Almost as important, the strategy marks a welcome shift in tone, breaking decisively from a long-standing discourse that emphasised individual responsibility over structural causes and rigidly promoted work as the best route out of poverty. Social security is recognised as an essential safety net, not simply a short-term solution or last resort.
The process also deserves credit. Throughout, ministers and officials demonstrated a genuine commitment to engagement, consulting extensively with experts, civil society and families, and have pledged to continue prioritising voices with lived experience during implementation.
But for all its ambition, there are several areas where it falls short. A glaring omission is the lack of meaningful numerical targets – something the Big Issue has consistently championed.
By not setting clear short, medium and long-term goals, the strategy has forfeited the powerful galvanising effect that targets bring to focus minds and drive action across government.
The Resolution Foundation suggests that by 2030, around 300,000 fewer children will be in poverty compared to today because of these measures – taking into account other economic forces and policy choices which will serve to drive up child poverty at the same time. This is substantial, but still implies a child poverty rate of around 31%.
Measured on these terms, this looks much more like a strategy that will prevent child poverty from getting worse rather than one that will deliver significant reductions in the child poverty rate as it is today. Nevertheless, we should be cautious of fixating on movements in statistical measures that are inherently incomplete and imperfect. Many actions within this strategy can’t necessarily be modelled but will still have a meaningful impact on children’s lives.
Turning the tide on child poverty can’t be achieved overnight, or even within a single parliamentary term. Yet the absence of targets speaks to a broader lack of a clearly articulated long-term vision. Early announcements framed it as a 10-year strategy, but the final document mostly focuses on the next few years. There is a lack of detail on how many of the longer-term and more structural policies (housing, transport, local services) knit together and will be shaped to actually benefit families in poverty.
And critical policy gaps still remain: the benefit cap stays in place, local housing allowance rates remain frozen and the process for uprating benefits remain inadequate. The strategy includes a welcome acknowledgement of the poverty risks faced by migrant children affected by the ‘no recourse to public funds’ condition, but planned reforms to the immigration system are likely to push more of these children into poverty over the coming years, not less. There is a missed opportunity to drive full take-up of benefits among eligible families, a change that could lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty.
Ultimately, this is a strategy where the limits of what’s possible have been defined by an extremely challenging fiscal environment. The government made the right choice in raising the revenue needed to scrap the two-child limit and prioritising it over other possible measures. But if it is to realise its ambitions on child poverty, this can’t be the final word. Ultimately, its success will be judged on the extent to which it is implemented well and properly built upon to deliver sustained improvements in family incomes, children’s lives and life chances. At Action for Children, we will do everything we can to help make that happen.
Scott Compton is senior policy advisor at Action for Children.
Do you have a story to tell or opinions to share about this? Get in touch and tell us more.
Change a vendor’s life this Christmas.
Buy from your local Big Issue vendor every week – or support online with a vendor support kit or a subscription – and help people work their way out of poverty with dignity.
