Tag: Poverty

Years of austerity have had a harrowing impact on vulnerable families in Scotland

  • Families’ needs are escalating while support services are diminishing, new research reveals
  • Children’s charities call on Scottish Government to invest in family support without delay

Years of austerity have had a harrowing impact on vulnerable families in Scotland with some now facing destitution, reveals NSPCC Scotland and Barnardo’s Scotland research published today.

The report, Challenges from the Frontline – Revisited, highlights the devastating impact of the rollout of welfare reform on children and their families and the effects of local government funding cuts on the support available to them.

The research, a snapshot of life before Covid-19, describes rising need in the face of lessening resource, with some families struggling to obtain adequate food, secure housing and basic necessities. Despite long-standing commitment by the Scottish Government to early intervention and parenting support, the research found that too many families were coming to services already at crisis point.

Service managers told researchers that welfare reform had financially punished a whole section of the population.

One said: “…because so many of our families are on universal credit, that does not allow them to have a standard of living that meets the needs of those adults and children within the household. It simply does not.”

Another said: “It’s the poverty and disadvantage that we see now. It was always there, but it’s certainly exacerbated by the welfare reform over the past few years. The rise of foodbanks here is massive. Families use them on a regular basis and you can see that, families who come to us and are really struggling.”

NSPCC Scotland and Barnardo’s Scotland are now calling on the Scottish Government to press ahead, as a matter of urgency, with the Independent Care Review’s vision of making intensive family support available to all who need it.

The review’s Promise report sets out a blueprint of how this should be done.

The children’s charities also say the Scottish Government must articulate a clear vision for family income in Scotland, and set out how – within the current levers available – it will ensure that all families have enough money to live with dignity.

Today’s report compares findings from research carried out with family support services in Scotland in 2013 and 2019. It concludes that in the intervening period severe hardship has affected parents’ mental health and family relationships, so that those now being referred have more complex difficulties and greater needs.

This is amid a landscape of local authorities and other public bodies continuing to face financial challenges. The research found evidence of family support services closing or being offered on a far more limited basis than had been the case in 2013.

Matt Forde, NSPCC Scotland head of service, said: “Our research reveals that families were facing destitution, isolation and mental health struggles before the Covid-19 pandemic began.

“We found that against a backdrop of years of austerity there was escalating need for help from families who were struggling with more complex problems, being met with less support than before.

“We know that adverse and traumatic experiences in childhood can have a profound impact on a person’s life.

“And it is crucial this unacceptable situation, now compounded by the Covid-19 crisis, is addressed with a matter of urgency.”

Martin Crewe, Director of Barnardo’s Scotland, said: “Supporting vulnerable families mitigates social inequality and improves children’s life opportunities.

“The Coronavirus crisis provides a huge opportunity to make meaningful, sustainable, transformative change. We need to harness the desire to do things differently, to reach out to families with a strengthened social safety net to prevent longer term difficulties developing in young people’s lives.

“The Independent Care Review’s Promise has given us a blueprint for family support and    we must deliver on this without delay.”

challenges-frontline-revisited-adversities-scotlandDownload

One million Scots on precipice of poverty

One in six live ‘precarious and insecure’ lives

Scotland must show “bolder ambition” if it is to meet targets for tackling child poverty, a new report by the Joesph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) has warned.

Over one million Scots – one in six people – are living ‘precarious and insecure’ lives, according to JRF’s latest Poverty in Scotland annual report – and the situation is likely to become even more critical with the ongoing cornavirus and the imminent end of the furlough scheme this month.

Child poverty now stands at 24% – almost one in four of our children now lives in poverty. The Scottish Government’s target is to reduce this figure to 18% or less by 2023 – 24 -but unless there is radical action this target is unlikely to be met.

JRF’s associate director for Scotland Jim McCormick, who also chaired Edinburgh’s Poverty Commission, said we are at a “crucial moment”.

“The decisions we make will determine whether we reach our ambitious child poverty targets by the middle of the next parliament,” he said. “As the shape of our economy changes, it is vital to do all we can to protect people’s jobs, homes and living standards, so more families are not pulled into poverty.”

