Why Fight Poverty?. Julia Unwin

Figure 1.3) and can lead to some working below their skill level, making it even more difficult for those without qualifications to find jobs.9

Figure 1.3. Low pay over time. Source: Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, Office for National Statistics (figures are for the United Kingdom).

      The boundary between graduate and non-graduate work is becoming increasingly blurred. As more graduates enter the job market, they are increasingly taking jobs that were traditionally ‘non-graduate’. The percentage of graduates earning below the hourly wage has risen over the past 15 years, while the number earning above the hourly wage fell from 47.9 per cent in 1993 to 23.1 per cent in 2008.10

      There has also been persistent exploitation in some sectors, particularly those characterized by long supply chains or demand for cheap labour.11 There is evidence that forced labour occurs in a number of sectors in the United Kingdom and often involves difficult, dirty and dangerous work, alongside threats or actual violence towards workers, and cramped, expensive accommodation. Migrant workers in particular are vulnerable to forced labour situations at the extreme end of a murky ­labour market.

      In this context the government can intervene in the labour market to regulate employment or it can subsidize low-paid workers to enable subsistence. The alternative of doing neither results in people working without sufficient means to maintain themselves and their families.

      The housing market is the second great contributor to high levels of poverty. Five per cent or 3.1 million more people experienced poverty in 2010–11 when housing costs had been taken into account.12 The United Kingdom housing market is as volatile as ever, with rising costs in London and the South-East and considerable pockets of decline elsewhere.

      And with new caps to Local Housing Allowance, housing has become even less affordable. In 34 per cent of local authorities in England, the maximum Local Housing Allowance was not enough to cover the cheapest quarter of two-bedroom rents.13 London and the east of England had the highest proportion of local authorities where housing was largely unaffordable (17 out of 32 London boroughs and 8 out of 20 in the east of England).13 The costs of renting rose 3.5 per cent in May 2013 (7.2 per cent in London) and the average rent reached £737 in England and Wales.14

      The third in this trinity of markets is the cost of essential items such as fuel, food, finance, council tax, domestic heating and power, transport and insurance. In 2012, these costs increased by 3.7 per cent, much faster than Consumer Price Index inflation. At the same time, nominal income growth was 1.6 per cent. Most significantly, wages have stagnated and costs of essentials have increased since 2008. JRF’s Minimum Income Standards research shows the cost of living has increased by 25 per cent since 2008.15 This has put particular pressure on low-income groups.16

      In short, we have a more or less flat-lining economy, an increasingly polarized labour market and a highly regionalized, localized housing market, combined with stagnating pay and a rapidly increasing cost of living.

      Although the context is difficult, the impact on the poorest people and places does not need to be so harsh.

      In our recent past, in the wake of world wars, we have built housing, invested in our infrastructure and developed free health care to sit alongside our free education. Shared endeavour has resulted in substantial change.

      We could forge a new, more resilient social contract, to commit to tackling poverty and ensuring the provision of a safety net for us all.

      This is not happening at the moment. The National Centre for Social Research’s analysis of the British Social Attitudes surveys shows that attitudes towards people in poverty are increasingly unsympathetic.

      In 2010, 23 per cent believed poverty was caused by character weakness or behaviour, compared to 15 per cent in 1994. This view was particularly strong among people aged over 65.17 The number of people who perceived social injustices to be the main cause of poverty decreased from 29 per cent in 1994 to 21 per cent in 2010.18 In 2011 two-thirds of people blamed parents’ behaviour and characters as the main cause of child poverty.19 At the same time, support for welfare spending has decreased, particularly among 18–24 year olds.

      There is currently no shared belief or understanding about poverty and no shared endeavour to solve it.

      Many people believe that poverty does not exist in the United Kingdom or that it does not matter – deeply held views that accord with their experience. Any attempt to address rising levels of poverty needs to understand these views, and take them very seriously indeed.

      Does poverty exist in the United Kingdom?

      In 2009, 39 per cent of people thought there was ‘very little’ real poverty in the United Kingdom and many strongly dispute the suggestion that it exists (Figure 1.4).20

Figure 1.4. Public perceptions of the level of poverty in Britain. Source: British Social Attitudes Survey, NatCen.

      They argue that while there is real poverty in other countries, any poverty in the United Kingdom is less severe, and describing it as such is misleading and untruthful.

      They are right to some extent. There is a world of difference between UK poverty in 2013 and 100 years ago, just as poverty in a village in Africa with no electricity and an absolute shortage of water and food is different from someone in Scotland living in a damp, poorly maintained home with insufficient to pay for their bus fare. There is also a world of difference in wealth. The middle-class homeowner of the 1920s would not understand or comprehend the income, assets and choices of their counterpart in the twenty-first century. Measurement of income and wealth are inevitably relative – and they are so regardless of the level of income or wealth.

      All poverty is relative and needs to be seen in context. Needs are relative in every society and differ depending on the price of food and other goods, and social norms – the opportunity to participate in society, e.g. buying birthday presents for family members or social activities for children.

      To fulfil these needs, people mainly need money, but also other formal resources, such as health services and education, and informal resources, such as informal childcare, borrowing money from a friend and so on.

      The resources someone needs can change over time and vary between people and places, depending on the range, sustainability, quantity and quality of their resources, individual and family circumstances, and the choices people make. Because UK poverty is relative, it can be easier to ignore or dismiss – but it is real and affects a sizeable portion of our population, with implications for our whole society.

      Chapter 2

      Does poverty matter?

      There is a strong belief in some quarters that poverty is not really important at all. In any competitive and successful society, it is argued, there are some who will do better than others, which means that some will do much worse. Poverty is an inevitable by-product of our largely prosperous and successful economy, and, by and large, people of skill and determination will get themselves out of poverty.

      There are others who believe that poverty does matter, but only for the individual and not for society, so any attempts to change the odds or interfere with people’s choices are unnecessary and unhelpful distortions to a market economy.

      Sitting alongside these views is the frequently expressed belief that poverty’s continuing existence actually provides some benefit. It gives a dire warning of an alternative future so spurs people on to more effort.

      More subtly, the debate revolves around how much political effort is needed to reduce poverty, and whether it deserves it. The issue at stake is whether poverty is some private, individual misfortune or a much wider, societal issue. C. Wright Mills describes it as follows:

      When,