Examination of Witnesses (Questions 468
- 479)
TUESDAY 20 MARCH 2007
MR JOHN
DICKIE AND
DR PAUL
DORNAN
Q468 Chairman:
Good afternoon and welcome to our inquiry into poverty in Scotland.
Would you please introduce yourselves for the record.
Mr Dickie: My name is John Dickie,
Head of Child Poverty Action Group in Scotland.
Dr Dornan: I am Paul Dornan, Head
of Policy and Research at Child Poverty Action Group.
Q469 Chairman:
Before we start on the detailed questions, would you like to make
an opening statement?
Mr Dickie: Yes, I suppose just
to give a wee bit of background to what we do and where our evidence
is coming from. We, at CPAG in Scotland, are a fairly small team
of seven people involved in various activities, firstly, trying
to raise awareness of the issue of child poverty, secondly, looking
at influencing policy both at the Scottish Parliament, but also
contributing to influencing policy at Westminster here in the
interests of children and families experiencing poverty, and finally
what most of our staff are involved in doing is providing expert
advice on benefits and tax credits to front-line advisers across
Scotland, sort of training advice, information and support to
ensure that families facing poverty get the full benefit and tax
credit entitlements that they are entitled to. We work closely
with CPAG in London and mirror the kind of activities that CPAG
is involved in. CPAG was established over 40 years ago, so it
is a kind of sobering thought for us as campaigners that 40 years
on we are still here in a situation where nearly a quarter of
Scotland's children are living in poverty, but hopefully sobering
for Members of Parliament as well. I think it is particularly
useful and we very much welcome the fact that the Scottish Affairs
Committee is willing to give this kind of time and interest into
looking at how we can tackle that poverty. I think the timing
is particularly useful in that we will have a new Prime Minister
likely in the summer here at Westminster, but also a new term
of the Scottish Parliament.
Q470 David Mundell:
And a new First Minister.
Mr Dickie: I just said a new Scottish
Parliament, but the make-up of that, I do not know. We also have,
I think, for the first time a real cross-party consensus that
child poverty exists, that it is unacceptable and that it must
be eradicated and eradicated within a generation. It is absolutely
vital that that new Government, at both UK and Scottish level,
understands the policies that are needed to make poverty a thing
of the past and understands the different roles that devolved
and central government need to play if we really are to bring
an end to poverty, so we really hope that the timing of this Committee's
report will play an important role in actually contributing to
an understanding of those policies and the different roles and
the different layers the Government needs to play. Another thing
I would like to flag up is that since we submitted our written
evidence, we have published, in quite a powerful collaboration
with Poverty Alliance, the Scottish Poverty Information Unit at
Glasgow University and the Open University, a book, Poverty
in Scotland, which was just launched a couple of weeks ago
with the First Minister speaking at that event in Scotland. It
lays out in quite stark terms the extent, nature and impact that
poverty has on people across Scotland, it covers not just child
poverty, and it also reinforces some of the key messages and makes
clear some of the key issues that we wanted to raise in our previous
written evidence to the Committee, issues around needing to tackle
the quality of work as well as increasing the numbers of people
in employment, the need to balance an emphasis on work as a route
out of poverty with a need to ensure that we are investing the
right amounts of money in benefits and tax credits to protect
those who for a reason cannot work, that we get the balance right
between policies that target and policies which are provided on
a universal basis, both Westminster policies and devolved policies,
and also that we need to be recognising the underlying role that
inequality plays in driving down the levels of poverty that we
see in Scotland and across the UK. Those messages come out in
the book and we have a copy here for the Committee and we can
send copies to individual members as well.
Q471 Chairman:
Dr Dornan, would you like to say anything?
Dr Dornan: No, I will not add
to what John has just said.
Q472 Chairman:
I am very pleased to note that in your submission you have praised
both the UK Government and the Scottish Executive for their political
will and investment which have led to a reduction in poverty,
so what are those policies of the UK Government and the Scottish
Executive which you think have helped to tackle and alleviate
poverty?
