Northern Ireland Assembly Flax Flower Logo

Session 2007/2008

Third Report

COMMITTEE FOR THE OFFICE OF THE FIRST MINISTER AND DEPUTY FIRST MINISTER

Final Report on the Committee’s Inquiry into Child Poverty in Northern Ireland

VOLUME ONE
TOGETHER WITH THE MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE COMMITTEE
RELATING TO THE REPORT AND THE MINUTES OF EVIDENCE

Ordered by The Committee for the Office of the First Minister and
Deputy First Minister to be printed 4 June 2008
Report: 08/07/08R (The Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister)

This document is available in a range of alternative formats.
For more information please contact the
Northern Ireland Assembly, Printed Paper Office,
Parliament Buildings, Stormont, Belfast, BT4 3XX
Tel: 028 9052 1078

Membership and Powers

Powers

The Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister is a Statutory Committee established in accordance with paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Belfast Agreement, Section 29 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and under Assembly Standing Order 46. The Committee has a scrutiny, policy development and consultation role with respect to the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister and has a role in the initiation of legislation.

The Committee has power to:

Membership

The Committee has 11 members, including a Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, and a quorum of five members.

The membership of the Committee is as follows:

Table of Contents

Volume One

Section

Executive Summary

Summary of Recommendations

1. Introduction

2. Approach of the Committee and focus of the report

3. Definition and measurement of child poverty

4. The evidence-base for the prevention of child poverty

5. Strategies to tackle child poverty in Northern Ireland

6. Policies to increase income

7. Tackling rising costs and financial exclusion

8. Promoting employment

9. Measures to tackle long-term disadvantage

10. Cross-cutting approaches

11. Conclusions

Appendices

1. Minute of Proceedings

2. Minutes of Evidence

Volume Two

Appendices

3. List of Written Submissions to the Committee

4. Written Submissions to the Committee

5. List of Witnesses Who Gave Evidence to the Committee

6. List of Research Papers

7. Research Papers

8. List of Other Evidence Considered by the Committee

9. Other Evidence Considered by the Committee

10. List of Abbreviations

Executive Summary

Purpose of the Report

Eliminating child poverty is one of the principal long-term objectives of the Executive and the Committee commends the Executive for adopting child poverty as a priority in the Programme for Government. In this report the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister has sought to develop a detailed understanding of child poverty in Northern Ireland and to use this understanding as the basis for the development of constructive suggestions to assist the Executive, and indeed future administrations, in developing a robust strategy to eliminate child poverty.

Child Poverty in Northern Ireland

A lack of money and low levels of income are at the core of child poverty. The most widely accepted measure of poverty is a measure of relative low income. Children are identified as being in relative income poverty if household income is less that 60% of the median household income in the UK. However, child poverty is about more than just a lack of money. Living in poverty has the potential to limit the aspirations and expectations of children and thereby contribute to a renewed cycle of poverty.

The Committee found that although levels of child poverty did fall in the late 1990s and in the early part of this decade, there has been no significant decrease in levels of child poverty during the past three years and there are still more than 100,000 children living in relative income poverty in Northern Ireland.

Tackling Rising Costs

The Committee is extremely concerned that, in the short-term, as a result of the rising cost of basic necessities such as food and fuel (the cost of a typical fill of home heating oil has risen to almost £600), there is the potential for levels of child poverty to rise over the next few years. The factors behind current economic challenges and such rising costs are in many ways outside the control of Government. Nevertheless, the Committee urges the Executive to apply pressure to the UK Government to provide further support to low income families to assist them in coping with the rising costs of basic necessities. The Committee welcomes the initiative to establish a taskforce to make recommendations on tackling fuel poverty and recommends that the Executive allocates specific resources to address the immediate crisis being faced by low income households.

Promoting Employment

The Committee was provided with evidence of the groups at most risk of child poverty and commissioned research into best practice in tackling child poverty. Not surprisingly, having a job is the factor that most protects families from poverty. A child in a workless household has a 58% chance of being in poverty compared with a risk of poverty of 14% for a child when one or both of their parents is working. However, the Committee was surprised to find that although employment significantly reduces the risk of poverty, almost half of children in poverty live in a household with at least one working parent. The significance of this finding is that it emphasises the importance of ensuring that economic development and employment strategies focus on increasing the quality of jobs that are created, as well as on the number of jobs.

The Committee identified that one of the most significant barriers to employment for low income families is the lack of availability of good quality, affordable childcare in Northern Ireland. This is particularly the case for lone parent families and families with a child who has a disability and is also a specific problem in rural areas. The Committee is of the view that childcare provision in Northern Ireland is woefully inadequate, recommends immediate action to resolve the dispute over responsibility for school aged childcare, and calls on the Executive to commit to the early development of a Childcare Strategy for Northern Ireland.

Policies to Increase Income

Evidence considered by the Committee highlighted the importance of policy in relation to taxation and benefits in tackling poverty. Countries with the lowest rates of children living in poverty (like those in the Nordic region) allocate the highest proportion of their gross national product to social expenditure, particularly family and other related social transfers. Some of these matters are outside the control of the Executive, but research considered by the Committee emphasised that the manner in which policies are implemented can have a significant impact on their effectiveness. For example, delivery systems for benefits can have a particularly significant impact on levels of severe poverty, as benefit levels are in fact set above the threshold for severe poverty. The Committee is therefore recommending that the Executive should develop a cross-departmental Benefit Uptake Strategy to assist low income families to obtain their full benefit entitlement.

Measures to Tackle Long-term Disadvantage

In the long-term, improving the health and well-being and educational outcomes of families in poverty has a critical role in helping to address the cycle of deprivation. The Committee recognises the successes that there have been over the past decade in improving overall educational outcomes and in increasing life expectancy and reducing levels of preventable illness. However, the gaps in educational and health outcomes between children living in poverty and children from more affluent backgrounds remain stubbornly unaffected. The Committee is convinced of the importance of early intervention and family based approaches in seeking to break the cycle of poverty and wishes to see the Executive establishing specific objectives to increase the level of investment across government in early years services and to increase the number of places provided within Sure Start. The Committee has also identified the need for legislation relating to the planning of children’s services to be reviewed to ensure that there is a truly joined-up approach to children’s services planning in Northern Ireland.

Overall Strategy to Tackle Child Poverty

The Committee has come to the conclusion that the development of a robust, properly resourced, implementation plan, supported by effective arrangements to ensure that all departments deliver on their child poverty commitments is critical if the Executive is to achieve its targets to reduce child poverty and eliminate severe child poverty. The Committee recommends the establishment of an independent expert panel that would examine and report to the First Minister and deputy First Minister on the contribution of the Programme for Government, Budget, Investment Strategy and associated delivery plans, to tackling child poverty. In addition, the Committee is proposing that the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) and the Department of Finance and Personnel should consult on the introduction of a system of financial incentives and penalties in relation to the delivery of cross-departmental priorities, such as child poverty.

Collective Commitment to Eliminating Child Poverty

Eliminating child poverty will require leadership and political will. The Committee believes that, in unanimously agreeing the recommendations in this report it has demonstrated that the political will exists to tackle child poverty in Northern Ireland. The Committee is of the view that a collective approach to the elimination of child poverty in Northern Ireland, which involves all political parties, and key public, private, voluntary and community partners, can be constructed. The starting point for a consensus on child poverty would be a comprehensive response to this report and its recommendations, in terms of a properly resourced, robust anti-poverty implementation plan.

Summary of Recommendations

Definition and Measurement of Child Poverty

1. We recommend that the Executive should, when defining, measuring and tackling child poverty, take account of the importance of ensuring that children and young people retain an expectation of achievement.

2. We support the decision by OFMDFM to adopt the 3-tiered approach to the measurement of child poverty used by the UK Government. In addition to measuring both absolute and relative low income, the Executive must ensure that material deprivation is also measured.

3. We recommend that OFMDFM and the Executive carefully consider the extent and distribution of poverty, including rural poverty, across Northern Ireland when developing their approach to tackling child poverty and when planning new investments and services. The Committee also recognises the importance of identifying and tackling smaller areas of deprivation, which are often masked by more affluent surrounding districts. It is vital that the Executive’s strategies and plans are based on a robust assessment of objective need.

4. We commend the Executive for adopting its target to work towards the elimination of severe child poverty. However, if this is to represent a meaningful commitment and not an aspiration, the Executive must establish, in advance of reviewing the Programme for Government, a baseline and system of measurement for the new severe poverty target.

Strategies to Tackle Child Poverty in Northern Ireland

5. We recommend that OFMDFM should move quickly to adopt the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy as the framework for its work to tackle poverty and social exclusion. Critically, this will allow OFMDFM to focus on remedying some of the deficiencies within the Strategy through the development of a properly resourced medium-term action plan, which includes SMART intermediate objectives and targets capable of delivering the Executive’s child poverty targets.

6. Following extensive deliberations, and taking particular account of the fact that the target to reduce child poverty by 50% by 2010 is a UK-wide target, the Committee has decided, on balance, to support the retention of the current target and to recommend that it be reviewed following publication of the 2006/2007 data later this year.

7. We accept that the Executive’s Anti-Poverty Strategy will have a critical role in filling many of the gaps in the current policy framework, but remain of the view that the Programme for Government and related PSAs need to be significantly strengthened if they are to ensure that resources and actions are effectively directed by departments towards the elimination of child poverty. As an immediate step, the Committee recommends that the First Minister and deputy First Minister:

8. We recommend that that during the first review of the Programme for Government specific targets should be included in relation to:

9. We recommend that OFMDFM should insist on the inclusion within Programme for Government Delivery Agreements of a short-list of the changes to be introduced by each department to contribute to the objective of a shared and better future and that this should include measures which contribute to the reduction in levels of child poverty.

10. We wish to encourage the Committee for Social Development to carefully monitor the delivery of the commitment in the Investment Strategy to deliver 10,000 new social and affordable houses by 2013.

11. We consider the development of improved spatial information to be key to the Investment Strategy’s contribution to tackling weaknesses in infrastructure and to the Strategy’s capacity to take account of objective need. The Committee will therefore expect to receive an update on the progress made by the Strategic Investment Board, and departments, to develop such information within Investment Delivery Plans, during evidence sessions to follow-up the Committee’s report on the Programme for Government and Investment Strategy.

12. We recognise the particular role of the Committee for Finance and Personnel in monitoring compliance with the guidance on the role of procurement in contributing to the socio-economic and sustainability objectives of the Executive and recommend that all statutory committees examine their department’s compliance with the guidance when scrutinising Investment Delivery Plans.

13. The Executive must quickly distance itself from the approach of direct rule Ministers to the production of ambitious strategy documents which are then supported by unambitious action plans, which act more as a statement of existing departmental action than as a real plan for change. The Lifetime Opportunities implementation plan must focus on identifying the intermediate, 3-year outcomes that need to be achieved to deliver each of the long-term poverty reduction and social exclusion targets, detail the additional or changed outputs that are planned to achieve such outcomes, explain the timeframe for delivery and how the outputs are to be resourced.

14. We call on OFMDFM to ensure that the inclusion of narrative and descriptions of existing departmental activity is minimised within Implementation Plans supporting the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy.

15. We welcome the recognition of tackling poverty and disadvantage within the public expenditure planning process and ask OFMDFM and the Department of Finance and Personnel to ensure that this remains a feature in future Budget rounds.

16. We welcome the proposal to establish a sub-group of the Executive to identify the key actions that are required to deliver on the commitments in the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy. However, it is likely that this process will take some months and the Committee remains of the view that OFMDFM should have a role in challenging departmental Delivery Agreements to ensure the relevance and robustness of departmental targets and actions designed to contribute to the cross-cutting theme of a shared and better future.

17. We recommend that OFMDFM and the Department of Finance and Personnel should consider, following consultation with this Committee and the Committee for Finance and Personnel, the introduction of a system of financial incentives and penalties in relation to the delivery of cross-departmental priorities, such as child poverty.

18. We recommend that, in addition to the introduction of new performance management arrangements for the Programme for Government and the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy, OFMDFM should establish an independent panel of experts to report to the First Minister and deputy First Minister on the impact of the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy and associated delivery plans, on families in poverty or at risk of poverty.

19. We wish to encourage other statutory committees, as part of their work to scrutinise the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy, to challenge departments to identify the principal measures being introduced to reduce poverty and to set out how these measures are being resourced.

20. We wish to encourage leaders within local government, OFMDFM and the Department of the Environment to take account of the potential role of local government in tackling child poverty when developing new systems for community planning and during the development of agreements on funding and priorities between central and local government.

Policies to Increase Income

21. We recommend that, following a review of initial benefit uptake programmes, consideration should be given by the Department for Social Development to the establishment of longer-term benefit uptake contracts and the adoption of alternative methods to try to contact hard to reach families living in poverty.

22. We recommend that the Department for Social Development brings forward legislative proposals which would enable information to be shared with other government agencies to enable more effective approaches to be developed to encourage benefit uptake.

23. We recommend that, as a first major initiative in seeking to eliminate severe poverty, the Executive should commit to the development of a cross-departmental Benefit Uptake Strategy.

24. We consider that, given the similar challenges faced in seeking to reduce child poverty, the Executive should seek to ensure that policy on poverty reduction continues to be a matter for co-operation and information sharing on both a North/South and East/West basis.

25. The Committee calls on Ministers to lobby the UK Government for the reopening of an office dealing with tax credits in Northern Ireland and for improvements to verification procedures and the administration of the tax credit system.

Tackling Rising Costs and Financial Exclusion

26. The impact of fuel bills that are quite literally rising by the week is so significant that we believe OFMDFM, and indeed the wider Executive, must develop a specific plan of action to deal with the issue of rising costs for people on low income.

27. We urge the Minister for Social Development to ensure that the Fuel Poverty Taskforce considers all practical options, including options for additional payments or special tariffs for vulnerable groups. The Committee believes that in the current climate all options must be considered.

28. The Fuel Poverty Taskforce should consider how, in addition to potential investments by the public sector to increase levels of energy efficiency, the private sector, including the regulated utilities and major fuel companies, could more effectively contribute to minimising fuel costs for people on low income. The powers of the regulator to incentivise and enforce such an approach should also be considered. At a more local level, policies relating to the fuel choices of low income families may need to be reviewed and serious consideration should be given to how people on low income could be assisted to minimise costs though the creation of cooperatives, thereby enabling the bulk buying of fuel at a reduced price.

