Memoranda submitted by The Poverty Alliance
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Poverty Alliance welcomes the opportunity
to respond to the Scottish Affairs Committee inquiry into Poverty
in Scotland. The Poverty Alliance is an independent non-political,
voluntary organisation with charitable status that acts as the
national anti-poverty network in Scotland. We have over 100 members
and a contact network of more than 600 groups and individuals.
The main aim of the Alliance is to help tackle poverty. In order
to achieve this aim we carry out a range of activities to deliver
the following objectives:
— To empower people living in poverty
to combat poverty on their own behalf.
— To build the capacity of agencies
to work effectively with people who are seeking to combat poverty
on their own behalf.
— To support the development of social
policies which promote social justice and combat poverty.
The Alliance currently receives core funding
from the Scottish Executive. In addition funding is also received
from a number of Scottish Local Authorities and charitable trusts
and foundations. Further information regarding the work of the
Alliance can be found on our website at www.povertyalliance.org
and in our annual report 2005-06.
1.2 This response is significantly informed
by the findings of the Get Heard project in Scotland. This
project sought to ensure that the voices of people with experience
of poverty were heard in the development of the National Action
Plan on Social Inclusion 2006-08. Across the UK the Get Heard
project was responsible for over 140 workshops looking at what
is and is not working in relation to current social inclusion
policies and what needs to change. The UK report can be accessed
at the UK Coalition Against Poverty's website: www.ukcap.org/getheard.
A full report[1]
from the 50 Scottish Get Heard workshops was recently published
by the Poverty Alliance and will be submitted to the Committee
as part of this inquiry.
2. WHAT IS
POVERTY?
2.1 Definitions of poverty are more than
merely technical issues of interest only to academics. In many
ways the definition we adopt can determine the way that we conceptualise
poverty and will therefore have a significant bearing on the solutions
that are proposed. Much has been written on how best to define
poverty and there has been significant progress in recent years
in the UK in developing new measures with which to track progress
in tackling poverty. We would recommend that as part of their
deliberations, the Committee consider Professor Ruth Lister's
recent publication that deals with the question of defining poverty.[2]
We would also note that the terms of the debate have changed little
since the Committee conducted its first inquiry in 2000, and much
that was in the original report still stands.
2.2 As Professor Lister shows, recent debates
regarding the definition of poverty have been dominated by the
absolute and relative dichotomy. Absolute poverty refers to the
level of resources required to meet basic physical needs. We would
reject a "subsistence" notion of poverty. Rather, we
would adopt a "relative" definition of poverty that
locates the experience within the society that an individual lives.
Lister refers to Peter Townsend when defining relative poverty:
"Individuals, families and groups in the
population can be said to be in poverty when they lack the resources
to obtain the types of diet, participate in the activities and
amenities which are customary, or are at least widely encouraged
and approved, in the societies to which they belong."[3]
2.3 Any definition of poverty must therefore
begin with income (resources), but we cannot consider that income
on its own. Crucially, our definition and understanding of poverty
must include the extent to which individuals are able to participate
in society.
2.4 This approach is one that is reflected in
the comments and experience of those taking part in the Get
Heard project:
"poverty is fundamentally about living on
a low income: it is about having to think twice about whether
you can afford to send a child to the pictures with her friends;
it is about being forced to decide between a school trip and healthier
food, about figuring out where the next meal is going to come
from when all you have is a couple of pounds."[4]
2.5 Any definition of poverty must reflect
the multidimensional nature of the phenomena: poverty is not simply
about a low income, it is also about the impact that it has on
an individual's ability to participate in society. Such a broad
definition of poverty allows us to look at a range of possibilities
when considering action to tackle poverty. Whilst ensuring that
people have an adequate income will be at the heart of any anti-poverty
strategy, such a such must also look at how people access the
labour market, the kinds of services they are able to call upon,
the ability to take part in cultural activities.
2.6 The UK Government's new approach to
measuring child poverty goes some way towards integrating a relative
definition of poverty into the measure.[5]
By combining measures of relative and "absolute" low
income with a measure of material deprivation, the new approach
highlights the impact that living on a low income has on individuals
and families. We have welcomed this new approach and would like
to see it applied to all groups in society. The UK Government
has been ambitious in setting targets and developing new measures
for child poverty, we would like to see similar commitments and
measures put in place for pensioners and adults with and without
children.
