It is 11 years since the Guardian launched a Breadline Britain series intended to uncover the truth about the scale of hardship in the early years of austerity. Around 3.6m households were found to belong to a “squeezed middle”, which meant they were one misfortune away from penury. New research on living standards by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) doesn’t tell us how many of those same households have since been squashed into poverty. But it does reveal that half as many families as were struggling in 2012, but managing to hold on to a decent standard of living, are now destitute. Basic needs are not being met. The problem of poverty, and all its attendant harms, has dramatically worsened.
Hard on the heels of another report revealing that 1 million UK children lack their own bed, this snapshot of life for the worst-off households is full of upsetting details, such as parents skipping meals in order that children can eat. The JRF found that 1.8m households, including around 1 million children, went without some combination of food, heat, housing and other essentials last year. Shockingly, one in 20 people (3.8 million out of a population of 67.3 million) now fall into the category of destitute. Single adults are the type of household most likely to be in that category.
Over half of these households have a weekly income of less than £85 and Paul Kissack, the JRF’s chief executive, describes their plight as an “urgent moral mission”. The choice of words points to a growing sense that terms such as fairness and opportunity, which are commonly used in discussions of socioeconomic disadvantage, fail to convey the level of need.
There is no solution to this crisis that does not involve raising benefits, though housing and wages are also crucial. The JRF and the Trussell Trust recently proposed a legal floor below which benefits should not be able to fall – the level to be set by an independent body. But since there is no chance of the current government adopting such a scheme, the JRF’s latest report suggests measures including restrictions on the sanctions that can be imposed on benefit claimants, and a change in the law so that asylum seekers can work (migrants are one of the groups among whom destitution has risen the most).
Beyond such practical steps, there is also a colossal communications challenge. Public attitudes to benefits have softened in recent years. From 40% in 2005, the proportion who regard claimants as undeserving has shrunk to 19%, according to the British Social Attitudes survey. But while most people see poverty as a problem, just 37% believe benefits should rise, making a more generous settlement a risky proposition for politicians courting popularity. In light of this, it was reassuring to see Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, committing recently to “dust off some of those Fabian pamphlets to rebuild a welfare state that treats all people with dignity”.
As Ms Reeves knows, this will take political courage as well as workable policy. Tackling destitution and the myriad social problems associated with it should not be regarded as the exclusive purview of anti-poverty charities, as important as they are, but a national priority that concerns everyone.
