Memorandum submitted by the Scottish Churches
Social Inclusion Network
1. WHO
WE
ARE
1.1 The Scottish Churches Social Inclusion
Network brings together a wide range of representatives of the
work of the churches and church agencies tackling poverty and
social exclusion across Scotland. The work represented ranges
from the national services provided by Crossreach (the Church
of Scotland's Social Care Council) to community work in all kinds
of parishes; it also includes such activities as the Poverty Hearings
pioneered by Church Action on Poverty, and the Justice and Peace
work of Catholic parishes.
1.2 Participating Bodies include: Action
of Churches Together in Scotland, Baptist Union of Scotland, Christian
Community Work Alliance, Church Action on Poverty, Church of Scotland
(Church & Society Council, Mission and Discipleship Council,
Social Care Council, Board of Social Responsibility, Priority
Areas Forum), Evangelical Alliance, Faith in Community Scotland,
Iona Community, Methodist Church, NCH, Roman Catholic Church (Social
Care Commission, Justice & Peace Commission), Salvation Army,
Scottish Churches Community Trust, Scottish Churches Parliamentary
Office, Scottish Episcopal Church, Society of Friends (Quakers),
United Free Church, Unity Enterprise.
1.3 The Network welcomes the renewed
commitment of the Scottish Affairs Committee to an Inquiry into
Poverty in Scotland, and is glad to have the opportunity to contribute
to that inquiry. We hope to have further opportunity to contribute
to this important work in future oral sessions.
2. INTRODUCTION
2.1 On the last occasion when the Scottish
Affairs Committee addressed this issue (in 1999), the then Scottish
Secretary, Dr John Reid MP, remarked that "poverty is the
biggest scar of a civilised society". We agree.
2.2 The issues affecting people living in
poverty, both globally and in Scotland, have been an ongoing concern
of the churches, at a practical level of engagement in community
building work across Scotland's poorest communities—a significant
role in regeneration recognised by the partnership of "Faith
in Community Scotland" and Communities Scotland in the recent
conference "what's faith got to do with it?". These
issues have also been at the heart of much of our engagement with
public issues at both Holyrood and Westminster.
2.3 Increasingly, we recognise that hearing
the voices of people whose lives are affected by poverty, and
valuing their expertise, are crucial to tackling poverty; we have
learned the immense importance of listening to those with a direct
experience of poverty. This may seem obvious but it is staggering
how often this expertise and commitment is ignored. According
to Joseph Wresinski, founder of the ATD-Fourth World Movement:
"As long as people living in poverty are not listened to,
as long as the planners of communities do not learn from those
who experience poverty and the world they live in, the measures
taken to alleviate their situation will be erratic, superficial
and opportunistic". The problems of poverty (and wealth)
cannot be adequately addressed without this perspective.
3. POVERTY AUDIT,
"GET HEARD"
AND "PROSPERITY
WITH A
PURPOSE"
3.1 That is why we have joined with a wide
range of voluntary sector partners in a "Poverty Audit".
Funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, this project aims to
assess progress in tackling poverty in Scotland since devolution
by ensuring that the voices of people living in poverty are expressed.
The impact of policies on their lives, and on their communities,
may not be fully captured in statistical analysis of progress
towards government or Executive targets. A series of focus groups
of people with direct experience of poverty has already taken
place, and there will be further discussion with those involved
as key themes emerge. A report will be published in early 2007.
While one of our aims in the project is to get serious discussion
of poverty, and policies to tackle it, on to the Scottish Parliamentary
election agenda (for the election in May 2007), it is clear that
devolved and reserved policy areas are interwoven here, and we
are confident that the report will have important things to say
which we hope will be available in time to impact on the Committee's
inquiry.
3.2 The Poverty Audit will also draw on
the valuable results of the Get Heard process, which, in
Scotland and elsewhere, has drawn from grass roots experiences
of poverty and social exclusion towards the development of the
NAP Inclusion 2006. We welcome the publication (funded by the
Church of Scotland's Priority areas Strategy Group) of the final
report of that process in Scotland Dignity Shouldn't Have to
Be Earned, and commend it to the Committee.