3. THE EXTENT
OF POVERTY
IN SCOTLAND
3.1 Just as there has been progress in the
ways in which we conceptualise and measure poverty in recent years,
there have also been significant improvements in the data available
to track progress in tackling poverty and the impact of poverty.
We will not attempt to cover this area in detail, but will only
highlight a few key indicators.
3.2 Much attention has been given to the
UK Government's commitment to eradicating child poverty. There
has been real progress made in Scotland in this respect. The decline
in child poverty in Scotland has been particularly notable, falling
from 33% to 23% between 1996-97 and 2004-05, a fall of some 25%.
This decline has been greater than for Great Britain as a whole
where child poverty has gone from 33% to 27%, a fall of 17%.[6]
These falls are both welcomed and the UK Government and Scottish
Executive should be congratulated in making and maintaining these
commitments. In explaining the difference between Scotland and
GB we would like to be able to point to clear reasons why the
fall has been greater in Scotland, but we are unable. As we have
stated previously,[7]
it is crucial that we understand the reasons for this differential,
particularly given the difficulty that is likely to be encountered
in maintaining this progress in the future. We hope that the Committee's
inquiry may help to shed some light on the question.
3.3 The extent of poverty amongst other
groups in society has also fallen, both amongst adults and pensioners.
In particular, the proportion of pensioners living in low-income
households in Scotland has fallen from 30% in 1996-97 to 16% in
2004-05. In adult households the fall has been less dramatic,
from 20% to 18% over the same period.[8]
3.4 To summarise, child poverty and pensioner
poverty have fallen significantly in recent years. It must be
of some concern that the decline in adult households in low income
has been less dramatic, indeed the figures could be seen as roughly
static. More alarming is the situation with regard to adults without
children. Figures for 2004-05 have not been published but in 2003-04
it was clear that the risk of living in a low income household
had not declined for single and adult couples without children,
and if anything had in fact increased.[9]
This is an issue that has, we believe, been studiously avoided
by policy makers north and south of the border.
3.5 It should also be noted that despite
some marked improvement, lone parents are more likely to live
on low incomes. People with disabilities are also more likely
to be living on low incomes. It is with some concern that we note
that there is still a real problem in identifying the proportion
of people in Black and Ethnic Minority (BME) communities who are
living in poverty. In any demographic group, women are still more
likely to live in poverty.
4. CAUSES OF
POVERTY IN
SCOTLAND
4.1 The causes of poverty are many, and
just as there is no single policy solution to such a complex interrelated
set of problems, there is no single cause. The discussion of the
causes of poverty that were discussed in the Committee's original
inquiry still stand: the lack of employment, low paid employment,
poor health, lower educational attainment, low benefit rates,
inadequate pensions, insecure employment, lack of access to services,
etc. This list still stands and we would perhaps add to it by
noting the impact of the council tax as a cause of poverty, particularly
amongst those who are not eligible for Council Tax Benefit eg
low paid workers.
4.2 In any discussion of the causes of poverty
we would encourage the Committee to focus on the structural
causes, rather than locating causes with individual behaviours.
Much has been written over the last 10 years about the "rights
and responsibilities" agenda that has been pursued by the
Government in relation to anti-poverty policy. It is our experience,
reinforced by the evidence gathered through Get Heard, that people
are more than willing to fulfil their responsibility to lead lives
free from poverty. Their ability to do so, however, is more often
than not undermined by lack of jobs, low paid work, low levels
of benefits, etc.