29. We recommend that the Executive prioritises the issue of high fuel costs during monitoring rounds and looks creatively at other options that could be used to finance the recommendations that emerge from the Fuel Poverty Taskforce.

30. The Committee asks the relevant departments and committees with responsibility for rates and water charges to ensure that, in developing measures to protect people on low income from further hardship, proper account is taken of the reduced incomes available to many vulnerable groups.

31. We recommend that within the Lifetime Opportunities Implementation Plan a new objective should be included to seek to minimise the impact of rising costs on low income households. As part of this objective, specific consideration should be given to the development of measures that minimise the cost to families on low income of government services. The principles of free education and free health care at the point of delivery must be at the heart of proposals to minimise the cost of services to families on low income.

32. We welcome the recognition by OFMDFM of the role of financial inclusion in tackling poverty and would wish to see this reflected in the Lifetime Opportunities Implementation Plan. We are aware that the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment has launched an inquiry on credit unions and recommend that the Committee investigates whether the direct engagement of credit unions, in the manner employed by the Money Advice and Budgeting Service in the Republic of Ireland, would help to improve the impact of the debt advice service in Northern Ireland.

33. We recommend that the Consumer Council be asked to work with NIHE, the Department for Social Development and insurance companies to investigate low-cost house insurance options, which take account of the levels of home contents insurance required by families on low income.

Promoting Employment

34. We call on OFMDFM to initiate a review, involving other relevant departments, to consider the issues addressed by the package for disabled children’s services in England in relation to the provision of short breaks, accessible childcare, transition support and parents’ fora and, based on the outcome of the review, to make recommendations to the Executive on the development of a resourced programme of action to deliver equivalent improvements in Northern Ireland.

35. We call on OFMDFM, as a matter of priority, to resolve the dispute between the Department of Education and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety over school aged childcare by assigning lead responsibility for childcare policy to the most appropriate department.

36. We call on Executive Ministers to ensure that before introducing welfare reform programmes which have been developed in other parts of the UK, careful consideration is given to their implementation in Northern Ireland, and, in particular, we recommend that an evaluation is carried out of whether necessary support services, such as childcare, are in place prior to their implementation.

37. We recommend that the Executive should set a date for the development of a long-term, properly resourced Childcare Strategy and take immediate action to resolve the funding crisis for school aged childcare. The Committee recommends that the Strategy should include specific targets to:

38. We recommend that consideration be given to introducing a statutory duty to require sufficient childcare provision to meet the needs of the community in general and in particular those families on lower incomes and those with disabled children.

39. We recommend that specific targets for improving childcare provision in rural areas be included in the Childcare Strategy.

40. We recommend that making work pay should be a specific objective within the Lifetime Opportunities Implementation Plan and that the Department for Social Development, with the support of OFMDFM, should work with departments in the UK on the development of a pilot “Better off in Work” initiative in Northern Ireland.

Measures to Tackle Long-term Disadvantage

41. The Committee considers that more attention needs to be paid to identifying and targeting the population groups at most risk of poor educational or health outcomes with specific, evidence-based strategies that will deliver real improvements for such groups.

42. It is crucial that the Early Years Strategy being led by the Department for Education is properly resourced and is quickly followed by an implementation plan containing SMART targets. We recommend that the Early Years Strategy should include specific targets on:

43. We recommend that OFMDFM and relevant departments and agencies, including, in particular, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and the Department of Education, review and update legislation underpinning children’s services planning with a view to:

Cross-Cutting Approaches

44. The Committee is of the view that:

(a) Further consideration should be given to how the process of Equality Impact Assessment could better inform policies in relation to their impact on groups at high risk of poverty; and

(b) The Anti-Poverty Unit in OFMDFM, with the support of the Department of Finance and Personnel, should have a role in challenging and reporting on whether key policies have taken adequate account of their impact on groups in poverty or at risk of poverty.

45. We recommend that OFMDFM should consider how to use the outcome of its work on Promoting Social Inclusion to improve understanding among policy makers and service providers of the groups which are most at risk of poverty and social exclusion and the steps that will have most impact in removing such groups from poverty and exclusion.

46. We recommend that the key recommendations from the Promoting Social Inclusion reports are integrated into the planning and implementation processes for the Programme for Government and Lifetime Opportunities Strategy.

47. We wish to encourage the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, in consultation with the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development, to consider carefully how to utilise the funding package on rural poverty and social exclusion to maximise its impact on rural child poverty over the long-term.

Introduction

Inquiry Terms of Reference

1. At its meeting of 4 July 2007, the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister agreed to conduct its first inquiry into child poverty. The terms of reference for the inquiry were agreed at the Committee meeting on 3 October 2007.

Terms of Reference for the Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee will examine the current strategic approach to tackling child poverty in Northern Ireland.

Specifically the Committee will:

The Inquiry Process

2. The inquiry into child poverty was formally launched on 17 October 2007. Advertisements requesting submissions by 16 November 2007 were placed in the local newspapers on 22 October 2007. In addition, the Committee agreed to write directly to Assembly Ministers and a number of interest groups, to request submissions on each of the matters included within the terms of reference of the inquiry. A list of those organisations and groups that submitted written evidence is attached at Appendix 3.

3. On 17 October 2007, the Committee decided to produce an interim report on its inquiry for the purpose of influencing the draft Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy for Northern Ireland. The interim report reflected the Committee’s initial consideration of the research and evidence presented to Members and sought to highlight to the Assembly and the Executive some of the key issues that needed to be taken into account before finalising the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy. The report was published on 09 January 2008. The Committee did not seek a specific response to the report, rather it was anticipated that the final Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy and related plans would represent the Executive’s response to the interim report. The Committee’s views on the extent to which the final Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy adequately address the challenge of seeking to eradicate child poverty are set out in section 5 of the report.

4. The complexity and cross-departmental nature of seeking to develop robust recommendations on child poverty is reflected by the fact that the Committee received 48 written submissions and considered oral evidence from 28 key stakeholders and 7 government departments. A list of the witnesses who provided oral evidence to the Committee is attached at Appendix 5. Transcripts of the oral evidence sessions are attached at Appendix 2.

5. In addition, following a number of oral evidence sessions, the Committee sought and received additional information, to further inform the Child Poverty Inquiry. Copies of these additional papers are included at Appendix 9.

6. The Committee also commissioned detailed research papers on both the definition and measurement of child poverty, and on potential solutions to child poverty and severe child poverty, from the Assembly’s Research and Library Service. Copies of these papers are included at Appendix 7.

7. On 30 April 2008, the Committee held an informal meeting to review the evidence to the inquiry and received presentations from representatives of Combat Poverty Agency and the New Policy Institute on priorities for tackling child poverty and good practice in the UK and the Republic of Ireland in addressing such priorities. Copies of the presentations received are included at Appendix 9.

8. The Committee was also eager to receive more direct evidence about the experiences of children and young people living in poverty. Save the Children and the University of Ulster therefore provided the Committee with a briefing on 30 April 2008 on a number of research projects, including some as yet unpublished research, which involved children and young people offering their views on the impact of poverty and on potential solutions. A copy of the briefing paper from Save the Children and the University of Ulster is included in the report at Appendix 9.

9. The Committee considered a draft report on child poverty in Northern Ireland at its meetings on 21 May 2008 and 28 May 2008 and on 4 June 2008 the Committee agreed its final report and ordered that the report be printed.

Acknowledgements

10. The Committee for the Office of the First Minster and Deputy First Minster would like to express and record its appreciation and thanks to all the organisations who contributed to the inquiry.

Approach of the
Committee and Focus of the Report

11. Members of the Committee are committed to improving the lives of our most disadvantaged children and young people. This is the reason that the Committee selected the issue of child poverty as the subject for its first inquiry. The Committee considers that it can best deliver on this commitment by paying careful attention to the evidence presented to it and only making recommendations that are clearly evidence-based. The report includes a detailed assessment of levels of child poverty in Northern Ireland, including the identification of groups at most risk of experiencing child poverty. It also seeks to identify the factors that protect against child poverty and draws on research in relation to international best practice in tackling child poverty.

12. The Committee recognises that eliminating child poverty is an extremely challenging target. If we are to have any hope of achieving this target there must be a collective commitment to action across government and indeed throughout society. This commitment will also need to be sustained by successive administrations. The Committee has therefore sought to adopt a constructive approach to the development of the report and in its consideration of evidence has endeavoured to recognise good practice where it exists. The Committee is also realistic about the economic and social challenges facing Northern Ireland over the next few years and has sought to make recommendations which take account of the reality of rapidly rising fuel costs and difficult economic conditions. There can be little doubt that major reforms will be required if we are to be successful in tackling child poverty. Delivering such reforms in current circumstances will require leadership, focus, determination and creativity.

13. All government departments have a contribution to make to tackling child poverty. During the course of this inquiry the Committee has engaged to some extent with all eleven departments and took oral evidence from seven departments. However, it would not have been practicable for this Committee to seek to scrutinise all the policies and programmes in each of these departments which are, or should be, contributing to reducing child poverty. In its report the Committee has therefore sought to focus on the overall strategy to tackle poverty as set out in the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy and the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy and on the resourcing and delivery of these strategies. In addition, the Committee has identified a number of gaps in the current policies and strategies and has made specific recommendations on how these should be filled.

14. Eliminating child poverty will require a long-term strategy. However, very challenging medium-term targets have been established to reduce child poverty by 50% by 2010 and to eliminate severe child poverty by 2012. The Committee has therefore sought to contribute to short/medium-term solutions as well as offering recommendations on longer term strategies.

15. In commencing this inquiry, the Committee was mindful of the fact that many of the potential solutions to child poverty are not under the control of the Executive. In particular, taxation and tax credits are not devolved and are the responsibility of the UK Government. In addition, whilst benefits are devolved, the provisions of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 and the practical implications of operating different benefit systems in Northern Ireland from elsewhere in the UK, limit the Executive’s capacity to introduce changes to the benefit system in the short-term.

16. The terms of reference for the inquiry recognise this difficulty and it was agreed that the inquiry would focus on those [actions] that would be deliverable by the devolved administration and organisations providing evidence to the Committee were encouraged to focus on matters under the control of the Executive. Within this report the majority of the Committee’s recommendations relate to issues for which the Executive has direct control, though, in a small number of instances, the Committee has sought to encourage the Executive to use its influence with the UK government to seek changes to policy on matters, which either are not devolved or are governed by parity provisions.

Definition and Measurement of
Child Poverty

17. The Committee quickly discovered that defining what we mean by child poverty and seeking to establish systems to measure child poverty are very complex. Such is the complexity of this issue that the Committee commissioned three separate research papers on the subject.

Definition of Child Poverty

18. There would seem to be widespread agreement that lack of money and low levels of income are at the core of child poverty. However, the Committee was encouraged to recognise that child poverty is about more than just a lack of money.

19. The Committee research paper on the measurement of severe and persistant poverty[1] advises that there is no straightforward and generally agreed definition of poverty. Poverty is seen today as a multi-dimensional issue and understood by many as the inability to participate in society - economically, socially and culturally.

20. Children’s organisations such as Barnardo’s and Playboard highlighted the impact that poverty can have on limiting the aspirations and expectations of children and young people and expressed the view that these dimensions of poverty should be taken into account when defining and measuring child poverty, but more particularly when seeking to tackle child poverty.

21. The relationship between poverty and exclusion is highlighted in the Irish Government’s definition of poverty[2].

People are living in poverty if their income and resources (material, cultural and social) are so inadequate as to preclude them from having a standard of living which is regarded as acceptable by Irish society generally As a result of inadequate income and other resources people may be excluded and marginalised from participating in activities, which are considered the norm for other people in society.

22. In its written submission to the Committee[3], the Department for Social Development characterises the UK Government’s definition of poverty as being technical, but one that attracts broad agreement at home and internationally.

23. Under this definition, poverty is defined as a household with an equivalised income less than 60% of the UK median equivalised household income. “Equivalised” means that the actual income has been adjusted to take account of the household size and age structure and 60% is a conventional internationally accepted fraction of the median.

24. In 2003[4], in addition to the above measure of relative low income, which seeks to assess whether the poorest families are keeping pace with the growth of incomes in the economy as a whole, the UK government decided that its assessment of child poverty would also seek to measure absolute low income and material deprivation.

Measurement of Child Poverty

25. The research paper[5] considered by the Committee on the measurement of child poverty advised that measurement of poverty is as complex as its definition. This is undoubtedly the case and at times it seemed that the measurement of child poverty required an inquiry in its own right. As well as considering two further research papers which dealt with the measurement of child poverty and severe child poverty, the Committee received a considerable volume of written and oral evidence on the subject.

26. The research paper[6] on the measurement of severe and persistent poverty described in detail the approach of the UK Government to the measurement of child poverty. It contains three elements:

Absolute low income: This measure seeks to evaluate whether the poorest families are seeing their incomes rise in real terms. It determines the number of children in families with incomes below a defined ‘fixed’ monetary value or ‘threshold’. Government maintain that this measure will help to ascertain whether the poorest families are experiencing a rise in income in real terms.

Absolute low income is measured using a fixed or set poverty line. For example, the fixed poverty line for a couple with two children was set at £210 per week which was 60% of the ‘average’ (or median) weekly income in 1998/99. The fixed poverty line does not move from year to year - it is held constant in real terms.

Relative low income: This measure seeks to determine whether the poorest families are keeping pace with the growth of incomes in the economy as a whole. As outlined above, this measure assigns a monetary value or ‘threshold’ as a cut off point below which people or families are deemed to be living in poverty. The difference between this measure and the last is that the threshold can change from year to year - as the population becomes better (or worse) off. The official UK ‘relative threshold’ for child poverty is 60 per cent of the ‘average’ or ‘typical’ household income for that year (before housing costs).

In real terms this means that in 2005/06 people are considered to be in poverty if they have an income (before housing costs) of:

Material deprivation and low income combined: This new measures seeks to provide a wider measure of people’s living standards. It examines the circumstances of children living in low income households (below 70 percent of contemporary median equivalised income) - which are also materially deprived. The material deprivation information is collected through the Family Resources Survey which asks parents a series of questions about the goods, services and household items available to the children and themselves. If they do not have these items, they are asked whether this is because they do not want them or because they cannot afford them.

