This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015/jun/25/number-of-uk-children-living-in-poverty-unchanged-latest-figures-show

The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Proportion of UK children living in poverty unchanged, figures show UK 'not on track to end child poverty by 2020' as figures remain unchanged
(about 7 hours later)
The number of children living in poverty was 2.3 million in 2014 but absolute poverty among households where a member has a disability has risen, official statistics show. The UK is not on track to meet its target of eradicating child poverty by 2020, the government’s social mobility tsar Alan Milburn has said, after new figures showed the number of children in relative poverty remained at 2.3 million.
New figures from the Department for Work and Pensions show the percentage of children in relative and absolute poverty remained flat, although there was a statistically insignificant fall of 100,000 for both measures. New figures from the Department for Work and Pensions showed that the percentage of children in relative and absolute poverty was unchanged, although there was a statistically insignificant fall of 100,000 for both measures. The overall number in absolute poverty was 2.6 million.
Among households in which at least one member has a disability, the number of individuals in absolute poverty rose by 300,000 to 5.6 million, while those in relative poverty remained flat at 4.1 million. Milburn, the chairman of the child poverty and social mobility commission, said it was positive that the figures suggested child poverty was not rising, but that the UK was “not on track to eradicate it by 2020”.
Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, said the proportion of people with low income was now at the smallest level since the mid-1980s. “Far more needs to be done to make sure that the poorest families share in the proceeds of economic growth,” he said. “Two in three children in poverty have at least one parent in work. A key priority must therefore be tackling in-work poverty.
An analysis from the Institute for Fiscal Studies said the latest figures “show little or no change in poverty rates, for the population as a whole and for the major demographic groups (pensioners, working-age adults and children)”. “This is why we look to the government to champion the living wage and to ensure that welfare cuts do not fall exclusively on the working poor. The risk otherwise is that child poverty - regardless of how it is measured - will rise, not fall.”Following signs that the government will either change the definition of child poverty or repeal the 2010 Child Poverty Act, Milburn said the issue could not “just be legislated away”.
However, Chris Leslie, the shadow chancellor, said the figures showed progress on child poverty had “slowed to a snail’s pace”. “There is an urgent need for a proper plan that tackles its root causes, including low pay, low educational attainment and low levels of employment in some communities,” he said.
Matthew Reed, chief executive of the Children’s Society, said it was “a scandal that there are 200,000 more children who have been pushed deeper into poverty over the past year. Iain Duncan Smith, the work and pensions secretary, said the proportion of people with low incomes was at its lowest since the mid-1980s.
An analysis from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) said the latest figures “show little or no change in poverty rates, for the population as a whole and for the major demographic groups [pensioners, working-age adults and children]”.
Among households in which at least one member has a disability, however, the number of individuals in absolute poverty after housing costs rose by 300,000 to 5.6 million, while those in relative poverty after housing costs remained flat at 5.1 million.
Chris Leslie, the shadow chancellor, said the figures showed progress on child poverty had “slowed to a snail’s pace”. He also said the government’s £12bn in welfare cuts, which are expected to affect tax credits and some disability benefits, would make things worse.
“Ministers should now take responsibility and tackle low pay, not attack the low paid,” he said.
Matthew Reed, the chief executive of the Children’s Society, said it was “a scandal that 200,000 more children had been pushed deeper into poverty over the past year.
“There has also been a steady rise over the last five years in the numbers of children living in in-work poverty, clearly showing that even those families with jobs are suffering because of government policies.”“There has also been a steady rise over the last five years in the numbers of children living in in-work poverty, clearly showing that even those families with jobs are suffering because of government policies.”
Forecasts from the IFS had suggested the number of children in relative poverty would rise for the first time in a decade, to 2.5 million. IFS forecasts had suggested that the number of children in relative poverty would rise for the first time in a decade to 2.5 million.
The fact that the figures do not show an increase in child poverty will make it easier for the government to change the way it is measured without being accused of trying to cover up a negative trend. The fact that the figures do not show an increase will make it easier for the government to change the way child poverty is measured without being accused of trying to cover up a negative trend.
Speaking in the House of Commons, Duncan Smith confirmed that he wanted to change the measure to take “life chances” into account and to incentivise policymakers to tackle the root causes of poverty. Speaking in the House of Commons, Duncan Smith confirmed that he wanted to change the measure to take “life chances” into account and to incentivise policymakers to tackle the causes of poverty.
David Cameron has called the current measure “absurd”, and the cabinet was briefed this week on the potential to change it – something that was promised in the Conservative party manifesto. David Cameron has called the current measure absurd, and the cabinet was briefed this week on the potential for changing it as promised in the Conservative party manifesto.
The current definition of child poverty is that a child lives in a household with an income less than 60% of the national average, meaning the number can go down when average incomes are lower in a recession.The current definition of child poverty is that a child lives in a household with an income less than 60% of the national average, meaning the number can go down when average incomes are lower in a recession.
The median real-terms household income before housing costs was stable at £453 per week, as was the average household income after housing costs at £386 per week.The median real-terms household income before housing costs was stable at £453 per week, as was the average household income after housing costs at £386 per week.
The TUC general secretary, Frances O’Grady, said: “Despite the headline employment rate returning to its pre-recession level, absolute poverty rates are still higher. Our economy is not creating enough good quality jobs to achieve the larger falls in poverty we need to give every worker a decent life and every child a decent future.
“The extreme cuts to tax credits the government is planning for working families will do nothing to raise wages and will leave low-paid families even worse off. There’s a big danger this will start poverty rates rising again.”
David Simmonds, chairman of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, said: “Councils are working hard to help tackle child poverty through their successful economic development strategies and by directly working with families in difficulty.
“Regardless of how statistics are compiled, we recognise that there are parts of the UK where there is much more to be done to raise children out of poverty and councils are playing an extremely active role because their detailed knowledge of their local community means they are best placed to lead the way.”