Eradicating Poverty

Article by Nisha Rikhi

Britain should be aiming as a society to eradicate poverty. Poverty is a scourge on society that affects millions of people, especially the most vulnerable people. In the twenty-first century, nobody should be experiencing food poverty, fuel poverty or child poverty in this country.

Food poverty:

Everyone has the right to food. Nobody should have to use food banks in order to put food on the table to feed themselves or their children. Yet it is still the case that many households are reliant on food banks to put food on the table. The government should make the standard element of Universal Credit more generous. At the moment a single person, under the age of twenty-five receives £311.68, having gone up from £292.11 a month. A person living with a partner who is over twenty-five receives £617.60 a month in the standard element of Universal Credit. This clearly is not enough to live on, given that the cost of essentials and utility bills have all gone up due to inflation and the base rate rises in the current climate. People in receipt of Universal Credit are therefore being forced to use foodbanks because they cannot meet their essential costs with their benefit income. It could therefore be argued that the government could lift people out of food poverty by increasing the amount of money they receive from the standard element of Universal Credit. By increasing this amount, people would be better able to meet their essential living costs which would reduce their dependence on food banks.

Placing a sugar tax on the producers of junk food would also help reduce food poverty. This is because the government should force the multi-corporations who produce junk food to pay a higher rate of tax which we could use to invest in schemes that would reduce food poverty. The government could use the revenue from the sugar tax to provide free milk to children under the age of eleven in school. The government could also use the sugar tax revenue to expand the Healthy Start programme to cover children under the age of 5 as opposed to only children under the age of 4 so that it helps more families buy healthy foods like milk or fruit for their children. Also, by taxing the producers of junk food, we could also see them reformulate their products to reduce the amount of sugar and salt in them. This would benefit the country as those products would become less unhealthy, thereby reducing some of the health consequences associated with junk food. Given that the NHS spends millions on treating obesity, diabetes, heart disease and other dietary-related illnesses, pursuing policies that will force manufacturers to reduce the sugar and fat content of their products can only be a benefit to society. This is because the government can use the money that the NHS can save on treating dietary-related illnesses on schemes that would help reduce food poverty. Therefore, it is clear that there is a compelling case to introduce a sugar tax on junk food in order to use the monies raised to introduce schemes that could help to reduce food poverty.

Fuel poverty:

Everyone has the right to a warm home. No one should be forced to accept a prepayment meter. Nobody should have to choose between hot food and heating. Sadly, there are many people who are forced onto prepayment meters as a result of being in debt to their energy providers and are forced to choose between eating and staying warm. It is clear that the force-fitting of prepayment meters should be permanently banned. During the height of the energy crisis and latterly the pandemic, the force-fitting of prepayment meters was paused. This is because an undercover journalist exposed British Gas operators illegally force-fitting prepayment meters. We know that the force-fitting of prepayment meters causes considerable harm to those who are forced to have them. It leads to people self-disconnecting and going without heating or hot food. Unfortunately, Ofgem has recently decided that energy companies can resume force-fitting prepayment meters, in accordance with a new set of rules. However, these rules do not reflect the wide scope of vulnerable clients. It is unacceptable that companies are force-fitting prepayment meters into the homes of the elderly, the dying, and the disabled when they are making ballooning profits. Energy companies should therefore be required to use their profits to support customers who really cannot afford their energy bills, rather than penalising them for being in debt. Therefore, the only way we can force companies to switch from penalising customers to supporting customers is by banning force-fitting of prepayment meters in their entirety.

The government should expand the Warm Home Discount, the Winter Fuel Allowance and the Cold Weather Payment schemes. This is because although these schemes provide some support with energy bills, they do not provide enough support given the burgeoning increase in the energy bills. This means that there are people who continue to struggle to pay their energy bills, despite receiving state support. There is an argument that expanding the support people can receive from the state support schemes could help reduce fuel poverty. At the moment the amount eligible pensioners could receive from the Winter Fuel Payment to help them pay their energy bills stands at between £250 and £600. Given the current energy crisis, the sum of money available from this is nowhere near enough. This is also the case with the £150 available from the Warm Home Discount for those on a low-income or in receipt of Pension Credit. The government needs to make both of these schemes more generous so that they cover a larger proportion of energy bills for pensioners. Doing this would ease the financial hardship, reduce the amount of energy debt that low-income pensioners find themselves getting into and help lift pensioners out of fuel poverty. Therefore, it is clear that the government needs to make the Winter Fuel Payment and the Warm Home Discount more generous in order to ease the financial hardship caused to the most vulnerable in society by rising energy bills.