The JRF report calls on the Scottish Government to be more ambitious.

A Scottish Government spokesperson said the government is ‘absolutely committed’ to tackling child poverty and said initiatives including Scottish Child Payments, Best Start Grants and Best Start Foods are evidence of this. The spokesperson called for the UK Government to match Scotland’s ambition.

poverty_in_scotland_2020Download

Give poor kids a chance

Education Vice Convener Cllr Alison Dickie writes about the pressing issue of child poverty in Edinburgh:

Let’s talk about stigma, even ‘poor kids’ and how it fuels inequality.

Posh pickles and peppered crackers.  Years ago, as a young family down Glasgow way, we made some kind soul feel good when they gifted us an exotic hamper.  At the time, I remember thinking that it must have been worth about £50, money that could have bought the school trousers our sons needed. 

This, and the wider experience of being worried about the next penny, our reliance on housing benefit, and the debt that became a problem, has given me some understanding about the complexity of poverty today.

Lockdown, and its significant impact on lives, has helped many others better understand how we can be just one life change or support network away from becoming financially vulnerable.

We live in an affluent city but there’s deep inequality, where 23% of our children live in poverty – as high as one in three in some areas.  And these children and families struggle to get the smallest and most basic of items, never mind homes in this city of shocking rents and house prices.  Contrary to popular opinion, 66% of these children come from families where at least one parent works.

In my own classrooms, there was the period stained skirt not to be forgotten, and the PE kit that was never coming out that wash. 

And as Vice Convener of Education, I still remember the pupil who shared her family’s shame of walking through the streets to their homeless accommodation, bin bags of belongings clutched in their hands.

Pickled gifts are nice and food provision is vital, but they won’t end child poverty.  And neither will a mindset that continues to see the deficit of ‘poories’ and the ‘vulnerable’, rather than the strengths that every child and their family can bring to the future of our city if we get alongside them for the long haul.

Sometimes we recreate inequality.  Think of the bulging schools we deem the best, often mistaking levels of academic performance for loaded advantage, or our hesitancy to sit down, learn and work with anyone. 

What too of the postcodes judged, or those loud, already empowered, voices who too heavily influence decisions?  And those annual SQA results, the prominence given to them when we say we equally value the strengths and qualifications of every young person?

Next week, the Edinburgh Poverty Commission will launch its findings, and their report will inform the Council’s second Child Poverty Action Plan. 

Education, in its most holistic sense, is key, from the equity framework that increasingly informs practice across our schools, to helping families find the benefits to which they are entitled through income maximisation, and the mentoring and wraparound support too. 

This, and building a stigma-free environment that supports everyone, from a focus on nurture and wellbeing, to digital devices for all, and the roll out of 1140 early years places to help families back to work. 

So, ‘All I am saying, is give every child a chance!’

Community Wealth Building: Zoom event

Dear Colleagues

Please find attached a zoom invitation to a meeting looking at Community Wealth Building.

The meeting will be hosted by Lesley Hinds, Chair of North Edinburgh Arts, with guest speaker Councillor Joe Cullinane, Leader of North Ayrshire Council. Please find attached a link to North Ayrshire’s Community Wealth Building strategy for information prior to the discussion.

https://www.north-ayrshire.gov.uk/Documents/nac-cwb-strategy-brochure.pdf

I this is of interest, and that you will be able to join the discussion on the 22nd. No registration is needed, simply use the link in the attachment, however it would be useful if you can reply to me in advance if you are going to attend to give me an idea of numbers.

Yours sincerely

Kate Wimpress / Director

North Edinburgh Arts, 15a Pennywell Court, EH4 4TZ        

NEA North Edinburgh Arts is inviting you to a Community Wealth Building meeting, by Zoom.

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/9661004253

Meeting ID: 966 100 4253

The long shadow of deprivation

Research highlights England’s local councils with the lowest social mobility opportunities

The effect of deprivation in dozens of English local authorities is now so persistent that some families face being locked into disadvantage for generations unless the right action is taken, a new report shows today.

In the most detailed study of regional social mobility ever conducted in the UK, the report from the Social Mobility Commission identifies local councils with the worst and the best social mobility in England.