Mr Dickie: Firstly, what has helped
is actually the recognition that poverty exists in Scotland and
across the UK and that it is unacceptable and it needs to be eradicated,
and I do not think we should underestimate the significance of
that as we have not always had governments that have recognised
poverty in that way and not only recognised it, but set quite
specific targets for measuring progress for reducing, and eradicating,
child poverty. We do not think those targets are fast enough or
that they go far enough, but they are ambitious targets and need
to be recognised, and the fact that progress has been sustained
towards those targets is important. I think the other particularly
important thing is that both have contributed to driving a change
in culture perhaps which means that we do have this cross-party
consensus on the importance of ending child poverty. In terms
of specific policies, the UK Government has recognised policies
that have led to rising employment levels, the investment in the
New Deals, increased support to people to enter employment, the
minimum wage, and increasing in-work support through working tax
credits and child tax credit has played an important role in actually
seeing the reductions in child poverty that we have seen, but
also support to families both in work and out of work through
the child tax credit and also the initial increases in child benefit
all played an important role at the UK level in driving the reductions
in child poverty that we have seen. In terms of the Scottish Parliament,
the Scottish Executive, we have seen a complementary focus on
employment and employability, and we have seen, I think, some
quite interesting and specific initiatives about reaching out
to some of those furthest from the labour market through the New
Futures Fund which worked through voluntary sector agencies to
reach some of those who were most disadvantaged and furthest from
the labour market, and it did that by building up trust with those
people. It was very much about voluntary engagement, recognising
just how far people actually had to travel before work was a serious
option for them. More recently, we have seen initiatives around
the Working for Families Programme from the Scottish Executive
which again is about removing barriers particularly to parents
which are stopping them getting back into work and looking at
a whole range of barriers, not just childcare, but a whole range
of issues that people face who have been out of work for a long
time and who maybe face additional barriers to do with health
or what-have-you. In fact in the Scottish Executive they do have
a strategy for tackling poverty generally and they have actually
welcomed outside expertise and involvement in contributing to
ideas for tackling poverty. These are the things which we would
praise and very much welcome and I hope we will have a chance
to get on to say what more we think needs to be done because I
think what we are seeing is that these policies in themselves
have led to real reductions. We have seen 130,000 lifted out of
poverty in Scotland and we should not look away from that, but
the scale of the problem, the level of poverty that was there
means that to really actually bring about an end to child poverty
requires much faster progress and action much further and we are
concerned that, if we just rely on current policy alone, we are
likely to see progress literally grind to a halt and certainly
not go nearly far enough in terms of reaching the target to halve
child poverty and to eradicate child poverty.
Q473 Chairman:
You will be aware that the Government has set the targets to halve
child poverty by 2010 and to end it by 2020, but how realistic
do you think those targets are?
Mr Dickie: I think it is important
that we do see that they are ambitious, but they are realistic.
There is no reason why these targets cannot be achieved with the
political will and investment, but I think what we would argue
is that it would require perhaps more will and perhaps more investment
than we have seen to date, and in fact it will do. If we rely
on current policy, then those targets will not be achieved and
we do need to see a ratcheting up of investment and a focus on
tackling poverty, but it is important to hold on to the fact that
these are achievable targets. Other countries have child poverty
rates that are, if not zero, approaching zero or they certainly
have child poverty rates well below half of what we have in this
country, so there is no reason that the successful, modern economy
or country cannot have child poverty rates that are close to zero
and that they cannot do that by 2020.
Q474 Mr Walker:
Which countries have close to zero?
Mr Dickie: We are looking mostly
at the north European countries, Scandinavian countries, Sweden,
Finland and Denmark which have child poverty rates certainly well
below 10% and some approaching 5%.
Dr Dornan: Yes, in that sort of
order. I think one of the criticisms that is often made, and I
think there was a bit of to-ing and fro-ing in the previous evidence
sessions of this Committee, is around how realistic comparisons
with the northern Europeans, the Scandinavian countries are. I
think we see those as very important aspirational targets to look
at, but, even if you were to look at some of the larger countries
that we more frequently look at, I still think that other countries
do things significantly better than we do, even if you are talking
about the Germanys, the Frances, those sorts of larger countries.
