Thursday, January 03, 2008
Tackling child poverty
Recent figures from the Institute of Public Policy Research, which revealed that 68,000 children in Wales live in poverty despite having at least one parent in work, are very disturbing. They cast further doubt on whether the Government is going to meet its target of halving child poverty by 2010.
I am pleased therefore that the Liberal Democrats are focussing on this issue at a UK level in a big way. Not only is Nick Clegg advocating a pupil premium, whereby funding is given to schools who teach children from poorer backgrounds but he has now set up a Commission on Social Mobility is to advise the party on how to help British youngsters from disadvantaged families fulfil their potential.
The Guardian tells us that it will be chaired by the Barnardos chief executive, Martin Narey, and should deliver its interim conclusions by the middle of the year:
Clegg said: "In 2007, a child born into deprivation is more likely to inherit his or her parents' disadvantage than at any time in our recent past.
"It is utterly unacceptable that by the age of seven, a bright but poor child will be overtaken at school by a child who was struggling in pre-school years but is from a more affluent background.
"I want to know why it is that Britain's low levels of social mobility compare unfavourably with almost every other developed nation. Children should be free to realise their aspirations and not be held back by the circumstances of their birth."
This genuine desire to do something to help the poorest people in our society is the best answer yet to those who mistakenly believe that Clegg has anything in common with David Cameron at all.
I am pleased therefore that the Liberal Democrats are focussing on this issue at a UK level in a big way. Not only is Nick Clegg advocating a pupil premium, whereby funding is given to schools who teach children from poorer backgrounds but he has now set up a Commission on Social Mobility is to advise the party on how to help British youngsters from disadvantaged families fulfil their potential.
The Guardian tells us that it will be chaired by the Barnardos chief executive, Martin Narey, and should deliver its interim conclusions by the middle of the year:
Clegg said: "In 2007, a child born into deprivation is more likely to inherit his or her parents' disadvantage than at any time in our recent past.
"It is utterly unacceptable that by the age of seven, a bright but poor child will be overtaken at school by a child who was struggling in pre-school years but is from a more affluent background.
"I want to know why it is that Britain's low levels of social mobility compare unfavourably with almost every other developed nation. Children should be free to realise their aspirations and not be held back by the circumstances of their birth."
This genuine desire to do something to help the poorest people in our society is the best answer yet to those who mistakenly believe that Clegg has anything in common with David Cameron at all.
Comments:
<< Home
This state of affairs is a blot on all political parties landscapes.
We need radical action to sort it starting with a decent minimum wage that people can live on.
What sort of economy are we supporting that shows approval of business that pay poverty wages, not only approves but gives grants and advice to.
The measure of us as a society is how we treat our most vulnerable, not how much we put into shareholders pockets.
We need radical action to sort it starting with a decent minimum wage that people can live on.
What sort of economy are we supporting that shows approval of business that pay poverty wages, not only approves but gives grants and advice to.
The measure of us as a society is how we treat our most vulnerable, not how much we put into shareholders pockets.
# posted by 
: 7:33 PM
: 7:33 PM
I have to admit that the 'pupil premium' policy is one i wholeheartedly support.
http://southpawgrammarwales.blogspot.com/2007/11/lib-dems-what-are-they-good-for-quite.html
http://southpawgrammarwales.blogspot.com/2007/11/lib-dems-what-are-they-good-for-quite.html
This is the difference Peter between you and us. You are only concerned with equality of opportunity whereas we are concerned with equality of opportunity and outcome. It is not just about an equal chance of climbing a greasy pole but ensuring that once ability has played out fairly the gap between the strongest and the weakest is not unfair or unjust. This is the flaw in the liberal analysis and why you were and are consigned to the history of left of centre politics.
# posted by : 11:05 PM
: 11:05 PM
An interesting point Activist though I am not sure why you had to adopt the Bond villain tone to make it. However, surely equality of opportunity will lead to an equal outcome.
People can only be given the chance to fulfil their potential. We cannot force it upon them nor can we create an artificial bubble in which those who are unequal are supported forever by the state at the expense of the rest of the economy. That sort of centralised statism was consigned to history some time ago. Even Gordon Brown does not advocate it.
Post a Comment
People can only be given the chance to fulfil their potential. We cannot force it upon them nor can we create an artificial bubble in which those who are unequal are supported forever by the state at the expense of the rest of the economy. That sort of centralised statism was consigned to history some time ago. Even Gordon Brown does not advocate it.
<< Home