27. In its written submission to the inquiry, the Committee for Social Development[7] advocated the importance of measuring deprivation as well as income.

The Committee does not believe that an income only measure gives an accurate account of the levels of child poverty or severe child poverty and would wish to see a mixed measure employed to include relevant deprivation measures.

28. During the inquiry the Committee’s attention was drawn to a number of alternatives to the UK model for the measurement of child poverty. For example, in the Republic of Ireland, child poverty is measured using a mixed measure based on less than 60 per cent mean household income plus enforced lack of at least one of eight indicators of ‘basic’ deprivation. The Bare Necessities report[8] which specifically examined poverty and social exclusion in Northern Ireland, also looked at a combination of income and deprivation, but in this case, a survey was carried out to ascertain the items and activities felt to be necessary for an acceptable standard of living, as the basis for devising a consensual mixed poverty measure.

29. In Europe, the Laeken indicators[9] are a set of relative poverty indicators commonly agreed and used within the European Union to monitor progress in this area. The relative threshold is set at 60 per cent of median income. This allows comparable statistics on poverty and social exclusion to be published for every EU country. Eurostat, however, goes beyond the 60 per cent threshold and publishes a range of poverty thresholds – for example at 40, 50, 60 and 70 per cent - of both median and mean income.

30. In 2006 a study by two Northern Ireland academics[10] evaluated a number of national and international measures of child poverty. The study considered the importance of choice of measure and made some recommendations about how poverty rates in Northern Ireland should be measured and reported in the future. The study advised that:

31. In a written submission[11] to the Committee, OFMDFM advised that it proposes to use the UK Government’s 3-tiered approach to the measurement of child poverty, though it was noted that information is not yet available in Northern Ireland on the mixed measure of income and deprivation. There was also significant support among organisations that gave evidence to the Committee for adoption by the Northern Ireland Executive of the approach used by the UK government, on the basis that it allows direct comparison with other European countries and takes account of absolute poverty and material deprivation, as well as relative poverty.

32. The Committee is of the view that lack of money and low incomes are key components of poverty. However, poverty also has the potential to have life-long and indeed generational impacts. The Committee therefore recommends that the Executive should, when defining, measuring and tackling child poverty, take account of the importance of ensuring that children and young people retain an expectation of achievement.

33. The Committee supports the decision by OFMDFM to adopt the 3-tiered approach to the measurement of child poverty used by the UK Government. The Committee is of the view that in addition to both absolute and relative low income the Executive must ensure that material deprivation is also measured. This is likely to be particularly important in the next few years, as it is the combined measure of low income and deprivation which is most likely to reflect the impact of rising costs on families in poverty.

34. In the Committee’s interim report[12] it was noted that there are two different approaches to measuring relative income poverty; before housing costs or after housing costs are taken into account12. Where possible in this report the Committee has utilised child poverty figures calculated before housing costs are taken into account. The Committee adopted this approach as it is the standard methodology for comparing poverty levels across Europe. In addition, in its submission to the Committee, Save the Children[13] argued that the After Housing Costs Measure does not provide an appropriate comparison with GB, as the housing costs in NI have (in the past) tended to be lower than GB, while most other costs have been higher, including food, fuel, childcare and clothing.

Child Poverty in Northern Ireland

35. OFMDFM, in its evidence to the Committee[14], advised that the main vehicle for measuring child poverty in Northern Ireland is the Family Resource Survey (FRS) and the related publication, Households Below Average Income Series (HBAI) Northern Ireland.

36. In the rest of the UK the FRS has been in place since the mid 1990s. The UK Government has determined that poverty levels in 1998/1999 provide the baseline for its target to half child poverty by 2010 and levels of relative income have been published for every year since 1998/1999. Figure 1 outlines the trend in child poverty levels in the UK as measured by relative income.

Figure 1 ‘Relative’ poverty line measure - UK

Relative’ poverty line measure - UK

Source: Households Below Average Income 2005/06

37. The FRS only commenced in Northern Ireland in 2002. As a result, in order to determine progress in Northern Ireland against the target to reduce child poverty by 50% by 2010, it has been necessary to estimate child poverty levels for the years 1998/1999 to 2001/2002. OFMDFM presented a detailed paper[15] to the Committee at the end of January 2008 describing how it has calculated child poverty levels in Northern Ireland. The table below sets out the results of these calculations.

Table 1 Relative income child poverty in N. Ireland

Year

Number of children in poverty

%

1998/1999

135,000

29

1999/2000

134,000

29

2000/2001

121,000

26

2001/2002

118,000

26

2002/2003

116,000

26

2003/2004

113,000

26

2004/2005

106,000

24

2005/2006

110,000

25

38. The results in both the UK and Northern Ireland indicate that the proportion of children living in households below the relative poverty threshold declined gradually between 1998/1999 and 2004/05 – an overall reduction of five percentage points- and then increased slightly in 2005/2006 by 1% point.

39. Research[16] considered by the Committee reported that the proportion of children below the absolute low income threshold also moved downward over time - from 26% in 1998/1999 to 13% in 2005/2006. The rate of change was greatest between 1998/99 and 2001/02, and slowed thereafter.

40. Dr Stephen Donnelly, Head of Research in OFMDFM, summarised recent trends in relation to child poverty in Northern Ireland[17].

Absolute low income is defined as the income of people on low wages, and whether their real incomes increase faster than the rate of inflation. OFMDFM has measured that, and results indicate a very positive trend — people who are on absolute low incomes are better off today, in real terms, than they were three or four years ago. Since 2003, the levels of relative income poverty have levelled off for working households and those with children, and they have increased to a certain extent for pensioner households. As a whole, poverty levels in Northern Ireland seem to have plateaued, but the absolute poverty levels are increasing over time.

41. Save the Children[18], in their evidence to the Committee emphasised the relative lack of progress that there has been in recent years.

What is clear from the figures is that the child poverty rate has not decreased over the past four years in which it has been measured in Northern Ireland. That is, obviously, an issue of real concern.

42. During the evidence session with OFMDFM, Members expressed real concerns that the current levels of child poverty may indeed be considerably worse than in the reports before the Committee. This was accepted by Dr Donnelly, who offered the following response[19] to Members’ concerns that the recent doubling in the cost of home heating oil would not have been not reflected in the poverty levels being reported to the Committee.

The problem is that our figures are about a year out of date and much of the upward pressure that will undoubtedly push up poverty levels has not been reflected in the statistics yet.

43. On the basis of the Committee’s concerns, Dr Gerry Mulligan, Head of the Equality/Rights and Social Need Division in OFMDFM, agreed to undertake modelling work to assess the potential impact on poverty levels of various assumptions about the rising costs of essential items such as fuel and food. The results of this work were provided to the Committee on 12 May 2008[20] and are reported in the section of the report dealing with the achievement of child poverty targets.

44. Whilst welcoming the reduction in child poverty levels between 1998/99 and 2004/05, there can be no doubt that poverty levels are still far too high in Northern Ireland. Having more than 100 000 children living in poverty in the 21st century is totally unacceptable.

45. The Committee is very concerned that there has, at best, been a levelling off in child poverty levels in recent years and is very apprehensive about the impact of the current economic climate and rising costs on poverty levels in Northern Ireland.

Comparison of child poverty levels in Northern Ireland with UK regions, the Republic of Ireland and Europe

46. A 2006 report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation[21], ‘Monitoring poverty and social exclusion in Northern Ireland’, concluded that Northern Ireland stands out from Great Britain in the following ways:

47. It is not therefore surprising that relative income poverty in Northern Ireland is higher than in other parts of the UK, with 25% of people in Northern Ireland considered to be in relative income poverty compared with 22% in the UK. Table 2[22] indicates that when calculated before housing costs are taken into account, the levels of child poverty in Northern Ireland are higher than in England, Scotland and Wales.

Table 2: Number and % of children in poverty by UK nation and English regions,
presented as 3 year running average (2003/04-2005/06), before housing costs.

Nation/Region

Risk of poverty (%)

Numbers

England

22

2,376,000

North East

28

140,000

North West

24

360,000

Yorkshire and the Humber

25

275,000

East Midlands

23

207,000

West Midlands

26

312,000

Eastern

16

192,000

London

26

416,000

Inner London

35

175,000

Outer London

21

210,000

South East

13

221,000

South West

17

170,000

Scotland

22

220,000

Wales

24

144,000

Northern Ireland

25

100,000

Source: HBAI 1994/95-2005/06

48. The levels of relative income child poverty in Northern Ireland for 2003/04- 2005/06, if calculated after housing costs are taken into account, are lower than in England, but higher than in Scotland and Wales, though these figures were produced in advance of the steep rise in housing costs that has been experienced in Northern Ireland over the past few years[23].

49. The research considered by the Committee demonstrates the complexity of comparing child poverty. However, its conclusion is that the level of child poverty in Northern Ireland would appear to be above that in Great Britain and the Republic of Ireland and well above the EU average.

50. The percentage of children in households under the 60% median income threshold before housing costs for EU countries is presented in Figure 2 below[24].

Figure 2 International Comparison of child poverty using 60% of median income

International Comparison of child poverty using 60% of median income

51. Figure 2 demonstrates that child poverty levels in both the UK and Ireland are well above the European average. It is however, worth noting that, as demonstrated by Figure 3[25], the poverty line is drawn at a much higher level in richer countries such as the UK and Ireland.

Figure 3. Poverty line in Euros per year (based on 60% median income for a single person)

Poverty line in Euros per year (based on 60% median income for a single person)

52. Also, whilst child poverty levels in the UK are well above the EU average, it is important to recognise that international research of poverty in rich countries found that the UK leads the rest of the countries in its overall reduction in the level of child poverty[26]. Using the measure of relative income poverty it has been estimated that in the UK approximately 600,000 children have been lifted out of relative poverty between 1998/99 and 2005/06. In Northern Ireland, OFMDFM has estimated that approximately 25,000 children have been lifted out of poverty since 1998/99[27].

Variation in Levels of Child Poverty

53. Child poverty is a reality in all parts of Northern Ireland, but poverty levels in Northern Ireland vary significantly. The geographic spread of child poverty in Northern Ireland (based on the 60% median threshold before and after housing costs) is shown in Figure 4[28].

Figure 4: Percent of children living in household below 60% of median income by Local Government District (based on average of latest three years of data, with some LGDs combined due to small numbers)

Percent of children living in household below 60% of median income by Local Government District

54. Research indicates that poverty levels are higher in Western areas of Northern Ireland, as well as in parts of Belfast.

Figure 5 Child Poverty by Parliamentary Constituency

Report Map

Source HBAI 2004/2005

55. In its submission to the Committee, the Children’s Law Centre[29] emphasised the intensity of poverty in some areas of Northern Ireland.

Poverty in Northern Ireland is considerably more concentrated than in Britain. 25 out of 566 wards (4.4%) have concentrations of child poverty in excess of 75% compared to 180 out of 10,000 wards in Britain (1.8%) with child poverty rates of 50% to 70%.

56. The Committee was surprised to hear from the Rural Community Network (RCN) of the extent of poverty that exists in rural areas. In correspondence with the Committee, the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development provided the following table comparing child poverty levels in rural and urban areas within Northern Ireland.

Table 3: Children in Poverty by Urban Rural Group, 2005/06

 

 

Before Housing Costs

After Housing Costs

No. of Children in Poverty

% of Children in Poverty

 No. of Children in Poverty

% of Children in Poverty

BMUA

26,400

20%

31,200

23%

Urban East

11,600

21%

13,700

25%

Urban West

28,700

33%

31,500

36%

Rural East

16,300

27%

17,100

28%

Rural West

25,400

28%

28,600

31%

NI

108,400

25%

122,100

29%

Source: Family Resources Survey NI, 2005/06, DSD

57. Perhaps less surprising was the evidence[30] presented to the Committee by the Western Investing for Health Partnership that rural communities suffer particularly in relation to access to services.

Rurality has a huge impact on poverty and Belleek and Boa ward in Fermanagh ranks as the most deprived ward in N.I in terms of the proximity to Services Domain.

58. The Committee recommends that OFMDFM and the Executive carefully consider the extent and distribution of poverty, including rural poverty, across Northern Ireland when developing their approach to tackling child poverty and when planning new investments and services. The Committee also recognises the importance of identifying and tackling smaller areas of deprivation, which are often masked by more affluent surrounding districts. It is vital that the Executive’s strategies and plans are based on a robust assessment of objective need.

Measurement of Severe Poverty

59. In its interim report the Committee welcomed the Executive’s commitment in the Programme for Government to work towards the elimination of severe child poverty by 2012 and called on OFMDFM to ensure that adequate resources are available to properly measure and assess progress towards this target.

60. It would seem that whilst the target to work towards the elimination of severe child poverty has been retained, OFMDFM is not yet in a position to advise how it proposes to measure progress towards this target. In correspondence to the Committee[31], OFMDFM advised that Junior Ministers have sought advice on indicators and measures in relation to severe child poverty and work is continuing on this.

61. In recognition of the absence of an agreed definition of severe child poverty, the Committee commissioned specific research on options for the measurement of severe child poverty. This research[32] identified that whilst the Measuring Child Poverty paper of 2003 refers to the use of low income thresholds for measuring depth of poverty, the UK Government does not specifically define severe child poverty in this paper or elsewhere. The research therefore considered a number of independent studies of severe child poverty.

62. In 2007, Save the Children published a study which aimed to identify its own measure of severe child poverty using a combination of existing UK government indicators. Children are classified as being in “severe” poverty if they are in households with very low income (i.e. below 50 per cent threshold), in combination with material deprivation (deprived of both adult and child necessities, at least one of which shows some degree of severity, i.e. two or more items). Those in households below 70 per cent of median income, in combination with some form of adult or child deprivation are classified as being in non-severe poverty. The remainder are classified as not being in poverty.

63. The study found that 10.2% (1.3 million) of children in the UK are classified as being in severe poverty. The study revealed very high levels of severe poverty in London and Wales, and a relatively high rate of 9.7% in Northern Ireland. This research estimated that 44,000 children under 18 were living in severe poverrty in Northern Ireland while an earlier study in 2004 put the figure at 8% or 32,000 children under the age of 16. The Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network[33] reported to the Committee that in Northern Ireland 2% of people are living on less than £100/week before housing costs and 5% after housing costs.