In the “coldest spots” those from disadvantaged backgrounds, entitled to free school meals, have little chance of making a better life for themselves or their children. They also earn much less than their more affluent peers.

These areas, which range across England, include:

  • Chiltern
  • Bradford
  • Thanet
  • Bolton
  • Wolverhampton
  • Kingston-upon-Hull
  • Fenland
  • Mansfield
  • Walsall
  • Gateshead
  • Kirklees
  • St Helens
  • Dudley
  • Bolton
  • Wigan

Individuals aged 28 from disadvantaged families in these councils earn on average just over half the amount of those from similar backgrounds in the most mobile areas. They also earn much less than those of the same age from more affluent families living nearby.

Steven Cooper, interim co-chair of the commission said: “These findings are very challenging. They tell a story of deep unfairness, determined by where you grow up. It is not a story of north versus south or urban versus rural; this is a story of local areas side by side with vastly different outcomes for the disadvantaged sons growing up there.“

Areas with high social mobility, where those from poorer backgrounds earn more and the pay gap with those from affluent families is smaller include:

  • Forest Heath
  • West Oxfordshire
  • South Derbyshire
  • Cherwell
  • Kingston upon Thames
  • South Gloucestershire
  • Tower Hamlets
  • North Hertfordshire
  • Eden

The research, carried out by the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) and UCL Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities (CEPEO), links educational data and HMRC earnings for the first time to identify young sons from disadvantaged families – those entitled to free school meals. The sons who were born between 1986 and 1988 and went to state schools in England, were followed from aged 16 to 28.

The results, covering around 320 local councils in England and 800,000 young adults, show a postcode lottery for disadvantaged people. In areas with high social mobility, disadvantaged young adults earn twice as much as those with similar backgrounds in areas with low social mobility – on average, over £20,000 compared with under £10,000. Annual earnings from this group range from £6,900 (Chiltern) to £24,600 (Uttlesford).

Councils with the lowest earnings for disadvantaged individuals include:

  • Bradford
  • Hyndburn
  • Gateshead
  • Thanet

But they also include:

  • West Devon
  • Sheffield
  • Malvern Hills
  • Kensington and Chelsea.

Those with the highest earnings include:

  • Broxbourne
  • East Hertfordshire
  • Forest Heath
  • Havering
  • Uttlesford
  • Wokingham

But those from poor backgrounds also face unfairness on their doorstep. Pay gaps between the most and least deprived individuals in local authorities with the poorest social mobility are 2.5 times higher than in areas of high social mobility.

Education, often blamed for social mobility differences, is only part of the answer. In areas with high social mobility, gaps in educational achievement account for almost the entire pay difference between the most and least advantaged sons. On average it accounts for 80% of the difference.

However, in local authorities where social mobility is low it is much harder to escape deprivation. In such areas, up to 33% of the pay gap between the highest and lowest earners is down to non-education factors, like local labour markets and family background.

Disadvantaged workers are restricted by factors including limited social networks (fewer internships); inability to move to more prosperous areas; limited or no financial support from family; less resilience to economic turbulence due to previous crisis such as 2008 financial crash and less developed soft skills.

The commission is now urging regional and community leaders to use the findings to help draw up tailored, sustained, local programmes to boost social mobility, building on the approach in some Opportunity Areas.

The commission will also ask the government to extend its current Opportunity Areas programme – which gives support to 12 councils – to include several more authorities identified as the areas with the most entrenched disadvantage.

Professor Lindsey Macmillan, Director of CEPEO at UCL and Research Fellow at IFS said: “This new evidence highlights the need for a joined up-approach across government, third sector organisations, and employers.

“The education system alone cannot tackle this postcode lottery – a strategy that considers the entire life experience, from birth through to adulthood, is crucial to ensuring fairer life chances for all.”

Laura van der Erve, Research Economist at IFS and co-author of the report, said: “Not only do children from disadvantaged backgrounds have considerably lower school attainment and lower adult earnings than their peers from more affluent backgrounds, we also find large differences in the outcomes of children from disadvantaged backgrounds across the country.