5. THE IMPACT
OF GOVERNMENT
POLICY
5.1 It is not the intention here to look
in any depth at the impact of the range of Government policies
on poverty and social exclusion. Since the Committee conducted
the last inquiry into poverty in Scotland the policy field has
become significantly more complex. The Scottish Executive and
Parliament are now well established parts of the policy making
process, with a well developed and in many areas, distinct, policy
agenda from that pursued south of the border. It is, of course,
impossible to consider the actions of the Scottish Executive in
isolation when looking at the impact of anti-poverty or social
inclusion policy. A summary of some of the "highlights"
of anti-poverty policy shows that both make significant contributions
to the fight against poverty:
— The launch of the Scottish Executive's
Social Justice Strategy in 1999 and its subsequent revision and
emergence as the Closing the Opportunity Gap approach in 2004;
— The publication of seven Opportunity
for All reports by the UK Government and the ongoing monitoring
of a wide range of indicators;
— The introduction of a National Minimum
Wage and its annual above inflation increases;
— The implementation of the Scottish
Executive's Central Heating programme and the reduction in fuel
poverty amongst pensioners;
— Free personal care for the elderly
in Scotland;
— The SureStart programme;
— The implementation of the Financial
Inclusion Action Plan by the Scottish Executive and the support
given to credit unions.
5.2 The number and range of initiatives
aimed at tackling poverty and social exclusion in Scotland and
across the UK is impressive. The most recent UK National Action
Plan (NAP) on Social Inclusion 2006-08 gives an indication of
some of the key priorities for the Government and the contribution
that devolved administrations, local authorities, voluntary organisations
and a range of other stakeholders make to the fight against poverty.[10]
However despite the progress that has been made, there remain
significant problems. This final section will consider, in brief,
issues connected to rural poverty, financial inclusion and work
as a route out of poverty.
5.3 The Geography of Poverty: Although
the problems of poverty are clearly more prevalent in urban areas,
the impact of living on a low income in a rural area can be severe.
Central to the experience of rural poverty is access to services.
Issues that emerged through the Get Heard project included access
to transport and the availability of childcare. Poor or inadequate
public transport links in rural areas restricted opportunities
to access paid employment, to visit health centres or GPs, to
access cheaper food at large stores, etc.
5.4 Childcare, seen as essential in order
to allow parents to be able to return to work, was seen by parents
taking part in Get Heard as inaccessible and costly. It would
seem that state support, such as that which has been available
to keep rural post offices open, is required to make child care
a genuine possibility for those living on low incomes in rural
areas.
5.4 Financial Inclusion: Much has
been done in Scotland to address problems associated with over-indebtedness,
financial exclusion and access to credit. Despite this activity,
participants in the Get Heard project in Scotland noted
many times the serious impact that debt has in their lives. Access
to affordable credit was seen as a priority. Where people knew
of their existence, credit unions were seen as a useful resource.
However, it was noted that accessing this kind of credit requires
savings to be made first. High interest forms of credit, from
"catalogues" to loan sharks, are easily accessible and
can provide an instant fix to short term financial problems. As
one participant stated:
"When you have kids and you need things
for them it's easy to forget that you have to pay it back. Once
a week Provident loans come round your door offering £100
on that day, no bother... it's a lifeline, not a fix."
5.5 Social Fund Crisis Loans were not seen
as a solution: they were difficult to access and the levels of
credit available did not significantly contribute to solving the
financial problems that people faced. It is particularly disappointing
to note that this service is still beset with problems. The Social
Fund has the potential to provide an important lifeline to those
on low incomes and to provide an alternative to high interest
forms of lending. We would ask the Committee to restate its original
recommendation that a full review of the Social Fund is carried
out and that this review should consider ways through the Fund
could become more accessible and helpful to those in need.
5.6 Despite some progress many participants
felt that there were barriers in setting up bank accounts. Some
of these barriers were practical and were linked to the withdrawal
of services from some areas. There has been much publicity around
the charging for cash machine services and the impact that this
can have on people living on low incomes. In some cases banks
have agreed to install and support cash machines in areas of disadvantage,
a welcome recognition of their own corporate social responsibility.
We would urge the Committee to consider what pressure can be brought
to bear on banks and other financial institutions in order that
they ensure that a full range of services are available to all
customers.