64. In considering the severity of poverty, consideration may need to be given to not only the depth of poverty but also its duration.

65. The UK government publishes figures on persistent low income[34], with low income being defined as below 60 per cent of median income. Persistent low income is defined as being in a low income household in at least three of the last four years. The table below shows that small reductions in persistent low income have occurred over the period 1991 to 2004, although the extent of persistent low income amongst children in GB remains relatively high at 13% before housing costs and 17% after housing costs.

Table 4 Percentage of children living below 60% of median income in at least 3 out of 4 years, GB

Year

Before Housing Costs

After Housing Costs

1991 to 1994

20

25

1994 to 1997

17

24

1997 to 2000

17

22

2000 to 2003

15

19

2001 to 2004

13

17

Source: HBAI 1994/95-2005/06

66. A recent study in Northern Ireland[35] sought to track a fixed group of individuals or households over time and thereby help to explain movements in and out of poverty. The survey tracked the same respondents over a four year period and, in the analysis, children were defined as belonging to one of the following five groups:

67. Early results from this research provide new evidence of the prevalence of persistent and severe poverty in Northern Ireland. Table 5 below reveals that relatively large proportions of children in Northern Ireland have experienced severe and persistent poverty.

Table 5 Poverty type over four years, Northern Ireland

Poverty type

%

No poverty

52

Short-term no severe

15

Short term and 1+ severe

12

Persistent no severe

9

Persistent and 1+ severe

13

Base = 550

100

Source: NIHPS 2001-2004

68. During the inquiry, the Committee has received convincing evidence of the importance of measuring severe poverty. The Committee was advised that despite the decline in levels of child poverty there is little evidence of a decline in severe poverty. In its written submission to the inquiry, Save the Children[36] highlighted its concerns that the reductions in child poverty in recent years may have been as a result of lifting those closest to the poverty line and therefore the “easiest to reach”, above the poverty threshold.

The intensity of poverty must also be considered. Our report, ‘Britain’s Poorest Children’, found that despite hundreds of thousands of children being lifted out of poverty in Great Britain over recent years, there was little change in the number of children experiencing severe child poverty.

69. The Committee fervently believes that, in taking forward its strategy to tackle poverty in Northern Ireland, the Executive must ensure that the poorest families benefit from the new policies and approaches that are being developed. We therefore commend the Executive for adopting its target to work towards the elimination of severe child poverty. However, if this is to represent a meaningful commitment and not an aspiration, the Executive must establish, in advance of reviewing the Programme for Government, a baseline and system of measurement for the new severe poverty target. The Committee hopes that the research which it has commissioned into the measurement and tackling of severe poverty will be of assistance in this regard.

The Impact of Poverty

70. Much of the Committee’s consideration of child poverty has necessarily and appropriately concentrated on the assessment and evaluation of research and quantitative results on child poverty in Northern Ireland. The Committee, however, recognises that there is a very human side to the issue of child poverty.

71. For some children in the most severe poverty, the impact of poverty is in many ways a typical view of what we mean by poverty. Claire Linney, from Dungannon Borough Council[37], described the position of some families in severe poverty who are being supported by local charities.

In low income households, the priority is rent; the key thing is to keep a roof over one’s head. Charities visit households here and report to us what they find: cupboards with limited food, and food of poor nutritional value. People are reluctant to use energy for light, let alone heat. Even investors have told us that they have had to change heating systems because oil runs out regularly. Having paid such a high rent, people cannot afford the basics of life.

72. However, research by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation in Northern Ireland[38] indicates that the traditional perspective of child poverty, a child with no winter coat or without well-fitting shoes or eating fewer than three meals a day, although still a reality for some children, is not typical. The research goes on to argue that modern day poverty is in main not about the absence of material things, but rather is marked by real difficulties in paying for essential services or accumulating small financial assets or taking part in activities that the rest of society take for granted.

73. The Committee considered compelling evidence on wide range of impacts of poverty on children, from organisations such as NCH (NI)[39].

Poverty impacts on all aspects of a number of areas in a child’s life including Income (particularly for those living in families dependent on benefits or in low paid employment), Education (the impact of socio-economic disadvantage starts early and may continue throughout the child’s years of education, poor parents struggle to meet additional education costs), Health (along a range of indicators such as diet and nutrition, dental health, physical environment, emotional well being, stress and mental and sexual health), Home and neighbourhood (such as major increases in the number of homeless families presenting to the NIHE and high costs of heating) and Play and social development (going without play and safe places to go impacts on the quality of life of a child or young person).

74. Playboard[40] highlighted the limited opportunities for development through play, with 14% of children being unable to take part in a hobby or leisure activity and outlined the impact of deprivation of this nature on children’s behaviour and mental well-being.

75. Committee members were particularly struck by the evidence of Patricia Lewsley, the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People , in relation to the difficult choices that many poor families have to make[41].

A few weeks ago I met a teenager who was exceptionally good at art. For her mother to afford the art materials, they could either go without food for two days, or do without electricity for a day and a half. That girl had to make the decision. She felt that she could not put her mother in that position; therefore she chose another subject. That young person is subject to a poverty of opportunity.

76. A particular concern for the Committee in this period of rising food and fuel costs is the evidence from the Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network[42], that families experiencing poverty also face a much higher cost of living as they cannot access the credit or payment benefits more affluent people take for granted.

77. The Committee received evidence from a range of organisations, including the Southern and Eastern Health and Social Services Boards, the Institute of Public Health in Ireland and the Western Health Action Zone about the impact of poverty on children’s health. The Committee was advised that such impacts are evident even before birth and that the infant mortality rate in the most deprived fifth of local areas is one-third higher than in other local areas. The Committee’s attention was also drawn to the findings of the Bamford Review[43] which clearly highlight and illustrate the correlation between social deprivation and the prevalence of mental health difficulties.

78. The link between poverty and educational underachievement was also drawn to the Committee’s attention, both in the research considered by the Committee and during oral evidence. In written evidence to the Committee, the Department of Education[44] recognised the very powerful association between poverty and educational outcomes.

There is a strong correlation between social disadvantage and educational outcomes. Only 37.6% of school leavers entitled to Free School Meals achieved at least 5 GCSE grades A*-C or higher compared to 70.2% for those school leavers not entitled to Free School Meals. In those wards with high levels of disadvantage and low educational attainment the percentage of pupils achieving at least 5 GCSEs at A*-C can be as low as 23% compared to the average across all areas of 64%.

79. The Committee was keen to hear more directly about the experiences of young people in poverty and Save the Children and the University of Ulster agreed to provide the Committee with a briefing[45] on a number of research projects, including some as yet unpublished research, which involved children and young people offering their views on the impact of poverty on their lives.

80. The views of the young people substantiate much of the research presented to the Committee in that, whilst some children were concerned that families without much money wouldn’t be able to buy food, they also identified a number of wider impacts, including the potential for poorer children to be excluded from normal day to day activities such as after-school clubs, because they can’t afford to pay for them.

81. A very interesting finding from the research was that most of the children did not see themselves or their friends as living in families that ‘don’t have much money’, but they recognise migrant families as living in poverty.

82. The evidence considered by the Committee on the impact of child poverty provides a compelling human, social and economic case for eliminating child poverty to be a top priority for the Executive. In addition to the totally unacceptable reality of some children living in cold homes and unable to afford nutritious meals, there is the much more widespread impact of poverty on children’s health, education and safety and on their expectations and aspirations. Failure to address the impact of poverty on the aspirations and expectations of children has the potential to significantly limit the Executive’s ambitions for a highly educated and highly skilled workforce, supporting a high wage economy.

The Evidence-Base for the
Prevention of Child Poverty

83. In seeking to develop robust recommendations on the actions that need to be taken by OFMDFM and the Executive to deliver child poverty targets, the Committee has sought to develop an understanding of the causes of poverty, the factors that increase the likelihood of poverty, the factors that help to protect against poverty and the population groups at most risk of poverty. The Committee also commissioned research to investigate best practice internationally in tackling poverty and severe poverty.

84. International research[46] conducted by UNICEF identified four common factors which have the greatest impact on child poverty rates: unemployment; low wages; lone parenthood and level of social expenditure.

85. Being unemployed and in receipt of related benefits has a very substantial impact on the risk of a family living in poverty. Recent research in Northern Ireland on persistent poverty in Northern Ireland found that 4 in 5 children who had experienced persistent poverty lived in workless households[47]. The same study reported that for the 86% of children who experienced persistent poverty the main source of family income was benefits, compared with 8% for families who had not been in poverty.

86. Many people would however expect that the receipt of benefits, such as job seekers allowance or income support, would protect a family against poverty. In its evidence[48] to the Committee, Save the Children highlighted that this is not in fact the case, as although benefit levels are higher than the threshold for severe poverty, they do not ensure that families have an income above the relative poverty threshold.

If a family is living entirely on benefits, it is likely to be living in poverty. At around 30%, Northern Ireland has the highest levels of working age population not in paid work of any region across the UK. Benefit levels are set below the poverty line (60% of the median income). For example, a couple with four children living entirely on benefits live on a weekly income of £289, £128 below the poverty line for that family type. However, benefit levels are higher than the severe child poverty threshold, so if a family is in receipt of all benefits they are entitled to, they should not be experiencing severe poverty.

87. The high cost of basic goods and services was identified by organisations such as Citizens Advice as an additional factor which is increasing the impact of poverty and deprivation in Northern Ireland in comparison with other parts of the UK[49].

Families in Northern Ireland spend £213 more a year on food than the UK average. In Northern Ireland we spend 26% more on bread, rice and cereals and £431.60 more on clothing and footwear. While clothing and footwear cost 37% more than the UK average, children’s clothes are even more expensive. The amount spent on clothes for girls (5-15 years old) is 50% higher than the UK average and for boys (5-15) is 87% higher.....By the end of the decade Northern Ireland electricity consumers will have paid £1billion more for their electricity than the rest of the UK - overall that equates to around £1,600 per household.

Groups at High Risk of Poverty

88. The Committee received a considerable amount of evidence on the groups within the population that are considered to be at greatest risk of child poverty.

89. In its evidence[50] to the Committee, OFMDFM identified the following households as being at particular risk of child poverty, in comparison with the average risk (25%) of relative income poverty for households.

Children in households that are:

90. In particular, disability and ill health, including associated caring responsibilities, can be significant barriers to education, employment and escaping the poverty trap. It can also result in families having higher levels of expenditure. The impact of disability on poverty was a key feature of the evidence presented by a number of organisations including Barnardo’s[51], Children in Northern Ireland (including Mencap) and Disability Action. The Committee was advised that in the region of 55% of families with a disabled child are either living at or on the margins of poverty and have more chance of living in poverty than other disadvantaged social groups, including lone parent families. The risk of poverty is especially high for the half a million children [in the UK] who live in households that contain both disabled adults and disabled children.

91. The Children’s Commissioner provided the Committee with an example of the difficulties facing families with a disability in seeking to sustain the family income[52].

I met a young disabled person who, at the age of twelve, was told by the school that he attended that it could no longer do anything for him, and he was sent home to his parents to be looked after. As a consequence, his father had to leave work because his mother could not look after him alone, and that drove the family into poverty. The fact that he was also denied an education subjected him to a poverty of education.

92. Research consistently highlights the significantly increased risk of poverty faced by children of lone parents. Research into persistent poverty found that 87% of children not in poverty in any of the four years studied lived with two parents. 75% of children in persistent and severe poverty lived with a lone parent. Gingerbread[53] provided evidence to the Committee, as part of the delegation from Children in Northern Ireland, of the increased risk of poverty faced by the children of lone parents.

High levels of child poverty in the UK have been linked to the increasing number of children growing up in workless households headed by a lone parent. Evidence suggests that nearly 70% of children living in workless households live in households headed by a lone parent and that half of all children living with one parent are in income poverty.

93. Children in families with four or more children have a 42% risk of poverty compared with the average risk of 25%. Younger children are also at slightly higher risk of poverty.

94. Research[54] from the UK indicates that children from a minority ethnic background are at a significantly higher risk of poverty. The evidence considered by the Committee in relation to the relative risk of poverty being faced by ethnic minorities in Northern Ireland is much less clear. The Committee heard concerns from a number of organisations, and from Children and Young People themselves, about the particular problems facing recent immigrants. The Equality Commission[55] expressed concern about the lack of information on the nature of this potentially increasing problem.

A problem concerning new residents in Northern Ireland is that available data is scarce and not particularly robust. The most recent census was conducted in 2001 and, although labour-force surveys have been carried out in the intervening period, they do not adequately capture population movements. Therefore, we must have more robust data to extend our knowledge of children’s needs in such circumstances. That would, at least, be an important step towards recognising who is at risk so that we can take measures to alleviate their poverty.

95. However, there is a minority ethnic group, for which the risk of child poverty is undoubtedly much higher than for the population as a whole: traveller children. The Children's Law Centre commented on the alarming statistics about high infant mortality rates among traveller children[56]. In oral evidence to the Committee[57], Mr Bob Collins, Chief Commissioner of the Equality Commission, commented on this relatively small but seemingly intractable problem.

The Travelling community is small, representing about 800 children of school age, all of whom fall into the category of children living in, or experiencing, poverty. That figure suggests that the problem should be amenable to a reasonably easy solution. However, that is not the case, and a range of issues must be addressed. Furthermore, those children’s capacity to engage in employment is affected by the extent to which they participate, and attain, in education. Education-related work by the statutory agencies offers a real prospect of progress.

96. NCH (NI)[58] highlighted to the Committee that children leaving care are another relatively small group, at very high risk of poverty and in need of sustained support well-beyond what would traditionally be called childhood.

At the point of leaving care, a range of issues arise. Young people make transitions to adult life at the age of 16 and 17. With the disadvantages that they have had, in having to come into care, and quite often — not in all cases — having had disruptive experiences while in the care system, they need as much support as possible. It is important to delay the transition as much as possible.

People living in poverty

97. In written evidence[59] to the Committee, OFMDFM highlighted the need to distinguish between household groups at high risk of poverty and the numbers of children in poverty in the different types of households, which is also determined by the incidence of those households in the population as a whole. OFMDFM provided the following example to illustrate this point.

