In May the Centre for Social Justice published Rethinking Child Poverty, arguing that current measures for child poverty “[fail] to acknowledge that poverty is about much more than a lack of income… To construct a measure of poverty that is both accurate and useful, it is vital that the main drivers of poverty – family breakdown, educational failure, economic dependency and worklessness, addiction and serious personal debt – are made the priority for measurement.”
This weekend, Archbishop of York Dr John Sentamu gave his reply. The Archbishop writes that “instead of redefining Child Poverty, we urgently need to do something about it.” He believes income inequality is the root of child poverty and recommends we “look at how Beveridge tackled the giants of inequality and use that as a blueprint for a new social covenant.”
You can’t begin to tackle a problem until you define and measure it. If Beveridge was writing his report today, how would he have defined child poverty?