The government should improve energy efficiency in homes across the country. This is because Britain has an enormous problem with damp and cold homes. The substandard housing conditions are adversely affecting millions of homeowners and renters. This is because living in a cold or damp home can cause or adversely affect various health conditions, which costs the NHS millions in avoidable hospitalisation and medical care. According to Citizens Advice, the highest proportion of homes in fuel poverty are in the private rented sector with 31% of renters unable to heat their home. The government should reinstate minimum energy efficiency standards in the private rented sector. This would force landlords to properly insulate their properties which would help reduce energy costs for tenants. Furthermore, the government should provide incentives and support to homeowners and landlords with insulation and energy efficiency. This is because providing government support will allow homeowners on lower incomes to improve their property’s insulation and replace older boilers. Providing government support to improve the energy efficiency of their homes would help reduce energy bills as homeowners would have better insulated and warmer homes. It is clear that government support to insulate properties and the imposition of minimum energy efficiency standards in rented properties would help to reduce energy bills. This is because these measures would encourage and force property owners to insulate and improve the energy efficiency in their homes which should result in energy bills falling. This is because people should use less energy once their homes are warmer. Therefore, it is clear that government mandating better insulation and energy efficiency in both privately rented and privately owned homes is vital to reducing energy costs and lifting people out of fuel poverty.

Child poverty:

No child should grow up in poverty. No child should be worried about where they are going to get the next meal from. Solving child poverty is something that every government should wish to see eradicated. The government should start by giving free school meals and providing free breakfast club places to every child with parents on Universal Credit. This would be an effective way of reducing child poverty as it would ensure that every child who is living in a low-income household has a hot meal and breakfast every day while they are at school. This would also ensure that children are getting at least two healthy, nutritious meals five days of the week. Schools are able to provide fruit and vegetables and are able to have healthy meals cooked on-site to ensure the children are well-fed. Providing healthy meals during school time is vital as low-income households are often simply not able to afford fresh fruit and vegetables, and sometimes they may not be able to cook hot meals due to being unable to pay the energy bills. Consequently, introducing free breakfast club places and providing free school meals would significantly ease pressure on parents as they would be able to pay the bills without worrying about how they are going to provide breakfast and lunch for their children while they are at school.

Child tooth decay is one of the biggest problems faced by young people. More and more children from poorer households are having to have infant teeth removed in hospital due to tooth decay. The government should introduce mandated supervised tooth brushing in all primary schools. This is because it will encourage children to brush their teeth every day and teachers can teach children about the importance of oral hygiene. Having supervised tooth brushing in school will improve the life chances of children as there will be increased attendance at school which we know affects educational outcomes of the poorest children. Having children brush their teeth at school will also help parents as the poorest parents may struggle to afford toothpaste and may be struggling to pay essential utility bills. This means that having tooth brushing as part of the school day will reduce the pressures on those parents and will help them manage the household budget and ensure that children are establishing good oral hygiene practices early in life. The government should also increase the number of dental appointments available to low-income children on the NHS. This is because some of the most deprived children are struggling to get access to a dentist which means that they are unable to get dental treatment when needed. This is shocking as there are children with tooth and mouth pain who have to go to A&E or wait many months, and sometimes years, for emergency dental treatment. This will affect the life chances of children as children who are in pain are unable to concentrate at school and will often miss days of school due to being in pain. This makes increasing the number of NHS dental appointments available to the poorest children a matter of urgency as supervised tooth brushing in school can only ever be a sticking plaster measure. Therefore, lifting children out of dental poverty will require the government to make a significant investment in making dental appointments on the NHS available to the poorest children while requiring primary schools to supervise tooth brushing in school in an attempt to establish healthy tooth brushing habits in children.