Whilst the poverty risk of children living in lone parent households (36%) is higher than that for children living in couple households (22%), a much higher proportion of income poor children (65%) live in couple households compared to lone parent households (35%). This picture of the risk and concentration of poverty reflects the demographic realities that there are many more couple households with children in the entire population than there are lone parent households.

98. OFMDFM reported that households that comprise a significant proportion of those in poverty include children in households that:

99. This distinction is particularly important when considering the issue of in-work poverty. In the UK, children in working families have a relatively low risk of poverty at 14 per cent (compared with the UK average of 22%). For children in families with one parent in full-time employment and one parent in part-time employment the risk of poverty falls to around 4%. For lone parents, even a part-time job can significantly reduce the likelihood of their child living in poverty to 17% (the risk of a child of a workless lone parent being in poverty is 56%)[60]. However, even though the risk of poverty is relatively low, as a significant majority of children live in a family with a working parent, around half of all children who are in poverty have at least one working parent. The significance of this finding is that it emphasises the importance of ensuring that economic development and employment strategies focus on increasing the quality of jobs that are created, as well as the number of jobs created, if they are to contribute to tackling poverty.

Protective Factors

100. Not surprisingly, factors that increase family income also protect children against poverty. Despite the above commentary on the working poor, the most obvious factor which increases protection from poverty is having a job. In contrast, factors that reduce the likelihood of employment increase the likelihood of a family being in poverty.

101. Having a good level of education and skills is critically important in both obtaining and sustaining employment and in securing a good wage. Statistics indicate that children in poverty perform less well than children from more affluent backgrounds throughout the education system. The impact of poor educational attainment has a very direct impact on income. In its recent post-budget report on Ending Child Poverty, the UK Government reported that half of those with no qualifications are in employment compared to 90% for those with a degree. It also reported that the wage returns for academic qualifications such as GCSEs and A-levels are in the order of 15 per cent and 25 per cent respectively. For those in work, poor skills can reduce job stability and progression.

102. Many of the groups at high risk of poverty face particular barriers to both employment and education, that is, they are very dependent on the availability of high quality, affordable childcare and daycare. Services which the Committee found to be sadly lacking in many parts of Northern Ireland.

103. The Committee received robust evidence about the significance of experiences during the first few years of a child’s life in determining long-term outcomes. In its written submission[61] to the Committee, Barnardo’s explains that educational disadvantage begins at an early age in that pre-school children with a lower economic status have less cognitive and behavioural abilities than pre-school children from higher socio-economic backgrounds. The Eastern Health and Social Services Board[62] also presented a strong case for early intervention in order to develop the aptitudes and skills necessary to overcome the adversity that many children in poverty face.

Early intervention is another key concept. Traditionally, services intervene when problems become apparent, such as when the child displays negative behaviour or indulges in risk-taking behaviour. We argue that support must occur much earlier in the child’s life — from birth onwards — in a much more positive and proactive way. That is linked to the concept of resilience, which is the capacity shown by some children to resist or overcome adversity. We must set in place services that build and support resilience; it is not enough simply to do what we have traditionally done, which is minimise risk.

104. Parents can play a very important role in helping to break the poverty cycle through the adoption of a positive parenting style and assisting children to develop important social skills. The role of parents in a child’s education is particularly important with some studies suggesting that parental involvement in a child’s schooling between ages 7 and 16 is a more powerful influence on achievement than family background and parental education levels[63].

Preventing Child Poverty

105. The Committee commissioned research to review the evidence base internationally on reducing child poverty. It also sought the views of stakeholders on international base-practice in tackling child poverty.

106. The research paper[64] proposed that, in broad terms, the principal measures to reduce child poverty can be divided into three categories:

107. During the inquiry, the Committee received considerable evidence about a fourth issue, which is considered by the Committee, and by many of those who provided evidence to the Committee, to be critical to meaningfully addressing child poverty in the short to medium-term: rising costs.

108. In the remainder of the report the Committee has therefore sought to outline the international evidence base for action in relation to each of the priority measures, to review the current plans for addressing poverty and to then make recommendations for action in the short to medium-term and the long-term. In addition, the Committee has reviewed the Executive’s overarching strategies for tackling child poverty and made recommendations on how these should be improved to ensure that key priorities relating to child poverty are actually delivered.

Strategies to Tackle Child Poverty
in Northern Ireland

109. The principal sources of information on the Executive’s current strategic approach to eliminating child poverty in Northern Ireland are the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy for Northern Ireland, which were approved by the Assembly on 28 January 2008[65]. In addition, the Committee was advised by OFMDFM that it is proposed that the Executive will be asked to adopt the broad architecture and principles of the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy[66] as the basis of its strategy to tackle poverty and social exclusion in Northern Ireland.

110. In its examination of the Executive’s strategic approach to tackling child poverty in Northern Ireland the Committee therefore received evidence on both the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy and the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy. The Committee also received evidence advising that a number of other strategies have an important role in tackling child poverty, including, in particular, the Children and Young People’s Strategy.

111. Before examining in detail the contribution of the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy to reducing child poverty, it is important that there is a clear understanding of the position in relation to the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy.

Lifetime Opportunities Strategy

112. The Executive has a statutory obligation under section 16 of the Northern Ireland Act 2006, to adopt a strategy setting out how it proposes to tackle poverty, social exclusion and patterns of deprivation based on objective need. Following the oral evidence session with officials from OFMDFM on 16 April 2008, the Committee received a memorandum from OFMDFM advising that OFMDFM intend submitting a paper to the Executive Committee early in 2008 within which it will be asked to adopt the broad architecture and principles of Lifetime Opportunities as the basis of its strategy to tackle poverty and social exclusion.

113. At the Committee meeting on 16 January 2008 the Committee was briefed on the review of the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy carried out by the Programme for Government Committee at the beginning of 2007. The conclusions of the review, which were submitted for consideration by a restored Executive included:

114. However, the Programme for Government Committee also identified a number of significant gaps and weaknesses within the strategy and recommended that further consideration be given to a number of aspects to strengthen it and to ensure its objectives are achieved. Aspects of the strategy and its implementation that the Committee decided should be addressed included:

115. The views of Disability Action on the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy, as set out in their written submission[67] to the Committee, reflect the conclusions of the Programme for Government Committee and many of the organisations that submitted evidence to the Committee.

In relation to the strategy contained in Lifetime Opportunities, Disability Action believes that the processes, timescales and content are, at the least, weak. Whilst not arguing at this point for a re-write of what should be the framework for tackling child poverty in Northern Ireland, Disability Action firmly proposes a significant review of its content in particular the current targets which are too general and non-specific.

116. In recognition of the general view that, despite its limitations, the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy provides a policy framework for addressing poverty and social exclusion, the Committee recommends that OFMDFM should move quickly to adopt the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy as the framework for its work to tackle poverty and social exclusion. Critically, this will allow OFMDFM to focus on remedying some of the deficiencies within the Strategy, through the development of a properly resourced medium-term action plan that includes SMART, intermediate objectives and targets capable of delivering the Executive’s child poverty targets.

117. The Programme for Government Committee, as well as a number of organisations that provided evidence to the Committee, also highlighted the absence of dedicated resources as a major weakness in the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy. The Committee’s recommendations in this regard are outlined following discussion of the contribution of the Programme for Government and Investment Strategy to tackling child poverty.

118. During evidence sessions relating to the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy, the Committee’s attention was drawn to the limited involvement of children and young people in the development of the Strategy. The Committee believes that children and young people have an important role to play in informing future strategies to address poverty and social exclusion and is confident that the commitment already shown by Junior Ministers to the engagement of young people, including young people from disadvantaged backgrounds, in the policy process, will ensure that previous weaknesses in this regard will be remedied.

Programme for Government and Investment Strategy

119. In its interim report on child poverty, the Committee made a number of recommendations in relation to the draft Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy. The Committee also explored the adequacy of the final Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy during oral evidence sessions with a range of stakeholders, including 7 government departments.

Child Poverty Targets

120. In its interim report[68] the Committee welcomed the inclusion within the Public Service Agreements (PSAs) accompanying the Programme for Government of targets to:

121. The Committee recognised that the child poverty targets were ambitious. However, there was widespread support among the organisations that made submissions to the inquiry for the adoption of these targets, and the Committee argued for their retention in the final Programme for Government and commended the Executive for their inclusion.

122. In the PSAs accompanying the final Programme for Government adopted by the Assembly, the child poverty targets were retained, though in a very slightly revised form. The reference to lifting 67,000 children out of poverty by 2010 was removed, with the result that the final target now reads to work towards the elimination of child poverty in Northern Ireland by 2020 and reducing child poverty by 50% by 2010.

123. During oral evidence[69], the Committee sought clarification on the impact of the revision and received assurances from OFMDFM’s Head of Research, Dr Stephen Donnelly, that in reality the measure of success has not changed.

There is no difference in the meaning of the two targets: lifting 67,000 children out of poverty is the same as a 50% reduction. When we receive new and better information on poverty from the family resources survey, we will be in a better position to rebase our estimate of what child poverty had been in 1998. It is unlikely that the figure will change substantially — it may be 65,000 or 69,000. The Programme for Government’s target of 50% is to allow for the inclusion of a stable statement. Figures that are based on better information will be published in due course, but 50% currently means 67,000 children.

124. During the latter part of the inquiry the Committee received increasing evidence of the impact that rising costs for basic necessities are having on families on low income. Unpublished information from the Consumer Council, shared with the Committee by the Committee for Enterprise Trade and Investment, indicated that oil prices have risen by more than 200% since 2003. The Chief Commissioner of the Equality Commission, characterised the international forces that are pushing up the price of fuel as being a real headwind against any policy that attempts to eliminate child poverty[70].

125. As a result of the Committee’s concerns about the impact of the rising costs on the Executive’s ability to achieve its child poverty targets, officials in OFMDFM undertook modelling work to assess the impact of rising costs on families on low income. The results of this work, which were reported to the Committee in correspondence on 12 May 2008[71], confirmed that the rising costs of necessities such as fuel and food have a much more significant impact on people who are already on low incomes.

OFMDFM statisticians have prepared a theoretical analysis of the differential impact of a range of increases in household expenditure on ‘necessities’ between low and high income households…This shows that, for example, an increase of 20% in household expenditure on necessities represents an impact on overall expenditure of between 7-8% for lower income households. This contrasts with an impact for ‘higher income’ households of between 4-5%. Price rises will impact on a household’s spending power but not its level of income (the basis upon which poverty is calculated).

126. Despite the obvious difficulties associated with delivering the child poverty targets included with the Programme for Government there remains significant support for the adoption of these targets. One notable exception to this consensus was Dr Peter Kenway, of the New Policy Institute[72], who provided a very blunt assessment of the current position, both in terms of the likelihood of targets being achieved and the Executive’s capacity to achieve it without significant change in the UK Government’s policy.

The main thrust of this submission concerns the likelihood of achieving the 2010 target of reducing child poverty by a half. The Committee’s interim report notes the consensus view that this target is ambitious. We go further. Given the latest official figures and in view of (a) the tax and benefit policies in force over the last two years, (b) the tax and benefit policies announced for the next three years, and (c) the economic prospects to the end of 2009, we believe that there is now no chance of coming close to that target either in Northern Ireland or Great Britain. The only way now to avert such an outcome is a substantial policy shift by the Westminster government in favour of a redistribution of income. This needs to be said.

127. In light of such evidence, and the current economic realities, the Committee has had to give serious consideration to recommending that the 2010 target to reduce child poverty by 50% should be revised downwards. Targets should be challenging, but if they become unachievable, there is a danger that they no longer act as a motivator for action.

128. Following extensive deliberations, and taking particular account of the fact that the target to reduce child poverty by 50% by 2010 is a UK-wide target, the Committee has decided, on balance, to support the retention of the current target and to recommend that this be reviewed following publication of the 2006/2007 data later this year. It is however clear that if the Executive is to make significant progress towards this target there must be swift action by the UK Government to increase the income of the poorest families and by the Executive to develop a short to medium-term plan of action to mitigate the impact of rising costs for families on low income, as part of its longer term strategy to break the cycle of poverty.

Public Service Agreements and Delivery Plans

129. In written submissions to the Committee a number of organisations expressed concern about the lack of detail within the Programme for Government and the PSAs on how the 2010 and 2012 targets are to be delivered. In its interim report[73] the Committee recognised that some of the detail on how child poverty in Northern Ireland is to be reduced would be included in the forthcoming anti-poverty strategy, but concluded that if resources and actions are to be skewed by departments towards tackling child poverty, the Programme for Government and PSAs should provide clear direction as to how departments intend to deliver on this. The Committee therefore recommended a number of improvements to the PSAs including:

130. The Committee recognised that there would also be an opportunity within the proposed delivery plans, to be published alongside the Programme for Government, to more clearly identify other targets and planned actions that the Executive would expect to contribute to tackling child poverty. The Committee therefore recommended in both its interim report and in the Committee’s report on the Programme for Government and the Investment Strategy[74] that the forthcoming delivery and investment plans include a shortlist of the principal/high impact changes that each department plans to make over the next three years to contribute to the achievement of targets established by the Executive on a better future [and sustainability] and the shortlist of key changes planned by departments on the theme of a better future should include the principal measures to be undertaken to help reduce child poverty.

131. The Committee was briefed on the changes made to the Programme for Government and Investment Strategy by officials from OFMDFM at the Committee meeting on 20 February 2008. The Committee also received a formal memorandum of response to the report of the Programme for Government Committee on 29 February 2008.

132. The Committee noted some improvements to the final Programme for Government and to the Public Service Agreements of most relevance to the child poverty target. For example, the final Programme for Government document contained a new commitment to develop a strategic delivery plan to ensure our anti-poverty strategy has maximum impact. Within Public Service Agreement 7, additional targets have been included in relation to the implementation of the new Employment and Support Allowance, the implementation of a new operating model for delivery of the social fund and the roll-out of the Jobs and Benefits Service. New targets were also included in relation to foreign direct investment in areas of economic disadvantage. There was particular support, both in the Committee and in organisations that provided evidence to the Committee for the additional resources provided for social housing and for the commitment to the provision of over 5000 new social houses over the next three years.

133. In evidence to the Committee, a number of organisations outlined both their welcome for changes in the final Programme for Government and Budget but also their outstanding concerns.

134. The Committee shares these concerns and remains of the view that measurable, outcome-focused targets have still not been established for a number of the policy areas that are likely to be crucial to reducing child poverty and eliminating severe child poverty.