“This highlights that children’s opportunities in England are still defined by both the family they were born into and the area they grew up in.”

Key findings

  • Social mobility in England is a postcode lottery, with large differences across areas in both the adult pay of disadvantaged adults, and the size of the pay gap for those from deprived families, relative to those from affluent families.
  • Disadvantaged young adults in areas with high social mobility can earn twice as much as their counterparts in areas where it is low – over £20,000 compared with under £10,000
  • Pay gaps between deprived and affluent young adults in areas with low social mobility are 2.5 times larger than those in areas with high social mobility.
  • In areas of low social mobility, up to 33% of the pay gap is driven by family background and local market factors, over and beyond educational achievement.
  • Characteristics of the coldest spots: fewer professional and managerial occupations; fewer outstanding schools; higher levels of deprivation and moderate population density.

The Social Mobility Commission is an independent advisory non-departmental public body established under the Life Chances Act 2010 as modified by the Welfare Reform and Work Act 2016. It has a duty to assess progress in improving social mobility in the UK and to promote social mobility in England.

New report highlights the impact of Covid-19 on affordable credit providers

New research by Community Finance Solutions (CFS) at the University of Salford and Carnegie UK Trust has highlighted the impact that COVID-19 is having on affordable credit providers across England, Scotland and Wales. 

Fear and Loaning – The Impact of Covid-19 on affordable credit providers serving financially vulnerable customers was published yesterday.

More than 60 Credit Unions and Community Development Finance Institutions (CDFIs) in England, Scotland and Wales took part in the study, which asked about the impact of Covid-19 on demand; lending volume; income; liquidity; viability, and confidence.

They reported a decline in the number of people seeking loans and a reduction in the size of loans being sought; a rise in the number of customers seeking payment holidays on their loans; and an increase in saving deposits.

Providers have furloughed staff and closed branches to help them deal with the impact of the pandemic. Some have adapted their business models, increasing the use of digital tools and introducing new products.

Those providers with the smallest average loan amounts (under £1,000) appear to have been most adversely affected by Covid-19, with a higher likelihood of furloughing staff, closing branches and of using government support schemes.

They are also less confident and more likely to forecast breaches of regulatory ratios or covenants and inability to meet short-term costs. These providers are the most likely to serve the most vulnerable and financially excluded.

There are likely to be a range of complex reasons behind the drop in the demand for credit. Positively, it may be because people have had support through other channels set up in response to the pandemic, such as the Job Retention Scheme or an interest free overdraft.

There have also been fewer opportunities for consumption during the crisis. Alternatively, some people may have not sought a loan from an affordable credit provider because their financial position has worsened and they may have to take other action, such as borrowing from family and friends or going without an important purchase.

There is concern that household finances will come under severe pressure as financial support interventions introduced in response to COVID-19 taper off and unemployment rises.

Affordable credit providers have a crucial role to play in supporting families through these difficult times, but this new research by the Trust and CFS shows that these providers are themselves vulnerable to the pandemic.

It will be essential that the affordable credit sector is supported to sustain and scale during this challenging period, so that it is able to support families and communities in the months ahead.

The report is available here.

Pål Vik, Director, Community Finance Solutions said: “This research report finds that the short-term effects of Covid-19 are more acutely felt by those lenders targeting low-income consumers.

“The findings underline the needs for ongoing research and data collection to inform interventions to preserve the access to affordable credit for those that need it the most.”

Sarah Davidson, Chief Executive, Carnegie UK Trust said: “Affordable credit providers have a vital role to play in helping disadvantaged communities cope with Covid-19 and rebuild resilience afterwards.

“This research highlights the need to continue to monitor the impact of the pandemic on affordable credit providers, and for the sector to receive the support that it needs to sustain and scale, ensuring that it can support those who are financially vulnerable.”

Sasha Romanovich, CEO, Fair4All Finance said: “Many more people in the UK will find themselves in vulnerable circumstances and the need for fair and affordable credit is likely to grow significantly over the coming months, not least as some high cost providers fail or withdraw from the UK market place.