3.3 Our experience is that it is often in
face-to-face encounter people and attitudes are transformed,
the stereotypes and myths which surround poverty can be most effectively
broken down and the real impact of policies be assessed. Attempts
to involve people experiencing poverty in defining, measuring
and putting forward proposals to overcome it also have their difficulties—conclusions
are often difficult to reach, definitions hard to agree and the
issues raised limited by the experiences of those whose stories
are shared. These may be among the reasons why some welcome attempts
in Scotland by Executive and Parliament to engage with people
(eg in the Social Inclusion Network) have broken down. The problems,
however, serve to underline the complexity of the issues that
we are facing and of the need to treat people as human beings
rather than simply reduce us to statistics. To marginalise, in
developing and assessing anti-poverty strategies, those whom such
policies seek to help will ensure that they remain excluded.
3.4 Although this inquiry is about poverty,
we are convinced that the problem of poverty has to be understood
in relationship to the problem of wealth. What, for the wealthy,
is often perceived as a problem of poverty, is for many living
in poverty a problem of wealth. For the creation of wealth to
add value to society it requires to be more adequately distributed.
For many within the Church, as well as within wider society, there
is a temptation to treat these as separate issues, which they
are not. We have been involved in work carried out by Churches
Together in Britain and Ireland (Prosperity with a Purpose—published
by CTBI) on poverty and prosperity, and would commend the report
on that study to the Committee.
4. DEFINING POVERTY
4.1 Definitions of poverty have been the
subject of considerable debate, including that between absolute
and relative levels of poverty. In effect, virtually all definitions
of poverty are, in practical terms, relative—dependent upon
the context and conditions of others. While some might wish to
point out that, by comparison to parts of sub-Saharan Africa,
there is no poverty in Scotland today others would point to the
fact that a person living in Drumchapel will, on average, die
ten years younger than someone living in neighbouring Bearsden
(a contrast which shows little sign of diminishing).
4.2 Health inequalities remain, literally,
a matter of life and death. Differences in life expectancy between
neighbouring areas remain a dramatic reflection of poverty; 40%
of people aged between 35 and 59 living in social housing report
a limiting long-standing illness, compared to 12% of owner occupiers;
premature deaths in Scotland are 30% higher than in England and
Wales (and worst of the EU figures). The Church of Scotland's
General Assembly in 1998 echoed wider concerns in welcoming the
inclusion of tackling health inequalities in UK Government strategic
plans; the Assembly added that "the inequalities in health
cannot be adequately addressed without the wealth of the nation
being more equitably distributed". It is disturbing—though
perhaps confirming of the point about redistribution—that
the figures show little, if any, improvement since the recognition
by Government of the problem.
4.3 How we define and measure poverty is,
to a large extent, determined by what we intend to do about it.
For some time, the term social exclusion has frequently
superseded poverty as a term used by government to describe those
who are unable to participate fully within society. In Scotland
the focus has been more on social inclusion as opposed
to exclusion, a welcome shift of emphasis. This language
also reflects well the importance of access to services (employment,
transport, housing, etc), particularly with reference to rural
poverty.
4.4 However, although both terms highlight
the multi-dimensional nature of poverty and exclusion, in their
populist form, they offer no critique of who is responsible for
the including (and excluding). It is overwhelmingly those who
have power (and wealth) who determine who is excluded and, under
what conditions, people are included. We have also expressed concern
that the use of the language of inclusion and exclusion may become
a way of avoiding some of the issues of material poverty.
4.5 Although there is no agreed definition
of poverty in the UK, the definition most frequently used is based
upon a calculation of the number of people living at or below
60% of the national median income after housing costs, with some
slight adjustments based on the number of people within a household.
Any variation on this percentage has a major impact on the numbers
of people who are defined as living in poverty. For most purposes,
we are content with this as a statistical measure. However, it
does not capture the hidden or less visible aspects of rural poverty;
the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation fails to measure the
true scale of rural poverty, as this is less concentrated by areas.
5. IMPACT OF
GOVERNMENT AND
EXECUTIVE POLICY
5.1 From the outset of devolution, an explicit
policy objective of the Scottish Executive has been the reduction
and eradication of poverty in Scotland. We welcomed the commitments
in a set of Social Justice targets and milestones (along with
annual progress reports on progress towards these), and the more
recent, and more focussed, cross-cutting policy objectives in
the Executive's "Closing the Opportunity Gap", with
its overarching themes of:
— preventing individuals or families
from falling into poverty;
— providing routes out of poverty for
individuals and families; and
— sustaining individuals or families
in a lifestyle free from poverty.