135. In addition many of the policy linkages, which are central to delivering a joined-up approach to child poverty, have not yet been made. The forthcoming Children and Young Person’s Action Plan will provide an early opportunity for the Executive to demonstrate a more coherent approach to tackling child poverty.

136. Any new sustainable development strategy should also include measures to improve the social as well as the economic and environmental dimensions of sustainable development.

137. The Committee recognises that there can be a considerable lead-time in the development of new policies and strategies and that it would have been unreasonable to expect the new administration to establish the full-range of objectives and targets that are likely to be necessary to deliver its child poverty targets in time for inclusion in the Programme for Government. The Committee had expected that the Delivery Agreements, setting out how departments intend to deliver on the goals and commitments within the Programme for Government, would assist in providing some of the detail on each department’s contribution to cross-cutting priorities, such as child poverty. Unfortunately, despite indications that these would be published before the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy were due to come into effect on 1 April 2008, the Committee is not aware that Delivery Agreements have as yet been published.

138. The Committee accepts that the Executive’s Anti-Poverty Strategy will have a critical role in filling many of the gaps in current policy framework, but remains of the view that the Programme for Government and related PSAs need to be significantly strengthened if they are to ensure that resources and actions are effectively directed by departments towards the elimination of child poverty.

139. As an immediate step, the Committee recommends that the First Minister and deputy First Minister:

140. Within the specific sections of this report dealing with policies on income, employment and tackling long-term disadvantage the Committee makes a range of recommendations on changes to be made in both the short to medium term and the long-term. Clearly, not all of these issues can be addressed in a high level document such as the Programme for Government and many will need to be picked up through the regional anti-poverty strategy. However, the Committee considers that there is compelling evidence supporting the need for the inclusion of new measures within the Programme for Government in relation to the need for action to invest in early years support for families living in poverty, to plug the gaping whole in Northern Ireland’s approach to welfare reform created through the absence of affordable, high quality childcare in many parts of Northern Ireland, to tackle rising costs, to make work pay for groups at high risk of poverty and to ensure that families are lifted out of severe poverty by accessing their full benefits entitlement.

141. The Committee recommends that that during the first review of the Programme for Government specific targets should be included in relation to:

142. In addition, the Committee recommends that OFMDFM should insist on the inclusion within Programme for Government Delivery Agreements of a short-list of the changes to be introduced by each department to contribute to the objective of a shared and better future and that this should include measures which contribute to the reduction in levels of child poverty.

Investment Strategy

143. The £6billion Investment Strategy[75] has a very important role in delivering the economic and social changes that are necessary if poverty levels in Northern Ireland are to be significantly reduced. Within the Strategy there is a recognition of the interconnections between investment, employment and tackling disadvantage.

To deliver on this commitment, we need the right infrastructure to grow our economy– our top priority over the lifetime of the Programme for Government. The right infrastructure will also support positive social change, enhance our environment and help us to deliver better public services for all.

144. In its interim report, the Committee highlighted the almost universal support that exists for investment in social housing in Northern Ireland. During the oral evidence sessions conducted as part of this inquiry, Dungannon Borough Council[76] and the Voluntary Sector Housing Forum[77] outlined the continuing need for investment to address the high costs of housing for families on low income and to tackle homelessness.

One section of Dungannon alone has 300 people on the waiting list, with almost 200 in priority need. The rental values and house prices in the area are extremely high. In the urban setting the rental value is anywhere between £150 and £170, and in a rural setting it is just slightly lower. There are extreme situations where families are paying more than £200 a week in rent for family homes.

Last year, 6,869 families presented as homeless, which translates to at least 9,300 children. Of that number, 4,206 families were regarded as full duty applicants under the legislation: again, if we are considering the impact on children then at least 5,630 were involved.

145. The Committee welcomes the commitment in the Investment Strategy to the delivery of 10,000 new social and affordable houses by 2013 and wish to encourage the Committee for Social Development to carefully monitor the delivery of this commitment as it represents one of the key contributions of the Department for Social Development to tackling poverty in Northern Ireland.

146. Investment in infrastructure has an important part to play in tackling poverty. During the inquiry the Committee heard evidence of the importance of infrastructure in attracting business investment. The Programme for Government recognises regional infrastructure disparities and commits to working to address them and to ensure that we deliver a more balanced regional outcome, including within the out-workings of asset realisation.

147. In its report on the Executive’s draft Programme for Government and Investment Strategy, the Committee noted the absence of information on the geographic spread of new capital investments within the draft Investment Strategy. Without such information it would seem to be very difficult for a robust assessment to be made of progress towards a more balanced regional outcome.

148. In its response to the Committee’s report on the Programme for Government, OFMDFM advised that the Strategic Investment Board is working with departments to determine how spatial information on infrastructure investment could best be considered in future Investment Strategies and have asked departments to include geo-specific information in Investment Delivery Plans where possible.

149. The Committee considers the development of improved spatial information to be key to the Investment Strategy’s contribution to tackling weaknesses in infrastructure and to the Strategy’s capacity to take account of objective need. The Committee will therefore expect to receive an update on the progress made by the Strategic Investment Board and departments to develop such information within Investment Delivery Plans, during evidence sessions to follow-up the Committee’s report on the Programme for Government and Investment Strategy.

150. During the inquiry the Committee’s attention was drawn to the development of new guidance published by the Equality Commission on the integration of equality and sustainable development into the procurement process. The Investment Strategy places considerable value on the contribution that the manner in which Investment is procured and managed can make to delivering social and economic objectives.

We will seek opportunities to promote social inclusion and equality of opportunity in the procurement of infrastructure programmes. This will impact through employment plans; building opportunities for apprenticeships into major delivery contracts – helping those eager to develop key skills valued in the workplace – and through a tendering process that prioritises the most economically advantageous option in this context. Through the procurement process, we will seek to maximise the social and employment opportunities for all our people, addressing existing patterns of socioeconomic disadvantage and using prosperity to tackle poverty.

151. The Committee welcomes the Investment Strategy’s recognition of the role that procurement can play in contributing to the socio-economic and sustainability objectives of the Executive. The Committee will scrutinise the work of OFMDFM and the Strategic Investment Board to ensure that proper weight is being given to this guidance during the implementation of the Investment Strategy. The Committee recognises the particular role of the Committee for Finance and Personnel in monitoring compliance with the guidance and recommends that all statutory committees examine their department’s compliance with the guidance when scrutinising Investment Delivery Plans.

Resourcing and Delivery

152. Ultimately the success of any strategy is determined by its ability to deliver its objectives and targets. Much of the evidence considered by the Committee outlined concerns about previous approaches to resourcing and delivering targets relating to poverty.

Cross-departmental Delivery of Child Poverty Targets

153. A principal concern, which is reflected to some extent in earlier consideration of the Programme for Government and PSAs, is the absence of detail in key strategies setting out how different departments are going to actually contribute in the short to medium-term to long-term goals. This would seem to be a particular feature of strategies developed prior to devolution and is a major weakness in the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy, which contains laudable, and appropriate goals, but in the absence of a properly resourced implementation plan, containing specific objectives, timebound targets and relevant actions over the Budget period, it serves to generally direct policy without driving real change.

154. For example, the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy contained a commitment that by 2020 every parent in Northern Ireland will have access to a range of information and services to enable their children to reach their full potential. However, the reality of implementation was a relatively small increase in the provision of Sure Start in Northern, leaving it as the poor relation of Sure Start Programmes in the UK, and a commitment to the development of only 2 Children’s Centres in Northern Ireland in comparison with the UK Government’s target[78] of 2500 such Centres to be in place by 2008. An implementation plan was also produced for the Children’s Strategy[79]. However, whilst the ten year strategy was widely lauded there has been much criticism of the one year action plan, not least because of the absence of measures to address child poverty.

155. In its evidence to the Committee[80], Save the Children highlighted the limitations of existing approaches to cross-departmental planning and implementation.

We feel that they [targets] are largely the result of an administrative negotiation process with the Departments, based on what was already happening, as opposed to the result of an examination of the higher-level targets and of working down to determine the actions required to deliver them…They are too general – and mostly don’t prioritise children in poverty. Much of the children’s sections look more like a Children’s Strategy as opposed to a Strategy intended to deliver change for the poorest children.

Criteria must be set to establish whether an action is considered to be contributing towards the child poverty targets, including:

156. The Executive must quickly distance itself from the approach of direct rule Ministers to the production of ambitious strategy documents which are then supported by unambitious action plans, which act more as a statement of existing departmental action than as a real plan for change. The Lifetime Opportunities implementation plan must focus on identifying the intermediate, 3 -year outcomes that need to be achieved to deliver each of the long-term poverty reduction and social exclusion targets, detail the additional or changed outputs that are planned to achieve such outcomes, and explain the timeframe for delivery and how the outputs are to be resourced.

157. The Committee calls on OFMDFM to ensure that the inclusion of narrative and description is minimised within the Implementation Plans supporting the Strategy. Whilst existing services have a critical role in supporting the delivery of anti-poverty objectives, they will not deliver improvements without change. Only those measures that can be seen to assist in poverty reduction or prevention for people at risk of poverty, or which deliver additional benefits for people in poverty or at high risk of poverty, should be included as actions in the relevant parts of the Lifetime Opportunities Implementation Plan.

The Role of the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister

158. OFMDFM’s written submission[81] to the inquiry advised that the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy would be monitored and evaluated through a range of mechanisms including:

159. The Committee considers that the Ministerial Forum has a particularly important role in establishing the intersectoral support that the Executive requires to deliver on its child poverty commitments and the Committee has already called for its immediate reestablishment. The Committee also recognises the value of the cross-departmental steering group and the need for ongoing research.

160. The Committee was particularly interested in OFMDFM’s specific role in ensuring cross-departmental delivery of the child poverty agenda and pressed officials on this during oral evidence. In his evidence to the Committee[82], Dr Gerry Mulligan outlined the cross-departmental role of OFMDFM.

As a lead Department on an issue such as poverty, we have available to us a number of levers. In general, we see our lead role as requiring us to promote, to challenge and to advise other Departments — that has, generally, been the role of OFMDFM.

161. When pressed by Committee Members on OFMDFM’s role in holding departments to account for their performance in delivering child poverty targets, Dr Mulligan emphasised the role of Executive arrangements.

The influence of OFMDFM is exercised through Executive arrangements. The Executive discuss cross-cutting issues and will take decisions to address problems that arise. Ministers do not have the legal authority to direct another Minister to implement such a specific measure, but under the ministerial code, those issues can be discussed and agreed at Executive level…..As with other cross-cutting issues, OFMDFM has the lead role and responsibility for the targets, but that does not hold only our Department’s feet to the fire — it implicates those other Departments whose programmes are essential to delivering on those targets.

162. Dr Mulligan highlighted the importance of the recognition in the Spending Review Process of tackling poverty and disadvantage in acting as an incentive for departments to prioritise action to tackle poverty.

The public-expenditure planning process allows for the Department of Finance and Personnel to issue guidance to Departments when making bids and defending departmental baselines. One of the requirements in the past has certainly been that Departments indicate the effect that their budgets have on tackling poverty and disadvantage. That is a very significant requirement for Departments in the setting of priorities. Departments are also aware that, when making bids for additional resources, those that are supported by information that demonstrates a positive impact on poverty are more likely to be successful.

163. The Committee welcomes the recognition of tackling poverty and disadvantage within the public expenditure planning process and asks OFMDFM and the Department of Finance and Personnel to ensure that this remains as a feature in future Budget rounds.

164. The Committee sought to develop an understanding of whether sanctions could be applied to departments if they failed to deliver on their poverty reduction commitments. Dr Mulligan explained that the sanctions available to OFMDFM are limited.

The only stick that we have is that which is provided through legislation or through the procedural rules that govern the working of the Executive. There is an important part of the process that requires that the First Minister and deputy First Minster be satisfied with papers before they go to the Executive for consideration. They must be satisfied that the papers address issues in a way that is relevant to the Department’s view of the policy. That gives the First Minister and deputy First Minister a gate-keeping role, and provides some incentive — whether one calls it a carrot or a stick — to ensure that policies are properly poverty-proofed. I suggest that such a process involves both carrot and stick.

165. In its interim report, the committee sought to have OFMDFM’s gate-keeping role strengthened by assigning the department a role in assessing and challenging Programme for Government Delivery Agreements to ensure the robustness of departmental targets and actions designed to contribute to the achievement of the cross-cutting theme of a shared and better future for all. During oral evidence, Dr Mulligan advised that OFMDFM will have sight of the delivery agreements and that a subgroup of the Executive will be established to identify the key actions that are required to deliver on the commitments in their overall [Anti-poverty] strategy.

166. The Committee welcomes the proposal to establish a sub group of the Executive to identify the key actions that are required to deliver on the commitments in the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy. However, it is likely that this process will take some months and the Committee remains of the view that OFMDFM should have a role in challenging Departmental Delivery Agreements to ensure the relevance and robustness of departmental targets and actions designed to contribute to the cross-cutting theme of a shared and better future.

167. There is an expectation that OFMDFM will lead and drive cross-departmental implementation of the measures necessary to reduce child poverty. However, the Committee is not convinced that OFMDFM has the power to be able to fulfil public expectations. The Committee is of the view that the Performance Management Framework for the Programme for Government, which is currently under development by the Executive, must include a system of rewards and sanctions to ensure that departments deliver on their cross-departmental commitment to eliminate child poverty.

168. The Committee recommends that OFMDFM and DFP should consider, following consultation with this Committee and the Committee for Finance and Personnel, the introduction of a system of financial incentives and penalties in relation to the delivery of cross-departmental priorities, such as child poverty. This could, for example, include incentives such as providing additional access to funding, or sanctions, such as reducing budget flexibility by ring-fencing resources for cross-departmental programmes, should departments fail to deliver on their commitments. The assessment of poverty impacts as detailed at paragraph 308 should inform such decisions.

Financing Cross-departmental Delivery

169. The Committee received extensive evidence on the issue of financing and funding child poverty reduction. The Committee does not consider that there is any likelihood of there being an increase in the Northern Ireland Budget. Therefore, it would seem that the debate is not so much about how much overall funding is available, but rather how that funding is directed and managed so that it delivers most benefit for families living in poverty. The Chief Commissioner of the Equality Commission, made the following assessment of the overall level of funding available through the Budget and Investment Strategy[83].