I think the other point I would add is that we often talk about
comparisons in the sense of other countries as things are at the
moment, but there is also the historical comparison within the
UK. If I recall my figures correctly, at the UK level the after-housing
cost and child poverty rate in 1979 was somewhere in the region
of 14% and it sky-rocketed to 33% by about 1998. We have done
much better in the past and I do not see any argument which logically
stands up which says we cannot do it much better than we do at
the moment.
Q475 Mr Walker:
Can we look at our comparators, and I know we are talking about
Scotland, but Scotland is still part of the United Kingdom, for
the moment anyway! I am an English MP, I do not know what goes
on up north of the border most of the time under the covers! We
are the fourth or fifth largest economy in the world, so let us
look at our comparators because we are not Sweden, we are not
Finland and we are probably never going to be Sweden or Finland,
but we are the fourth or fifth largest economy in the world, depending
on which figures you look at, so how do we compare with Germany,
Japan, France and the USA?
Mr Dickie: If we look at Germany
and France, they do substantially better than the UK in terms
of child poverty rates. I do not have the exact figures off the
top of my head of what the child poverty rates are in Germany
and France, but they are substantially ahead. In terms of the
USA, the child poverty rate is worse. They are the one country,
or not the one, but they consistently come out worse than the
UK.
Q476 Mr Walker:
They are worse than us at the moment?
Mr Dickie: Yes, so what this roughly,
I suppose, is telling us is where we should look for ideas, what
kind of policies will work, what kind of government interventions,
policies and employment market we want to promote. The direction
we would say to look at is at those countries where the child
poverty rates are a lot lower, and that is not to say that you
can take the model of the country and implant it completely because
obviously the history and the nature of different countries will
be different, but in terms of where we look to for lessons and
approaches, then I think it makes sense to look to the Scandinavian
countries.
Dr Dornan: One of the issues which
dominated the press headlines at least a couple of weeks ago was
the UNICEF report on the well-being of children which profiled
a series of countries and looked at conditions of various, including
measures like income poverty, but various other measures as well.
I think John is absolutely right to highlight the difference between
where you look for examples because we consistently look often
to English-speaking, Anglo-Saxon countries, Australia and America,
and those countries were scoring consistently badly, as we were,
across a range of different indicators. The northern Europeans,
not just the Scandinavian countries incidentally, but I think,
if I remember rightly, Holland seemed to do quite well, I am not
quite sure why, but it did seem to do quite well, and I think
those are the sorts of examples that we would feel are very important
to look at. Indeed, if what we do is we narrow our own ambition
by saying, "Well, this will always be bad and we must look
to countries which also face very significant problems and poor
child well-being", then we narrow our own opportunities actually
to look at what else does work in those other countries. I accept
the point entirely that they are not pure comparators, but I do
not think that some of the other ones which fly around in the
debate, Japan and France, I do not think they are pure comparators
either, and I would not want to narrow our ambition by saying
we only have to look at certain examples.
Q477 Mr Walker:
A lot of it is tied up in the social-political model and the UK
has a completely different social-political model, it seems, than
Sweden, Finland and Norway have. I do not see any political party
on the horizon that would change that significantly, the model
we have. As you know, the main political parties are coalescing
around the centre ground and the debate over taxation is really
at the margins, and perhaps to go down the Swedish/Finnish route,
we would have to have a sea change in society's view on how it
felt about wealth redistribution and so on to support that. I
am not saying that will not happen, but it does seem unlikely,
given where we are in the political cycle at the moment, for that
to happen.
Mr Dickie: I suppose part of our
job is about changing attitudes, changing minds, and not just
addressing politicians, but addressing wider society and saying,
"What kind of country do you want to live in? Do you want
to live in one where we continue to tolerate and accept the fact
that a quarter of our children are living in poverty and are being
excluded from the social activities and the opportunities that
the majority take for granted?" We are saying that we need
to really force people to think about that and that then needs
to translate into pressure on politicians of all parties to try
and set the tone and set the direction of how much we are willing
to invest and what kind of investments we are going to make in
particularly children and families in the case of tackling child
poverty.
