Last week, Professor Philip Alston, the Special Rapporteur on extreme poverty and human rights for the United Nations, released a report following his official tour of the United Kingdom. One of the report’s most notable aspects was a damning indictment of the Conservative Government’s policies which in the past eight years have assumed a rigid austerity programme. Even though the UK has the fifth largest economy in the world, one-fifth of its population lives in poverty. The Government justifies frugality and the cutting of public services as the effective and necessary measure in response to 2008’s financial crash. However, Alston disputes this argument, writing that in “the area of poverty-related policy, the evidence points to the conclusion that the driving force has not been economic but rather the commitment to achieving radical social re-engineering.”
Alston states that, “great misery has… been inflicted unnecessarily” by austerity, deployed as a political decision and fuelled by a system of thought that encourages the de-cluttering of the state and maximization of the free market. The poverty that has consequently arisen does not seem to be recognized; as Alston comments, the Government is “determinedly in a state of denial”. Despite having focused on the perfectly reasonable aim of achieving full employment, it has overseen the parallel rise of insecure jobs that do not provide adequate payment for respective living costs. In fact, around 60% of those in poverty in the UK are families where someone works. 2.8 million people in poverty are part of families where all adults work full time, and 2.5 million people live just 10% above the poverty line, meaning that any sudden economic change or personal crisis could easily result in long-term hardship. The capability of the state to provide a safety net has been weakened greatly by cuts for public services. The National Audit Office has reported that local governments in England have seen a 49% real-term reduction of Government funding from 2010 to 2018. Despite the increased need for public services during times of national economic hardship, these services have been underfunded and are hence unable to shoulder the financial burden. Perhaps the most shocking aspect of the UN report is the figures given on child poverty rates estimated at around 40%, which the Institute for Fiscal Studies predicts to rise another 7% before 2022. As Alston commented: “For almost one in every two children to be poor in twenty-first century Britain is not just a disgrace, but a social calamity and an economic disaster, all rolled into one.”
There are immediate measures, such as increasing public spending, that would significantly alleviate the burden of economic hardship faced by so many as a result of austerity. However, there is already a widespread debate amongst academics and policymakers on how welfare in the UK could be reformed more fundamentally. This was the thinking behind the Government’s Universal Credit scheme, a policy that gained widespread support for its consolidation of several benefits into a single payment, yet has been rolled out across the country. A mandatory six-week waiting period for the first payment, based on the assumption that the recipient would maintain themselves on savings in that time, highlighted the gulf between the Government and the economic realities faced by so many. Outside of Westminster, more ambitious schemes have been discussed, seeking to modernize the welfare state and bring about social reform. One proposed solution which has gained widespread attention is Universal Basic Income, a payment made unconditionally to the whole population. This proposition was further analyzed by the University College of London’s Institute for Global Prosperity whose report outlined a Universal Basic Services framework. Through this scheme, certain necessities like housing and food would be “free at the point of need”, a crucial tenet enshrined in the establishment of the welfare state in the 20th century. This would combat rough sleeping and homelessness, which have risen by 134% and 60% respectively since 2010. Likewise, the distribution of food to those in need would tackle significant household costs. Since 2012, the number of food banks has risen from 29 to 2,000, as families struggle to meet their costs on stagnant and insufficient wages. The Institute outlines several other services, such as free access to the Internet, a mobile phone, and public transport. The report estimates that by reforming the Personal Allowance threshold the 2.3% of GDP necessary to fund the proposal could be raised. This reform UCL contends would be cheaper than a Universal Basic Income system. Yet, the current administration has shown complete unwillingness to consider either increasing public spending or the testing of novel policy systems.
Westminster’s constant state of tension, anxiety, and furor over Brexit negotiations impedes the government’s capacity to focus on domestic social challenges. Whilst for some politicians the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union will promise “sunlit uplands”, many economists fear the worst. As it seems increasingly likely that the Prime Minister’s Brexit agreement will be killed off in Parliament, the prospect of a no deal scenario looms. The International Monetary Fund estimates that if the UK were to leave the EU in March next year without a deal, it could cost the economy between 5% and 8% of its GDP. With this in mind, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has calculated that inflation, regardless of a deal, could leave up to 900,000 more people in a state of poverty. Ultimately, the burden will fall on those who are already struggling to maintain a decent standard of living. As countless British citizens continue to struggle the Government will most likely continue its pattern of denial.
As a likely byproduct of widespread economic hardship the public’s resentment of the state was clearly evidenced by the saliency of the Leave campaign’s slogan to “take back control,” which seemed to ring true with those who voted in favour of Brexit. It articulated a sense of dislocation from the political system and its decisions. The result, which laughed in the face of the vast majority of experts in various sectors, revealed a deep disillusionment with power in its varying forms within the UK. Whilst cases can certainly be made about the historical precedents of this discontent, it would be hard to argue that austerity has not contributed to it. A dismantling of local government budgets has ensured the demise of important “place-making” aspects of society, which built communities and a sense of engagement amongst individuals. In fact, as Eric Klinenberg notes, 343 libraries have closed between 2010 and 2016, despite their recognized significance as a glue of social cohesion. The same has happened to community and youth centers, amongst other public buildings which have been sold off in an attempt to shed “unnecessary” economic burdens. In the city of Oxford, community shelters for rough sleepers have had to slash the number of beds available and face closure as council budgets fail to account for them. Growing economic and social inequality, magnified by the loss of community spaces and buildings, all further growing detachment and a sense of alienation from governing systems.
According to many plans to overhaul the welfare state will not suffice and as a result, radical ideas about the economy and its function have been articulated. From the think tank, the Institute for Public Policy Research, a report on “economic justice” has been published, arguing for a complete reconfiguration of how we conceive the economy and its role in society. By increasing the bargaining power of workers, promoting public investment, reconsidering taxation on wealth and corporations, and ensuring that the huge profits to be gained from technological advancement, such as automation, will be distributed evenly across society, the report advocates social reform not through standard policy measures, but in a way that is “hard-wired” into the economic framework. A more equal economy, it predicts, will stimulate low productivity in the UK, while encouraging greater wellbeing among the population. In order to approach the problem systematically, the Royal Society of the Arts has launched a campaign for “deliberative democracy”. This would involve widespread discussions between citizens over major social challenges, which would broaden decision-making away from the short-term outlooks of political parties. A deliberative democracy format would resemble citizens’ assemblies in Ireland, which effectively produce reports that are then presented to parliament. These suggestions aim to engage the population within decision-making, enabling a sense of collective control over long-term societal challenges. Whilst the UK has always suffered from a myopic centrism, the austerity measures of recent years have pulled power from local governments, as well as devolved governments in Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales.
As Brexit continues to drag politics further into itself, the Government will fail to properly account for the issues Alston outlines in his original report. Rising poverty in the UK requires immediate action, but growing inequality paired with the slow deterioration of the country’s social fabric, further calls for long-term fundamental change. Thankfully, much has been done to question the status quo; from community projects to think tanks and academics. Nonetheless, it will take a Government that is willing to test such ideas, in order to see productive reform.