I reiterate my point about resources: the expenditure in the Programme for Government over the next few years, and the investment made as part of the investment strategy, is a significant commitment of resources in Northern Ireland. Some of that investment is from the Government and some from the private sector. All of that investment will have social and economic consequences. It represents an opportunity, and, creatively used with sensitivity to its potential to make social change, it will tackle child poverty and create employment.

170. In her oral evidence to the Committee[84], the Children’s Commissioner contended that investment in poverty reduction and early interventions will reduce service costs over the long-term.

There may be talk about resources, and Ministers will ask where they are to find the money to implement these recommendations. In reply to that I ask them where they will get the money not to implement them, because that will cost far more.

171. A number of organisations in their evidence to the Committee argued that there should be dedicated, ring-fenced funding for the implementation of anti-poverty implementation plans. The views of the Children’s Law Centre[85] are representative of many of the organisations that provided evidence to the Committee.

Lifetime Opportunities needs to be properly resourced with the commitment of adequate ring-fenced funding, secured through cross-departmental budget allocations rather than through a skewing of resources.

172. The Committee has debated the issue of whether there should be ring-fenced funding for child poverty throughout the inquiry. The Committee can see the value of having a dedicated funding stream which offers departments an incentive to invest in poverty reduction, by providing an opportunity to bid for additional funding. Such packages can also stimulate creativity and allow new approaches to poverty reduction to be tested. Any such funding scheme would of course have to be financed from within the existing Budget, and resources would necessarily have to be redirected from other parts of the Budget to create such a package.

173. Another benefit of ring-fenced funding is that finances are transparent and are protected from short-term pressures, pressures which can be difficult to resist in those departments such as Education and Health with most to contribute to breaking the cycle of poverty. In addition, it is much easier for those with lead responsibility for a cross-departmental strategy to track and monitor how a ring-fenced budget is being spent by departments to support strategy implementation.

174. The difficulty of seeking to ensure that cross-departmental commitments are delivered in the absence of dedicated funding streams was exemplified by the outworkings of the decision to mainstream the Children and Young People’s Funding Package. Budget allocations within the draft Budget would have resulted in reductions or the cessation of some important programmes established under the funding package. Both this Committee and Junior Ministers within OFMDFM actively supported efforts to restore funding to at risk children’s services and additional funding was allocated by the Executive in the final Budget to address concerns expressed during the consultation on the Programme for Government and Budget. However, several months after the finalisation of the Budget, and despite the best efforts of this Committee and a number of Ministers, problems associated with the funding of services for Children and Young People continue to emerge.

175. Overall, it would seem that the Executive is not convinced of the value of ring-fenced funding packages and has sought to mainstream the Children and Young People’s Funding Package and other such packages into departmental baselines. The Committee recognises that there are benefits from such an approach in ensuring that only high priority programmes are funded and in helping to prevent the cycle of funding crises faced by the voluntary and community sector when such packages come to an end. The Committee also recognises that, in reality, not all funding that makes a contribution to tackling child poverty could be ring-fenced, due to the extensive range of policies and programmes across government which necessarily already contribute to tackling child poverty. Ring-fenced funding could only resource new or additional measures. It is also worth noting that many of the measures being recommended in this report do not require new funding. The more effective use of existing funding is really what is required.

176. The Committee considers that the key features of funding arrangements for cross-departmental priorities such as child poverty are that they must be effective, transparent and should support accountability. Ring-fencing funding can deliver many of these features, but the Committee believes that there is an alternative to having a ring-fenced funding package, which would have many, though not all, of its benefits. The alternative would involve establishing systems and processes which provide transparency by clearly and publicly establishing the level of funding being directed towards child poverty, supported by effective performance management arrangements and a strong, independent challenge function to ensure accountability.

177. This would involve, for example, publishing details of the financial allocations beside each of the SMART outcome and output based targets included within the Departmental Delivery Agreements and the Lifetime Opportunities Implementation Plan and the inclusion within annual reports detailing progress against each of the targets, of information on actual expenditure against the targets that have been set.

178. The Committee is not however convinced that the current role and powers of OFMDFM will allow such a system to operate effectively without some further support. The Committee believes that the influence of OFMDFM would be significantly enhanced by the production of independent assessments of the contribution being made by departments towards poverty reduction.

179. The Committee recommends that in addition to the introduction of new performance management arrangements for the Programme for Government and the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy, OFMDFM should establish an independent panel of experts to report to the First Minister and deputy First Minister on the impact of the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy and associated delivery plans on families in poverty and at risk of poverty.

180. The Committee also wishes to encourage other statutory committees, as part of their work to scrutinise the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy, to challenge departments to identify the principal measures being introduced in the department to reduce poverty and to set out how these measures are being resourced.

181. The Committee has identified the need for additional resources to be allocated to implement recommendations in relation to the rising cost of basic necessities for people on low income. Details of the Committee’s recommendations on financing this priority are included in Section 7 of the report.

Role of other Sectors in Tackling Child Poverty

182. During the inquiry it became evident to the Committee that whilst the Executive has a crucial role in providing leadership on poverty reduction, a wide range of organisations across a number of sectors have important roles in helping to tackle poverty.

183. The Committee wishes to particularly commend the voluntary, community and faith-based organisations that do so much to assist those in the most severe poverty, through the provision of loans and equipment, assistance with accommodation and even help to pay for basic necessities. This is a very valuable role and even if the Executive is successful in its efforts to reduce child poverty, it is likely that the most vulnerable in our society will remain difficult for government to reach directly and the assistance of partner organisations will continue to be vital.

184. Members of the Committee were very pleased to hear of the interest of local authorities in the child poverty agenda and both Craigavon Borough Council and Dungannon Borough Council provided oral evidence to the Committee during the inquiry.

185. In its written submission to the Committee[86], Dungannon Borough Council highlighted the need for local plans to take account of local need. Although much of this report has necessarily focused on regional planning, the Committee agrees that action is also required at local level and that local authorities are well placed to take forward this agenda.

186. It would seem that the community planning process is likely to provide the framework within which local efforts at interagency planning to tackle poverty and social need can be developed. The capacity of local government to deliver on the child poverty agenda will undoubtedly be enhanced through the transfer of neighbourhood renewal functions.

187. However, as has been demonstrated by Dungannon Borough Council, it is already possible, as part of the civic leadership role of local government, for Council’s to offer leadership on the anti-poverty agenda. The Committee wishes to encourage leaders within local government, OFMDFM and the Department of the Environment to take account of the potential role of local government in tackling child poverty when developing new systems for community planning and during the development of agreements on funding and priorities between central and local government.

188. The private sector also has an important, and in the Committee’s view, an increasing part to play in eliminating child poverty. As has already been demonstrated, the creation of employment opportunities, and, in particular, the creation of well-paid private sector employment opportunities, must be at the heart of any effective strategy to reduce child poverty. The private sector is also becoming an increasingly significant partner in efforts to tackle the legacy of underinvestment in Northern Ireland’s infrastructure.

189. In addition, employers have a critical role in providing opportunities for employees with low levels of education or skills to develop their knowledge and skills and thereby increase the likelihood of both remaining in employment and advancement. The adoption of family friendly and flexible working practices can also assist parents and carers to enter the labour market and continue in employment. The private sector also has a responsibility to ensure that low income customers are not disadvantaged through, for example, lack of access to low-cost finance and services or through the introduction of differential charging schemes which penalise those on low incomes.

190. The Committee considers that the proposal to reestablish the Ministerially led Poverty and Social Inclusion Stakeholder Forum will have an important role in seeking to build ownership of the anti-poverty agenda across all relevant sectors.

Policies to Increase Income

The Role of Taxes and Transfers

191. A number of organisations that submitted evidence to the Committee highlighted the importance of taxation policy and the role of government transfers, which provide benefits and services to families on low income, in tackling poverty. Save the Children[87] drew the Committee’s attention to research showing that countries with the lowest rates of children living in poverty (like those in the Nordic region) allocate the highest proportion of their gross national product to social expenditure, particularly family and other related social transfers. Derry Children’s Commission in its evidence[88] to the Committee advised that no country which allocates 10% or more of GDP to social transfers has a child poverty rate higher than 10% and no country which allocates less than 5% of GDP to such transfers has a child poverty rate of less than 15%.

192. Figure 6[89] below, which sets out poverty levels (as measured by 50% of median income) before and after government support in terms of taxes and transfers, underlines the importance of these to reducing child poverty.

Figure 6 The impact of taxes and transfers

The impact of taxes and transfers

193. In the UK, according to this research, taxes and transfers have reduced poverty levels by around ten percentage points. It is widely recognised that changes in taxation and benefit policy in the UK have been a significant factor in the reductions in child poverty levels seen in UK. The table below demonstrates that during the 1990s the UK leads the rest of the (rich) countries in its overall reduction in the level of child poverty, though the UNICEF report noted that at the start of this period the UK child poverty rates offered much scope for improvement.

Figure 7 Percentage Child Poverty Change 1990s

Percentage Child Poverty Change 1990s

194. The UNICEF report[90] stresses that the relationship between government spending and reduction in poverty rates is complex. For example, many countries with similar levels of government support for families in poverty have significantly different levels of child poverty. The report argues that the relationship between social expenditure and child poverty rates depends not only on the level of government support but on the manner of its dispensation and on the priorities governing its allocation.

The Role of Benefit Uptake Plans

195. The Committee recognises that the Executive has limited room for manoeuvre in relation to many aspects of policy on taxation and benefits. However, as the research[91] considered by the Committee clearly highlights, the manner in which policies are implemented can have a significant impact on their effectiveness. Delivery systems for benefits can have a significant impact on levels of severe poverty, as benefits levels are in fact set above the threshold for severe poverty.

It is known that a large number of people who are in need of benefit find it too difficult to claim. Poverty campaigners would wish to see more research being carried out around the issue of benefit levels and uptake. Methods to reduce the complexity of claiming benefits should be sought. All barriers to benefit uptake need to be identified and attempts made to find more creative ways of reaching people.

196. During the inquiry, the Committee took evidence on the new programmes established by the Department for Social Development and the Social Security Agency to increase benefit uptake in a number of targeted areas. In its evidence to the Committee, the Department for Social Development advised that one of the six benefit uptake programmes established by the department specifically targets child poverty.[92]

In 2007-08, a specific exercise was conducted to, as far as is possible, address child-poverty issues. That involves contacting — through the information and advice sector — families that include more than three children or that include a child with a disability to ensure that they are claiming their full benefit entitlement. Early indications are that the amount of benefits that should be in payment but are not is low, which is encouraging because it means that people are getting their full entitlement to benefit. Although the level of extra benefit uptake resulting from that exercise is low, we intend to try to run a similar exercise this year. However, that will be subject to approval from the Minister.

197. Advice NI and Citizens Advice deliver a number of the benefit uptake programmes on behalf of the Social Security Agency and provided convincing evidence[93] on the effectiveness and value for money of the benefit uptake programmes.

Advice NI has been involved in benefit-uptake matters since 2005-06, when we were engaged with the Social Security Agency in pilot exercises targeting a relatively small number of people— just over 2,000. Those exercises generated approximately £400,000 in arrears and £500,000 in awards for people who had not been accessing their benefit entitlement.

That model is well ahead of anything that has been done in GB; it is an innovative business model. We have publicly welcomed it on a number of occasions, because it is easy to understand, the agency itself can verify the outcomes and it is not expensive.

198. In its evidence to the Committee, Advice NI contended that the impact of the programme could be further enhanced if the Social Security Agency were to make a longer-term commitment to benefit uptake contracts. Both the Committee for Social Development and Advice NI[94] have also argued for consideration to be given to the introduction of alternative methods to try to contact the hard core/hard to reach families living in poverty.

We also believe that the method of benefit-uptake work is as important as what is done. Currently, trawling databases and sending out letters is the sole mechanism used by the Social Security Agency. We understand that there is only a 50% response rate for that method — 50% of people do not respond to letters from the agency. We have developed various alternative methodologies, including engagement with key champions — people in the community — to encourage people to come forward and undertake benefit checks. We invite and ask the agency to explore other such methodologies.

199. The Committee commends the Department for Social Development and the Social Security Agency for its cost-effective, partnership approach to the development and delivery of benefit uptake programmes. The Committee recommends that, following a review of the initial programmes, consideration should be given to the establishment of longer-term benefit uptake contracts and the adoption of alternative methods to try to contact hard to reach families living in poverty.

200. It is important to recognise that in addition to the Social Security Agency there are many government departments and agencies with responsibility for providing benefits, allowances and grant-aid to families on low income. These range from Free School Meal entitlement to Educational Maintenance Allowances and from Health in Pregnancy Grants to Rates Relief. Ensuring that good practice is replicated across government is likely to be a very effective means of tackling child poverty.

201. The Committee considers that increasing the uptake of Free School Meal entitlement is an obvious area for short-term action in terms of benefit uptake. However, the Committee was somewhat surprised to hear of barriers to information sharing which are preventing Education Boards from more effectively targeting efforts to encourage uptake of this entitlement. The Social Security Agency[95] advised of the current position.

All the staff in our front-line offices, particularly in the jobs and benefits and social security offices, are responsible for giving information and advice about benefit-related matters. That also extends to other non-SSA-related matters, such as free school meals and support with school uniforms. Unfortunately, the sharing of information with the education boards is restricted by data-sharing practices. Current legislation does not allow us to directly share our information with any other Government body.

202. The Committee recommends that the Department for Social Development brings forward legislative proposals which would enable information to be shared with other government agencies to enable more effective approaches to be developed to encourage benefit uptake.

203. The Committee recommends that, as a first major initiative in seeking to eliminate severe poverty, the Executive should commit to the development of a cross-departmental Benefit Uptake Strategy, building on the successful benefit uptake programmes led by the Social Security Agency. The Strategy should seek to focus on those in greatest need and to identify solutions which cut across departmental boundaries. It should seek to remove key barriers to benefit uptake, by simplifying assessment processes, by tackling the complexity of some current systems and by removing legislative barriers to data sharing.

The Tax and Benefit System

204. At the commencement of the inquiry the Committee stated that its focus would be on matters over which the Executive has control. The Committee did not therefore seek to evaluate in detail alternative tax and benefit models to those currently in operation. The Committee did however note that there remain a number of concerns about the ability of current approaches to tax and benefits to deliver further reductions in levels of poverty.