5.2 Over the last seven years governments
at Westminster and Holyrood have introduced a range of measures
which have helped to improve the quality of life for a significant
number of people experiencing poverty. Much of this has focused
around efforts to get people back into paid employment, at reducing
child poverty and the introduction of a minimum income guarantee
for pensioners. In taking these steps the government deserves
to be congratulated.
5.3 The figures show that there has been
some significant success in reducing poverty in Scotland (measured
as those living in households with less that 60% median income),
notably in a 30% reduction in child poverty (compared to 17% across
the UK as a whole) mainly through increased work opportunities
for parents coupled with UK policies such as Minimum Wage and
Tax Credits. One in five Scots (a million people) were living
in income poverty in 2003-04, but this showed a significant drop
to a level lower than at any point in the past 10 years.
5.4 However, for many people without children
there has been little change in their situation since 1997; for
too many people in Scotland poverty is still a daily reality.
For example:
— according to JRF the number of working
age adults without children in poverty has increased from c300,000
in the mid 1990s to c400,000 today;
— almost half of lone parents are in
income poverty (though this proportion is falling);
— there are 200,000 people of working
age who want to work but who are not officially unemployed (JRF
MPSE in Scotland 2005);
— while work strongly reduces the risk
of being in poverty, two-fifths of the people in working-age households
who are in income poverty now have someone in their household
in paid work;
— a third of all employees in Scotland
(and half of part-time workers) earn under £6.50 per hour;
— research by Save the Children (2005)
shows that for families suffering severe poverty (children in
households with less than 27% median income) little if any progress
has been made since 1999.
5.5 Many of those whose level of income
has increased slightly in real terms since 1997 have been, according
to government figures, lifted out of poverty as a result of very
welcome initiatives including elements of Welfare to Work, the
introduction of Working Tax and Child Tax credits. However, these
measures have only served to lift those previously just below
the poverty threshold to just above it and many remain susceptible
to poverty if there is even a slight variance in their family
or personal circumstances. For others, struggling with a greater
depth of poverty, government measures have, to date, had little
or no impact. While employment is clearly a successful route out
of poverty for many people, acute problems remain for those who
are unable to find paid work as well as for significant numbers
who, because of the level of their wages, remain locked in poverty
despite the fact that they are in paid employment.
5.6 It has become increasingly obvious that
these positive government measures do not go far enough. The
Minimum Wage, while welcome, especially with the recent increase,
is still set at a level which means that those who are paid on,
or just above, the current rate are forced to apply for a range
of means tested benefits to supplement their income. We believe
in the principle of a Living Wage (advocated by, among
others, Church Action on Poverty) which currently recommends
a figure of £6.80 per hour, based on a scientific analysis
of how much an adequate standard of living costs. The Minimum
Wage should be enough to keep people out of poverty and not reliant
on in-work benefits.
5.7 Listening to the experiences of people
living on basic benefits convinces us of the urgent need both
for a radical simplification of benefits and for an increase in
their levels of payment. The value of many benefits has fallen
in real terms over the past twenty years. This has to be reversed.
5.8 Among the people we have met there has
been a clear recognition that there are those who abuse the system.
Any measures taken to address this specific problem must not be
to the detriment of the vulnerable; further, the stigmatization
of certain groups (eg those claiming benefits) by sections
of the media and some politicians is shameful and must be challenged.
We would express concern that the focus (in government advertising
as well as in the wider media) on abuses of the benefit system
diverts attention from the impact of tax avoidance and other devices
(around the edges of legality and beyond them) through which abuses
by wealthy people cheat "the system" and therefore the
most vulnerable.
6. POVERTY REPORT
CARD
6.1 In considering progress since the Scottish
Affairs Committee's last report, and since devolution, we have
found useful the "Poverty Report Card" produced by the
Poverty Alliance in 2005:
1.6.2 The Report Card notes that "fuel
poverty has `come in from the cold' on the political
front ... The UK Government and the devolved administrations have
put in place schemes and initiatives that will help ... The Central
Heating Programme in Scotland, funded by the Scottish Executive,
is an excellent example of what can be achieved. It provides a
non-means tested package of a free central heating system, insulation
measures and energy advice for those who do not already have central
heating in the social rented sector and to those aged over 60
in the private sector. Monitoring has shown that it is taking
87% of households out of fuel poverty". They conclude that
"fuel poverty is being tackled: the problems are known and
the solutions have largely been identified"; however, recent
dramatic energy price rises, with a disproportionate impact on
the poorest—especially through back-dating of prepayment
meter charges—have pushed many more households back into
fuel poverty.
