That black, Asian and minority ethnic people in Britain are disproportionately likely to be poor is not news. The relationship between class and race is a strong one, embedded deep in our history. But a new report highlighting the increasing exposure of minority ethnic people, particularly women and children, to the most extreme forms of poverty is cause for alarm. In the current context of heightened risks for low-income households due to rising prices, the prospect of increased racial inequality is especially unwelcome. It means not only unfairness but serious hardship: hunger, destitution, cold and debt.
The findings by the Runnymede Trust show that minority ethnic people are 2.2 times more likely than white people to be in deep poverty – and three times more likely if they are Bangladeshi. Social security cuts over the past decade have hit minority ethnic families harder, and they are expected to benefit less than white families from the government’s energy price cap. While the new measures are expected to reduce fuel poverty rates among white households by 53%, for racial minorities the figure is 35%. The proportion of black children facing food insecurity is 24%. Having stalled since the financial crisis of 2007/08, efforts at reducing these socio-economic disparities have gone into reverse.
The report offers several explanations besides benefit cuts. Prominent among these is the overrepresentation of people of colour, especially women, in low-paying and insecure jobs. Another factor is the low level of home ownership, and lack of other assets, among some minority groups. In the past, the strong emphasis placed on incomes by policymakers seeking to boost social mobility has sometimes led to wealth being overlooked. Differences in housing tenure, and the growth in the private rental sector relative to social housing, is another reason for the worsening position of poorer minority households.
Under successive Conservative governments, the dominant frame for discussions of inequality has been geographical, with the levelling up agenda supposed to redistribute opportunities and resources away from the south-east and big cities towards parts of the country often described as “left behind”. This approach has not delivered. Underfunding of health and social care, cuts to benefits and a lack of public investment undermined it. But the reframing of inequality as primarily a problem of place has served to negate the importance of other aspects – including race. Against this backdrop, the perspective offered by Runnymede is particularly important.
Unpicking the causes of inequality is complicated. Research from the Institute for Fiscal Studies last year showed that second-generation ethnic minority groups are less upwardly mobile than one would expect, given their educational attainment. Why this is the case is something policymakers should seek to understand. Differences in outcomes between ethnic minorities, as well as between them and the white population, also require investigation. Discrimination remains a fact of life. Rising poverty is deeply concerning, whichever demographics are affected. Children should not be hungry and cold. But the lens of race remains a vital one that should be used by all who are serious about levelling up.
