Compared to many other places in the world, and in the UK, we’re pretty lucky in Kent as far as poverty goes, I’d say. Or so I thought until I researched how this blog could be useful as a part of the global Blog Action Day today.
It’s obvious that UK poverty is a different thing altogether from poverty in the third world – but regardless of this, it is indeed unacceptable and not necessary.
Just this month, Sinead Hanna’s article appears at KM Online – “One in four Kent children lives in poverty” and provides a list that shows 48% of children in Thanet are in low income families, across to the other side of the county with 24% of children in Sevenoaks.
The Campaign to End Child Poverty website states:
3.9 million children – one in three – are currently living in poverty in the UK, one of the highest rates in the industrialised world. This is a shocking figure given the wealth of our nation.
But I have to admit that stating that almost 1 in 4 children in Sevenoaks are living in or close to poverty has me wondering just how that is measured, I’m afraid. I certainly do not intend to dispute that there is real poverty around and close to us, but it concerns me that if the figures are not reflecting the real life situation, then are the people that need help the most going to get it first?
So more research to do on this, I think – it’s important and that’s my pledge for Blog Action Day as editor of Kent View – to understand just what poverty in Kent means…
It is hard to believe that 1 in 4 kids lives in poverty in Sevenoaks and I would certainly question the veracity of the claim. It seems to be based on the number of children in ‘workless families and those who get working tax credits’.
But then I suppose it depends on what you mean by ‘poverty’. In the US, it is defined by income – the poverty line is around $10,000 pa, for example.
Thanks Babs, this highlights that poverty is closer than we actually think.
As Sally says in her comment, if it is based on workless families and working tax credits, that’s hardly a good definition of poverty, is it? I mean, you can get the WTC even when you have quite a high family income, can’t you. Certainly not the kind of figure Sarah Arrow is talking about in the USA.
Making sensible claims in support of your cause is something I feel strongly about in my guise as The Nappy Lady (www.thenappylady.co.uk), because I feel far too many campaigners focus on emotive issues that are easily disproved from a factual point of view. The risk is that people think “well, if that bit is wrong, the rest must be rubbish, too” and then switch off.
If we apply this principle of construction to any of the powers of the Government, we shall find it so pernicious in its operation that we shall be compelled to discard it. ,