2.6.3 Homelessness is both a consequence
of poverty and a factor in prolonging it. Poor housing conditions
have a similar impact. The Scottish Parliament has been effective
in legislating for improvements in the response to the needs of
homeless people, but levels of application to local authorities
are still unacceptably high. We endorse the Scottish Executive's
target that local authorities should be in a position to offer
settled accommodation to all non-intentionally homeless applicants
by 2012. However, our concerns about reaching this include:
— The inadequacy of the current
supply of affordable housing, and the need for further substantial
investment, particularly in affordable housing for rent.
— The lack of availability
of rehabilitation and support facilities for all those who need
them in finding routes out of homelessness, particularly in the
areas of drug and alcohol misuse, but also in relation to mental
illness, young people who have been looked after by the social
care system, and others leaving a variety of forms of institutional
living.
— The lack of joined-up practice
between reserved and devolved issues, including housing benefit,
and employment and training programmes.
3.6.4 Although the Pension Credit
has helped many pensioners living in poverty, a failure
to listen adequately to the views of pensioners groups on means
tested benefits (or even the view of the Select Committee on Work
and Pensions that "it can be quite a challenge to get people
to claim means-tested benefits; they feel a huge loss of dignity
and that they are begging for charity in doing so") has resulted
in incomplete take up of the Pension Credit, with DWP still estimating
take-up at 61%-69% of those eligible, ie up to 1.63 million pensioners
missing out on what they are entitled to, despite £20m spent
in advertising. The stakeholder pension seemed a positive attempt
to provide affordable access to occupational pensions, but the
effect of low wages, lack of financial awareness along with access
to adequate financial planning, and lack of commitment from employers
to contribute have minimised the gains from this well intentioned
savings product.
4.6.5 In terms of links between disability
and poverty, Suzi MacPherson notes that "the policy focus
on disabled people is positive in making a commitment to tackling
discrimination through extensions to the provisions of the DDA
as well as through attempts to support disabled people to access
employment via in-work benefits and support to return to work.
However, as a route to tackling poverty this focus is somewhat
limited." In particular, the continuing emphasis on work
as the route out of poverty fails those whose disability prevents
paid employment; the parallel policy commitment to "support
those who cannot work" seems to offer little improvement
if any in benefit levels. There is also evidence from the Get
Heard project in Scotland which shows that many employers
are very reluctant to take on people with disabilities or long
term health problems.
4.6.6 Child poverty has
rightly been placed at the centre, with the welcome commitment
to eradicate it by 2020, seemingly more on target in Scotland
than elsewhere in the UK. We agree with Children in Scotland
that, after recent steps forward, "the real challenge will
be to reach those children and families completely reliant on
benefits".
4.6.7 Research carried out for the Scottish
Executive on Life in Low Income Families in Scotland found
that "the importance of family and relationships is readily
apparent". We therefore question the assumption that work
is always the answer (especially for lone parents), and strongly
agree that "more needs to be done to allow parents to spend
more time at home caring for their children, particularly fathers
who have a crucial role in their upbringing. Support for vulnerable
families is welcome but more emphasis should be placed on integrating
Sure Start programmes into mainstream children's services to ensure
that no vulnerable family `falls through the net'". We also
support the campaign of the Child Poverty Action Group for free
nutritious school meals for all pupils at least in primary schools.
4.6.8 The 60th birthday of child benefit
is a good time to celebrate the role child benefit plays—showing
our commitment to our children and helping parents make ends meet.
Child benefit is popular, effective and reaches more children
living in poverty than any other benefit or tax credit. With others
in the "Make child Benefit Count" campaign, we call
for an increase in child benefit, and for younger children to
get the same rate as the oldest child. This would help support
larger families—which is vital if child poverty is to be
ended once and for all.
6.6.9
The growth in in-work poverty is a cause
for concern: "under Labour the biggest group of people living
in poverty are now not unemployed or pensioners but low paid workers"
(Unison Scotland). As the Report Card notes "Unskilled workers,
women, ethnic minorities and young workers are all more likely
than others to be low paid. Despite this the recently announced
rate rise will not affect the 16-17 year old. Young people should
be not be disadvantaged because of their age.