No child or young person should face homelessness. At the moment there are too many children and young people living in temporary accommodation while they wait for permanent housing. Often this housing is outside their local area, meaning that it is some distance from their schools and family support networks. Although the government may not be able to eradicate homelessness, the government needs to ensure that children have a basic standard of temporary accommodation while they wait for permanent homes. Temporary accommodation should be made safer and more sustainable for people to live in while they wait for permanent housing to become available. People are often in temporary accommodation for a long time; therefore, it is reasonable to expect that the accommodation would be safe and suitable. This is because there are steps that can be taken to make temporary accommodation suitable for a longer period. The government should introduce national standards for temporary accommodation. Every temporary accommodation setting should be equipped with WiFi, clean bedding, safe sleeping equipment, working cooking facilities, adequate space for children, and disability adaptions. Councils should be required to inspect the temporary accommodation in their area and enforce the national standards stringently. Furthermore, councils should be required to maintain a register of licenced temporary accommodation providers to ensure standards are maintained and councils should only be legally allowed to place people in licenced temporary accommodation placement settings. These measures would ensure that temporary accommodation is viable for the short to medium term and that it is of a sufficient standard to ensure that people can continue to live their lives while waiting for permanent housing to become available to them.

Keeping people housed:

Keeping people housed is really important. Every single person in this country has the right to a safe permanent home. Nobody should be sleeping on the streets or stranded in temporary accommodation. Everyone should be able to afford to own or rent a home that they can live in for a prolonged period. Unfortunately, the biggest problem that we face is the acute shortage of housing. The only way the country can drastically reduce the risk of homelessness is by building more affordable homes. Government should require every local council in the country to build a set number of council or housing association homes every year. The homelessness crisis is predominantly being caused by the sheer lack of housing in populated areas of the country. People are struggling to find properties to rent or buy which are affordable because demand is outstripping supply. If we want properties to be more affordable then we need to increase the supply of homes available to buy or rent.

The only long-term solution is for the government to build more homes to buy or rent. By conservative estimates, we need to build three-hundred thousand homes each year in order to keep up with demand. The government should therefore start building new homes to rent or buy at pace. These new homes should be built on brownfield sites and on some greenfield sites running on either side of major railway lines. This is because there is land that is currently not being used which could be built on to provide housing. The government needs to force housebuilders to build new homes on old industrial sites or greenfield sites that are no longer used. The government also needs to force housebuilders to make a significant proportion of new housing developments are affordable homes. Mandating that more homes be built on available land and that more of those homes are advertised at affordable prices should help to ease the housing crisis.

The risk of homelessness could be radically reduced by making the housing costs element of Universal Credit more generous. This is because at the moment the housing costs element only subsidises the rental liability for most private tenants. This means that it is still possible that some claimants will find themselves in rent arrears due to being unable to afford the portion of rent they have to pay. The result of this can sadly be evictions as landlords seek to remove tenants who cannot pay so they can replace them with tenants who are able to meet the rental liabilities in full. Therefore, there is an argument that the housing costs element of Universal Credit should be made more generous. This is because if there was less of a shortfall in rents then landlords may not feel the need to evict tenants on the basis of them not meeting their rental liability. This would then mean that there would be less pressure on the local councils to find housing for people as there would be fewer people being made homeless. This means that making the housing costs element of Universal Credit more generous would be a good idea across the board.

Therefore, it is clear that there are several levers the government could pull to eradicate poverty. However, the government should focus first on introducing measures which will have the greatest impact on reducing poverty. Giving free school meals and providing free breakfast club places to every child with parents on Universal Credit and making both the standard element and the housing costs element of Universal Credit more generous would arguably have an immediate impact on poverty. This is because these measures would reduce the number of children going to school hungry and they would also reduce the number of households struggling to afford essentials and facing homelessness due to rent arrears. Hence it is clear that it is possible for the government to enact measures that will greatly reduce poverty. The aim of eradicating poverty is a laudable one and it is clear there are many levers the government could pull to eradicate poverty in British society.