“Fair4All Finance have a role as a catalyst to create a thriving and sustainable affordable credit sector, and we welcome this research.”

Michael Sheen, actor and social activist said: “It is vital that affordable lenders come through the current stage of the crisis to be able to support financially vulnerable consumers in the medium to long term.

“We need all those people with a voice – councils, housing associations, the third sector and the media – to highlight to those borrowers that often need access to small sums of money that fair credit is out there, at a fair price. ”

The Carnegie UK Trust has also recently published The 10% solution: How to make affordable credit more available to those who need it most as a short and full report.

This research examines the levels of high cost credit use and the provision of affordable credit across seven Scottish local authorities, reveals the gap between demand and appropriate supply, and puts forward a range of interventions available to local authorities that can support affordable credit providers and make a significant difference to the lives of low income individuals in their areas.

Increasing the market penetration of affordable credit providers in these seven areas to 10% of demand could save low income households nearly £5m a year.

While the research fieldwork for this report took place before the COVID-19 pandemic, it demonstrates the need for affordable credit, and the importance of supporting a resilient sector which can provide for financially vulnerable consumers in the years ahead.

Families to be alerted to additional financial support

A first for social security in Scotland

The Scottish Government is to actively inform families that they may be eligible for Best Start Foods and the Best Start Grant.

Information obtained from DWP and HMRC will allow Social Security Scotland to identify people who are on certain benefits or tax credits and have children of the right age. Social Security Scotland will then write to an estimated 22,000 families before the end of August inviting them to apply.

The letters are aimed at increasing take up of all financial support families are entitled to as part of the Scottish Government’s benefit take-up strategy and the wider co-ordinated approach to helping families who are under even more financial pressure due to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic.

This important new proactive approach to maximising benefit uptake is a first for social security in Scotland.

Families already receiving qualifying UK benefits and tax credits will receive these invites. Those who currently don’t receive such support but think that they may be eligible are still encouraged to find out if they too are entitled to access Scottish benefits.

Social Security Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said: “Social security is a human right and an investment in the people of Scotland. Encouraging individuals to claim the financial assistance they are entitled to is a duty of government and a social responsibility. We are committed to making sure that people get all of the money that they are entitled to – to help maximise incomes and tackle poverty.

“The economic impacts of the pandemic are pushing thousands of people further into hardship so it’s important families are informed about the support available to them.

“This unique direct marketing of benefits complements the Scottish Government’s wider efforts to help parents during this challenging time. We must do all that we can to eradicate child poverty and make Scotland the best place in the world to grow up.”

Councils REDUCE Welfare Fund payments during pandemic, says ECAP

Edinburgh Coalition Against Poverty has denounced Scottish councils for not spending the money given to them by the Scottish Government to disburse to needy people via the Scottish Welfare Fund.

In response to the Covid-19 emergency the Scottish government added £45 million to the Scottish Welfare Fund, more than doubling its funding. But despite this, local councils – who administer the Fund – are actually paying out LESS in grants to needy applicants than they did during the same period last year!

The Scottish Welfare Fund (SWF) supports people in real need, and the government promised that by boosting the fund Councils would have greater flexibility in making SWF payments “ to ensure they can fully support people in financial crisis, including workers in the ‘gig economy’.

But Scottish Government figures reveal that while in April and May 2019 Councils disbursed a total of over £6.5 million in SWF grants, in April and May 2020 less than £6 million was paid out to needy people.

Edinburgh Coalition Against Poverty (ECAP) say: “It’s a disgrace – despite having more than twice as much money to make grants, and despite soaring need, at the height of the pandemic Scottish local authorities have actually REDUCED the SWF grants.”

Shirley Anne-Somerville, Cabinet Secretary for Social Security and Older People, stated in the Scottish Parliament on 27/3/20 that the guidelines normally limiting crisis grants to 3 per year were scrapped.

But an investigation by ECAP has revealed that virtually every Scottish local authority still declares on its website that Crisis Grants are normally restricted to three per year. The Highland Council website even declares : “You should not apply for a Crisis Grant if you have already had three crisis grants or awards made to you in the last 12 months”.