7. REINFORCING
FACTORS
7.1 We would urge the Committee to consider,
as in your 1999 Report, the ways in which other factors reinforce
or exacerbate poverty—both as causes and as symptoms—including
fuel poverty, housing and homelessness, health and debt.
7.2 The long-term, destructive relationship
of poverty and debt was researched by JRF in late 2005.
The Debt on our Doorstep campaign arose from the poverty hearings
held by Church Action on Poverty, in which people shared their
personal experience of what poverty meant for them; debt was a
painful and recurrent theme of these hearings. Since 1999, churches
have worked with others in campaigning for joined-up strategy
to tackle the spiral of debt and poverty.
7.3 In Scotland, there is even more urgency
in joining up policies, since tackling debt involves matters within
the reserved powers of Westminster (eg credit market regulation
and the Social Fund) as well as others within the remit of the
Scottish Parliament (eg debt recovery, financial capability and
promotion of credit unions). We are therefore glad to be involved
in the Cross Party Cross Parliamentary Group on Tackling Debt
in Scotland, which is unique as a recognised CPG of the Scottish
Parliament including Scottish MPs. While there is clearly much
behind the scenes co-operation between the UK government and Scottish
Executive, the lack of transparency prevents more engagement of
those working to tackle poverty with these policy discussions.
7.4 While we value steps towards financial
inclusion emanating from both Parliaments, we remain concerned
that the needs of NINA ("no income, no assets") debtors
seem to be lower in priority than other groups, whether in addressing
the market failure acknowledged in the credit market by which
the poor pay significantly more for credit (as highlighted in
the Committee's 1999 report) or in reforming debt recovery and
bankruptcy. As your Committee found in 1999, the impact of "legitimate"
doorstep lenders may be even more destructive than that of illegal
loan sharks. We agree with Citizens Advice Scotland that "access
to affordable credit is key to tackling ongoing financial exclusion
issues yet, despite explicit recognition of market failure in
this area, the Government is still looking to industry to deliver
solutions". In addition reform of the social fund—the
one source of low value, no cost loans currently available—has
been slow to respond to these needs.
7.5 While detailed studies about the impact
of poverty among the black and minority ethnic population
in Scotland find it hard to paint a very clear picture of the
extent of poverty among ethnic minorities (due to difficulties
in gathering data), recent reports by the Scottish Executive and
results from 2001 Census show that minority ethic population is
more likely to be affected by poverty. The Audit of Research
on Minority Ethnic Issues in Scotland from a "Race"
Perspective in 2001 uncovered extensive evidence to suggest
that discrimination in key areas such as access to housing, education,
social care, health, employment opportunities, make minority ethnic
people more vulnerable to poverty. Recent figures released by
the Executive show that children from minority ethnic background
are twice as likely to live in poverty. We are encouraged by the
Executive's drive to tackle discrimination and racism, and their
effort to mainstream equality in delivery of services. However,
more needs to be done to tackle the disproportional vulnerability
to poverty among the minority ethnic population.
7.6 One specific area for attention is the
situation of asylum seekers. The fact that government policy
restricts benefit support for asylum seekers awaiting decision
to 70% of income support levels implies an acceptance of poverty,
while those working with asylum seekers, especially in Glasgow,
are encountering many more examples of destitution. We welcome
statements from the Home Office confirming that no families should
be destitute, but experience tells a different story, of a growing
problem. The recent survey by the Scottish Refugee Council (on
which we understand the SRC will be submitting further evidence
to you) revealed that at least 154 asylum seekers, refugees and
their dependents were destitute in Glasgow between 30 January
and 26 February 2006 (including 25 destitute children under the
age of 18); 27 were asylum seekers with active claims, 7 were
refugees and 78 had been refused asylum status and were at the
end of the process. These numbers are likely to significantly
under-represent the actual number of destitute people because
of the methods used and the problems associated with reaching
a hidden population.
8. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
8.1 The experience of churches and other
faith-based groups which are tackling poverty is that, while considerable
steps forward have been made, poverty remains, in too many communities,
stubbornly resistant to Government initiatives. Our evidence illustrates
both successful impact and continuing problems; the Poverty Report
Card shows key areas where more needs to be done. The single point
we would want to stress is the importance of listening to the
voices of those directly affected in devising strategies and policies
to tackle poverty, and we believe that the Poverty Audit currently
under way will be a major step in that direction.
Rev Graham K Blount
Scottish Churches Parliamentary Office
October 2006
|
