24.7%
Lewisham West and Penge45.9%21.5%24.4%
Please follow and like NEN:
error25
fb-share-icon0
Tweet 20

Published by

davepickering

Edinburgh reporter and photographer