Wrongly Refused

One applicant in Edinburgh, applying for a Crisis Grant during the pandemic, was wrongly told that they could not be awarded a Grant because they had already had three grants in the last 12 months.

When ECAP challenged and denounced this as wrong, the City of Edinburgh Council then did pay the applicant a Crisis Grant.

ECAP say: “ How many applicants are being wrongly refused Grants? And how many people are being put off applying by Councils wrongly stating that the Crisis Grant limits still stand? This denial of support to people in need is unacceptable.”

In a statement, ECAP insist: “ The Councils in Scotland must pay out the extra cash they have been given as grants to people in need. Councils must make clear the 3 Crisis Grants per year limit is scrapped and make payments accordingly.

“And the Scottish Government should tell local authorities they must widely publicise the extra support available, massively increase payments, and implement the new rules ending the restriction on Crisis Grant payments.”

More detailed article at http://edinburghagainstpoverty.org.uk/?p=2783

The Hunger Virus

More people could die as a result of hunger linked to COVID-19 than could die from the disease, Oxfam warns in a new report published today.

The report, The Hunger Virus, reveals how an estimated 122 million more people could be pushed to the brink of starvation this year as a result of the social and economic fallout from the pandemic including through mass unemployment, disruption to food production and supplies, and declining aid.

This equates to as many as 12,000 people dying every day while the global mortality rate for COVID-19 reached a peak of 10,000 deaths per day in April 2020.

Eight of the largest food and beverage companies in the world have paid out over $18 billion to their shareholders since the start of 2020 – more than 10 times the funding required for food and agriculture assistance to the most vulnerable communities in the UN COVID-19 humanitarian appeal.

Danny Sriskandarajah, Chief Executive of Oxfam GB, said: “The knock-on impacts of COVID-19 are far more widespread than the virus itself, pushing millions of the world’s poorest people deeper into hunger and poverty.

“It is vital governments contain the spread of this deadly disease, but they must also prevent it killing as many – if not more – people from hunger.

“Governments can save lives now by funding the UN COVID-19 appeal and supporting the call for a global ceasefire to end conflict in order to tackle the pandemic. The UK could make a real difference by championing debt cancellation at the G20 finance ministers meeting next week to pay for social protection measures such as cash grants to help people survive.

“For many people COVID-19 comes as a crisis on top of a crisis. To break the cycle of hunger, governments must build fairer and more sustainable food systems that ensure small-scale producers and workers earn a living wage.”

The report reveals the world’s ten worst hunger ‘hotspots’, including Afghanistan, Syria and South Sudan where the food crisis is most severe and getting worse as a result of the pandemic. It also highlights emerging epicentres of hunger – middle income countries such as India, South Africa, and Brazil – where millions of people who were barely managing have been tipped over the edge by the pandemic.

For example:

  • Yemen: Remittances dropped by 80 percent – or $253 million – in the first four months of 2020 as a result of mass job losses across the Gulf. Borders and supply route closures have led to food shortages and food price spikes in a country that imports 90 percent of its food.
  • Afghanistan: Border closures have hit food supplies and the economic downturn in neighbouring Iran has caused a drop in remittances. The number of people on the brink of famine has risen sharply from 2.5 million in September 2019 to 3.5 million in May 2020.
  • India: Travel restrictions left farmers without vital migrant labour at the peak of the harvest season, forcing many to leave their crops in the field to rot. Traders have also been unable to reach tribal communities during the peak harvest season for forest products, depriving up to 100 million people of their main source of income.

Women, and women-headed households, are more likely to go hungry despite the crucial role they play as food producers and workers.

They make up a large proportion of already vulnerable groups, such as informal workers, that have been hit hard by the economic fallout of the pandemic and have also borne the brunt of a dramatic increase in unpaid care work as a result of school closures and family illness.

Kadidia Diallo, a female milk producer in Burkina Faso, said: “COVID-19 is causing us a lot of harm. Giving my children something to eat in the morning has become difficult.

“We are totally dependent on the sale of milk, and with the closure of the market we can’t sell the milk anymore. If we don’t sell milk, we don’t eat.”