Q478 Mr Walker:
I think you have absolutely crystallised the problem because I
think that the message we seem to be getting back from the British
public, despite what they may say, is that the answer seems to
be yes, they are willing to tolerate it because, if they were
not willing to tolerate it, things would be changing more quickly,
and I am just playing devil's advocate here, but you must be very
frustrated.
Mr Dickie: I suppose the positive
side of it is that we have the Government and politicians of all
parties now who obviously see that there is value in standing
on a platform which says, "Yes, poverty does exist in the
UK. Yes, that is unacceptable and yes, that can be eradicated
within a generation", and politicians and different parties
might have different approaches as to how to do that, but to have
got that consensus, I think, suggests a shift not just in terms
of political thinking, but a shift in terms of wider social thinking
and a sense of what wider society thinks is acceptable.
Dr Dornan: If I could just add
two things to that answer, the first is the reaction to the UNICEF
report. There is lots of discussion about just exactly what the
UNICEF report was, but I think that a lot of the press reaction
to that was reflecting a genuine sense that actually conditions
in which children were growing up in the UK were not acceptable.
Now, if you try to crystallise that down to particular aspects,
say, 60% of median income, that is very dry, that is much harder
to defend, but I think there is a genuine appetite there and I
think some of the reaction to UNICEF demonstrated that. The other
point of evidence which I would draw to your attention which you
may have seen is the work which was done by the Fabian Commission
on life chances a little while ago. I think one of the most interesting
things about that was deliberative research with members of the
public about what their views were on children's chances, and
what that showed is exactly the situation that you outline in
the sense that there is a great deal of resistance, there is a
great deal of blaming parents, saying, "Well, poverty does
not exist and, if it does exist, it is for this, this and this
reason", but actually, if you start unpicking some of the
reasons why children found themselves in poverty, some of the
drivers for that, and also when you started showing what positive
things could be done and that there was actually a target and
there was some political consensus behind making that work, actually
you get into quite a different discussion. I think this is exactly
John's point about leadership, that there is a lot that can be
gained and I would not accept for one moment that we have reached
a sort of stalemate where we are where we are and we cannot make
more progress; I think there is much more that can be done in
building that public consensus.
Q479 Mr McGovern:
In answer to the question about the targets to halve child poverty
by 2010 and to eradicate it by 2020, John, you said that you felt
that the targets were ambitious, but achievable. Can I just ask
how you think the Government is doing so far?
Mr Dickie: I think as I said,
progress has been made and in Scotland the target to reduce child
poverty by a quarter was reached, as it was across a lot of the
regions of England as well, although across the UK as a whole
the target to reduce child poverty by a quarter by 2004-05 was
missed, which just makes it more important that we do actually
get the policies right in the next few years to make sure that
we are on track and that we do hit that 2010 target. A core to
the Government's approach has very much been about work and work
being the route out of poverty and I think we very much recognise
that work is a key route out of poverty, but providing parents
with opportunities and support to get into work and not just get
into work, but, once they get into work, to sustain that work
is vital. I think we do have an anxiety that an emphasis on work
and work alone without looking at necessarily the wider issues
and the quality of that work means that there is a danger of progress
kind of being undermined in the future if we are just looking
at getting people into jobs. There are three areas or issues that
we are concerned about, and one is the quality of work. It is
important that we look at that, not just the headline employment
rate which is high in Scotland and the UK, but international comparisons
demonstrate that just having a high employment rate does not actually
mean you will have a low child poverty rate because we have one
of the highest employment rates and we also have one of the highest
child poverty rates, so tackling some of the issues around the
quality of work and making sure that moving into work is not just
a route out of workless poverty into in-work poverty, but it is
a genuine route out of poverty. We also need to address some of
the issues around ensuring that we get the balance between parents'
ability to access work and also their ability to parent and to
take their caring responsibilities on board.
|