5.7 Work as a route out of poverty: The
Welfare Reform Agenda: Tackling unemployment and helping people
back into the labour market have been central to anti-poverty
policy in Scotland and the UK since the 1990s. The UK Government
and Scottish Executive have both seen work as "the best route
out of poverty". Coupled with efforts to help people back
into work, an early focus of policy was also to "make work
pay", most notably through the introduction of the National
Minimum Wage. The recent Welfare Reform Bill is the latest step
in the welfare to work agenda. Whilst we agree that for many people,
paid employment can be a successful ladder out of poverty, we
believe that a number of issues have not be given sufficient attention
in the development of the latest proposals. We will summarise
some of these issues very briefly[11]:
5.8 Availability of jobs. It is taken for
granted that there are jobs available for all those who are able
to work. We are very sceptical of this belief. In areas where
poverty is high, jobs are often very scarce. There may be large
numbers of vacancies in the economy, but this does not mean that
these jobs are suitable for those who may be able to return to
work, or that they are located in the areas where they are need,
or that people have the skills to be able to undertake them. Additional
support for people attempting to return to work, whether in the
form of training, job search advice, confidence building etc,
is very welcome and the individually tailored approach is one
that was endorsed by Get Heard participants. However, all
of this support will be wasted is appropriate job opportunities
are not available.
5.9 Quality of jobs: Many of those who are
the subjects of the latest round of welfare reform face significant
barriers in attempting to return to work. Although the minimum
wage has addressed many of the most exploitative pay rates, it
does not on its own lift people out of poverty. Added to the continuing
problem of low pay is the short term, temporary nature of many
jobs. These jobs offer little prospect of a sustained route out
of poverty. A welfare reform programme based on moving people
into jobs at the lower end of the labour market is unlikely to
be successful in addressing poverty. The Committee should consider
the role of the UK Government with regard to job creation in disadvantaged
areas.
5.10 Employer engagement: This is an area
where far more work needs to be carried out. Any welfare to work
strategy must fully consider the question of employer engagement
and employer discrimination. A recent survey referred to by John
Philpott[12]
has shown that most employers are unwilling to employ people with
complex needs such as mental health problem. There is little evidence
to show that Government has seriously considered issue of how
employers are to be encouraged to take on people with complex
needs, particularly in a labour market that is becoming more competitive.
Again, the welfare to work strategy is unlikely to lead to positive
outcomes for unemployed people if the Government does not find
ways of engaging with employers and addressing the discrimination
that many people with complex needs face.
6. CONCLUSIONS
6.1 This response has only touched on some
of the key issues relating to poverty in Scotland. It is clear
that since the last inquiry a good deal of progress has been made
in reducing levels of poverty amongst some groups. However, far
more still needs to be done to create a Scotland that is free
of poverty and social exclusion. The Poverty Alliance looks forward
to contributing additional information to the Committee and awaits
with interest the final conclusions of the inquiry.
Peter Kelly
The Poverty Alliance
October 2006
1 Burnett, L (2006) Dignity shouldn't have to be earned!
Get Heard Scotland Final Report, Poverty Alliance: Glasgow. Back
2
Lister, R (2004) Poverty, Polity Press: Cambridge. Back
3
ibid, p 21. Back
4
Burnett, L (2006) Dignity shouldn't have to be earned! Get Heard
Scotland Final Report, Poverty Alliance: Glasgow, p 44. Back
5
Department for Work and Pensions (2003) Measuring Child Poverty,
DWP: London. Back
6
CPAG (2006) Media Briefing: The Governments Child Poverty Target,
www.cpag.org.uk. All figures in this paper are based on 60% of
median household income after housing costs. Back
7
Kelly, P (2005) Progress in Tackling Poverty? Low Income Households
in Scotland 2004/04, Briefing No 4, Poverty Alliance: Glasgow. Back
8
Scottish Executive (2006) Scottish Households Below Average Income
2004-05, Statistics Publication Notice, 9 March. Back
9
Kelly, P (2005) Progress in Tackling Poverty? Low Income Households
in Scotland 2004/04, Briefing No 4, Poverty Alliance: Glasgow. Back
10
DWP (2006) Working Together: UK National Action Plan on Social
Inclusion 2006-08. Back
11
The Poverty Alliance response to the Welfare Reform Green Paper
will be forwarded to the Committee for their information. Back
12
Philpott, J (2006) "Core Jobless and Welfare Reform",
Scottish Anti Poverty Review, Issue No 3, Poverty Alliance: Glasgow. Back
| 