Since the pandemic began, Oxfam has helped 4.5 million of the world’s most vulnerable people with food aid and clean water, working together with over 344 partners across 62 countries. The international agency aims to reach a total of 14 million people by raising a further $113m.

Vulnerable still struggling to get food as Which? calls for urgent action

Which? is calling for action to help the most vulnerable after it found that more than a quarter could be at risk of going hungry because they have faced difficulty accessing basic food and essential groceries.

With shielding measures due to end soon in some parts of the UK, the consumer champion is calling on the UK’s four governments to extend free food parcels and other support for those who need it, to avoid millions of people being left behind if support is suddenly withdrawn.

Months into lockdown, Which? has found huge inconsistencies across the four nations with many people still finding the current system chaotic and overly complicated. 

Which? heard reports of care home workers forced to queue in busy supermarkets several times a day for basics like bread and milk – risking further spread of the virus – because they could not secure the delivery slots that they needed to provide for their residents.

Other concerning reports included a 93-year-old lady who had to wait 11 weeks for her first food parcel despite registering in week one and a 71-year-old with shingles who had to wait a month between supermarket click and collect slots.

The new research from Which? found that more than one in four (28%) vulnerable people across the UK had faced difficulty getting the food provision they needed in the week before they were surveyed (from 29th May to 17th June).

Which? found that the group of people struggling the most to get vital groceries were those who identified as being situationally vulnerable, meaning they are not at clinically increased risk from coronavirus but still require help accessing food because they are visually impaired or have learning difficulties, for example.

In the UK two in five (40%) situationally vulnerable people reported having difficulties getting essentials in the week prior to being surveyed, however, across the home nations, Which? found an alarmingly mixed picture. 

In Wales and Scotland, this number rose to nearly half (47% and 46% respectively), compared to almost two in five (38%) in Northern Ireland and more than a quarter (27%) in England. 

Even among the shielded group – those who are the most high-risk to coronavirus and for whom the most help, including priority supermarket delivery slots and food parcels, has been offered – Which? found that there was still a very high proportion of people facing difficulty getting the food and essentials needed in the week they were surveyed.

This figure was highest in England where a third (33%) of those shielding had struggled, while three in 10 (31%) in Northern Ireland, over a quarter in Scotland (27%) and a quarter in Wales (25%) also faced difficulties.

Those who were previously told to self-isolate because they are over 70, pregnant or otherwise considered clinically vulnerable had had the fewest problems getting food in the last week according to Which?’s survey. A fifth (20%), however, did struggle.

Officials say changes to the shielding guidance will only happen if the rate of community transmission remains low, but the governments in both England and Northern Ireland have said that free essential food boxes will stop being delivered at the end of July.

In both of these nations, those considered high-risk will still qualify for priority online supermarket delivery slots as well as being offered help with medicine deliveries and getting to medical appointments.

Which? is concerned that while the easing of lockdown restrictions may make life easier for people who are comfortable with and able to go into shops again, there is still a huge risk that many of those who have already been struggling will now be cut further adrift as they may still not be able to leave their homes to get groceries – especially if it involves long queues, taking a taxi or using public transport.

Which? is calling for access to free food boxes, priority delivery slots and other relevant assistance to be made available for as long as medical advice or practical restrictions, such as social distancing, are in place. The help should be extended to include not only the most-high risk but also those who are situationally vulnerable and have so far been sidelined.

This would mean that central and local governments will need to accurately assess and identify which consumers remain vulnerable so that they can also be given access to appropriate support such as priority supermarket delivery slots or local food provision through other means.

Sue Davies, Head of Consumer Protection and Food Policy at Which?, said: “It is a real concern that months into lockdown, the current system of food provision is still not working for so many of those who need it the most. 

“Some people could now be looking at a cliff edge where shielding restrictions are lifted and they are left to fend for themselves, cut off from outside help in getting essential groceries.

“Which? is now calling for the UK’s four governments to work with the food industry, local authorities and charities to ensure a longer-term plan for supporting all of those who are at risk and need support is in place by the end of July, so that no vulnerable person faces difficulties in accessing the basic food supplies they need.”