205. The Committee noted with interest the research[96] from the Joseph Rowntree Foundation on the application of ‘progressive universalism’ to give a certain level of benefits to people with particular needs, regardless of their income and the potential for models which rely less on means testing and more on targeting the size of a family to ensure that money reaches more children in poverty. The Committee was also very interested in the evidence[97] provided by Dr Peter Kenway from the New Policy Institute that the preoccupation with child poverty may be limiting the effectiveness of government policy and recommending that there should be a greater focus on the family.

206. During the review of evidence presented to the inquiry on 30 April 2008, Mr Jim Walsh from Combat Poverty Agency outlined the different model of tax and benefits that operate in the Republic of Ireland[98]. The Committee considers that, given the similar challenges faced in seeking to reduce child poverty, the Executive should seek to ensure that policy on poverty reduction continues to be a matter for co-operation and information sharing on both a North/South and East/West basis.

207. The Committee was also very interested in research[99] conclusions which emphasise that although policy on tax and benefits is often at the forefront of discussions on poverty reduction, tax and benefit models cannot be relied on solely to address child poverty. The Committee supports the research conclusions that a multi-faceted approach is required with a key long-term requirement to increase substantially the amount that parents earn from work. This research is considered further in the section of the report dealing with the promotion of paid work.

Tax Credits

208. Research discussed earlier in the report points to the important role of tax credits in maximising the incomes of poor families. It also outlined the contribution of the tax credit system in the UK to the reduction in levels of child poverty in Northern Ireland. The administration of tax credits has however been mired in controversy. Members of the Committee are all aware of constituents who have been gone into debt either as a result of delays in payment or over-payments. The Southern Area Childcare Partnership[100] was one of a number of organisations who drew such problems to the attention of the Committee.

These tax credits whilst welcomed reinforce the view that we have an extensive low wage economy. In addition many families have real difficulties with long delays in processing claims, the knock on effect where claiming other benefits depend on having a tax credit assessment and even more where the claw back of overpayments result in very great hardship in financial and relationship terms.

209. The Committee was still shocked to hear that a recent report by Citizens Advice UK[101] stated that one third of crisis loans that are borrowed from the Department for Social Development or the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) in GB are required due to delays in the administration of tax credits. In Northern Ireland the problems are often compounded by the fact that since 2005 HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) no longer has an office in Northern Ireland which deals with tax credits.

210. The Committee is alarmed at the impact of administrative problems within the tax credit system on families in poverty, supports the demand by Citizens Advice that that there should be better customer contact in Northern Ireland for HMRC customers and calls on Ministers to lobby the UK Government for the reopening of an office dealing with tax credits in Northern Ireland and for improvements to verification procedures and the administration of the tax credit system.

Tackling Rising Costs and
Financial Exclusion

211. One of the key issues to have arisen during the course of the inquiry, and which will have a very significant impact on strategies to tackle poverty, is the impact of rising costs on families on low income. There was a particular concern in the early stages of the inquiry about increasingly high housing costs and the impact that this was having on homelessness and on low income families, particularly those in the private rented sector. In the later stages of the inquiry, while these concerns remain, the rapid rise in fuel and food costs has emerged as perhaps the major threat to the well-being of families on low incomes.

Fuel Costs

212. The table below, provided by the Assembly’s Research Service a few months ago, demonstrates that in the past year alone oil prices have increased by more than 44%. Oil prices have risen by more then 200% since 2003. Up until the last week in May, electricity prices had not increased significantly. However, an increase of 14% has just been announced and it is anticipated that electricity may rise by a similar percentage later in the year.

Table 5 Fuel price changes in 2007/2008

 
% increase 2007- 2008
Coal 25%
Oil 44% (30.98 pence per litre to 44.68 pence per litre)
Electricity Very slight increase April 2007-April 2008 - from 11.51 pence per unit to 11.6 pence per unit.
Gas 28%
LPG 4.5% (38.1 pence per litre to 39.8 pence per litre)

Source: The Sutherland Tables

213. In addition to this statistical evaluation of rising fuel prices, the Committee has also heard of its real life consequences, such as the tendency for some people on low income to a buy oil in containers containing perhaps 10-20 litres of fuel as they can no longer afford a fill of 500-1000 litres.

214. The Committee understands that the rising costs of food and fuel are matters which are to a very large extent out of the Executive’s control. Members of the Committee also recognise that other departments and committees, including Social Development and Enterprise, Trade and Investment, have more direct responsibility for these matters than OFMDM. Indeed in the oral evidence sessions with the Department for Social Development and the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment the Committee was provided with details of the long-term plans that are in place to tackle Northern Ireland’s high level of fuel poverty, its relatively high energy costs and its dependency on fossil fuels and, in particular, oil.

215. However, the impact of fuel bills that are quite literally rising by the week is so significant that we believe OFMDFM, and indeed the wider Executive, must develop a specific plan of action to deal with the issue of rising costs for people on low income.

216. The Committee welcomes the announcement[102] by Minister for Social Development to establish a taskforce to consider urgently options for addressing rising fuel costs and fuel poverty, as the current PSA target to alleviate fuel poverty in approximately 9,000 households each year through implementing energy efficiency measures, while welcome, falls well short of the sort of radical action required to deal with the current crisis.

217. Helping families in poverty to deal with escalating costs without the likelihood of any significant increase in income will be very challenging and will require the involvement and support of all relevant stakeholders. The Committee is therefore pleased to note the recent interest being taken in this issue by the Utility Regulator, the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment and the Committee for Social Development. The Committee also welcomed information received during the inquiry that the problem of low income families paying higher utility bills through pre-payment systems is less apparent in Northern Ireland than in other parts of the UK.

218. To assist its deliberations on how best to deal with the problem of rising fuel costs for families on low income, the Committee commissioned a research[103] paper to investigate possible new policy approaches. A copy of this paper has been shared with the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment and the Committee for Social Development.

219. It will be for the taskforce established by the Minister for Social Development to identify how best to tackle the current crisis for people on low income created by rocketing fuel costs. The Committee would however urge the Minister to ensure that the Fuel Poverty Taskforce considers all practical options, including options for additional payments or special tariffs for vulnerable groups. The Committee believes that in the current climate all options must be considered.

220. The Committee would also encourage the taskforce to consider how, in addition to potential investments by the public sector to increase levels of energy efficiency, the private sector, including the regulated utilities and major fuel companies, could more effectively contribute to minimising fuel costs for people on low income. The powers of the regulator to incentivise and enforce such an approach should also be considered. At a more local level, policies relating to the fuel choices of low income families may need to be reviewed and serious consideration should be given to how people on low income could be assisted to minimise costs though the creation of cooperatives, thereby enabling the bulk buying of fuel at a reduced price.

221. There will undoubtedly be a need for resources to be made available to deal with the short-term crisis of rising fuel costs for people living on low income. This will represent a major challenge as the Budget has already been fully allocated. The Committee would however encourage the Executive to prioritise this issue during monitoring rounds and to look creatively at other options that could be used to finance the recommendations that emerge from the taskforce, including the funding that is to be allocated by the Lottery arising from money in dormant accounts and the potential contribution of the private sector.

Service Costs

222. Clearly the cost of fuel and food are largely outside the control of the Executive. However, there are other costs to families on low incomes over which the Executive has more influence. For example, the Committee heard evidence[104] about the impact on low income families of the gap between rents in the private sector and levels of housing benefit and that there was the potential for a new approach to determining housing benefit levels to exacerbate the situation in some areas. Increased investment in more social housing as provided for in the Investment Strategy should contribute to reducing the differential. In addition, the Committee welcomed the commitment[105] made by the Minister for Social Development to the Committee for Social Development that she will introduce the new housing allowance on a pilot basis and that there will be no losers because of it. The Committee is confident that the Committee for Social Development will scrutinise the Minister’s delivery of her commitments.

223. A number of organisations emphasised to the Committee the potential impact that costs associated with education can have on children from families on low income. Derry Children’s Commission[106] drew the Committee’s attention to research conducted in Wales which puts the average hidden cost of education at £1,300 per child annually. This includes money spent on school trips, sports kits, uniforms, textbooks, school meals, transport, after school activities, materials and equipment. Citizens Advice[107] advised the Committee that 80% of respondents to an on-line survey felt that school costs were difficult to meet and noted that uniform grants are available only for secondary and special education schools, subject to certain criteria.

224. The Committee also received evidence expressing concern about the potential impact on some vulnerable groups of the new rates system and the introduction of water charges. The Committee therefore wrote to the Department of Finance and Personnel and the Department for Regional Development seeking details of any assessment carried out in relation to the impact of rating reforms and the introduction of water charges on child poverty. Copies of the responses received to the Committee’s letters are included in Appendix 9 to this report[108].

225. The Committee accepts that the Committee for Finance and Personnel and the Committee for Regional Development have been, and continue to scrutinise the proposals of the Department of Finance and Personnel and the Department of Regional Development, and the Committee does not therefore intend to comment in detail on the measures that are being proposed.

226. However, such is the extent of cost pressures facing families on low income and other vulnerable groups, the Committee asks the relevant departments and committees with responsibility for rates and water charges to ensure that, in developing measures to protect people on low income from further hardship, proper account is taken of the reduced incomes available to many vulnerable groups. In addition, the replies from the departments again highlight the need for a cross-departmental benefit uptake strategy, as a new rates relief scheme is being introduced and proposals for an affordability tariff are being developed.

227. Having reflected on the evidence that it has received on costs relating to food, fuel and housing, the Committee considers that the issue of cost minimisation for people on low income has developed into an issue that requires a specific policy response. The Committee is of the view that the objective of minimising costs for families on low income should be an objective not just for central government but also for local agencies and authorities and the private sector.

228. The Committee recommends that within the Lifetime Opportunities Implementation Plan a new objective should be included to seek to minimise the impact of rising costs on low income households. As part of this objective, specific consideration should be given to the development of measures that minimise the cost to families on low income of government services. The principles of free education and free health care at the point of delivery must be at the heart of proposals to minimise the cost of services to families on low income.

Supporting Financial Inclusion

229. In its written submission[109] to the Committee the Consumer Council provided the following definition of financial inclusion.

Financial inclusion covers a broad range of concepts. Individuals or households can be excluded financially for many reasons including: lack of consumer knowledge; confidence; skills; enough money to buy products or access advice; or physical access. Financially excluded consumers often find themselves more affected by increases in interest rates, increases in the total household bills, additional bills and charges and changes to Government Policy…..Individuals or households on a low income may not have the money to buy essential financial products such as household insurance or to set aside even small amounts for savings or pension provision. They may not be able to afford to buy advice from an independent financial adviser.

230. During the inquiry, the Committee received evidence highlighting the barriers to services and the additional costs facing families on low income, if, for example they do not have access to a bank account. The Committee also heard about the difficulties faced by low income families when dealing with the impact of unexpected/large one-off costs, such as fuel costs in the winter, the additional costs when children are off school, flooding or the breakdown of an electrical appliance. These events can result in a family getting into debt and when on low income it can be extremely difficult to pay off that debt whilst meeting the costs of essential goods and services.

231. The UK Government set out its strategy to tackle financial exclusion in Promoting Financial Inclusion[110], published alongside the 2004 Pre-Budget Report. The report sets out a range of measures – in three priority areas – access to banking, access to affordable credit and access to free face-to-face money advice. The UK Government also established a framework for delivery – including a Financial Inclusion Fund of £120 million over three years and a Financial Inclusion Taskforce, to oversee progress.

232. The Committee pressed OFMDFM for clarification on policy responsibility for financial inclusion and on the matter of whether funding has been provided to the Executive, through the Barnett Formula, for the implementation of programmes to tackle financial exclusion in Northern Ireland. OFMDFM provided the following response in correspondence to the Committee on 12 May 2008[111].

OFMDFM has lead responsibility for financial inclusion matters although operational programmes which impact on financial capability and financial inclusion are delivered by other departments, e.g. DE, DETI. OFMDFM is represented on the UK Officials’ Group on Financial Capability and works closely with the General Consumer Council, the Financial Services Authority, Banks and other key stakeholders in progressing financial capability through the Financial Capability Partnership. OFMDFM will liaise with colleagues in DFP to determine whether any Barnett consequential has been received as a result of the UK [financial inclusion] package referred to by the Committee.

233. The Committee welcomes the recognition by OFMDFM of the role of financial inclusion in tackling poverty and would wish to see this reflected in the Lifetime Opportunities Implementation Plan. The Committee is however concerned that it required the Committee’s inquiries to prompt action to determine whether there are Barnett consequentials arising from the UK financial inclusion package and looks forward to early receipt of the response from DFP to OFMDFM’s inquiries.

234. In relation to the individual policies to assist families in poverty to overcome financial difficulties, officials[112] from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment advised that during 2006/2007 the debt advice service funded by the Department assisted nearly 2000 clients dealing with £15m of debt. The Committee welcomes the announcement made by the Minister for Enterprise Trade & Investment during the inquiry that a contract for the next three years has been put in place to continue the free face to face debt advice service across Northern Ireland.

235. The Committee’s attention was drawn to the Money Advice and Budgeting Service in the Republic of Ireland as a potential model for the further development of the debt advice service in Northern Ireland. One of the interesting features of the service is that it in addition to providing advice and support, direct assistance is provided through the establishment of an account in a local credit union through which creditors are paid.

236. The Committee is aware that the Committee for Enterprise, Trade and Investment has launched an inquiry into credit unions and recommends that the Committee investigate whether the direct engagement of credit unions, in the manner employed by the Money Advice and Budgeting Service in the Republic of Ireland, would help to improve the impact of the debt advice service in Northern Ireland.

237. The Committee supports the call made by Citizens Advice[113] for greater controls throughout the UK on financial services to prevent the operations of loan sharks and the provision of inappropriate or very high cost borrowing.

238. The Consumer Council[114] highlighted the issue of insurance, or more appropriately the lack of insurance, as a particular form of financial exclusion. The absence of appropriate insurance increases the risk of low income householders going into debt. The Committee is particularly concerned that 75% of NIHE tenants do not have home contents insurance.

239. The Committee understands that the Consumer Council is currently undertaking research to determine if Northern Ireland consumers are getting a raw deal on insurance in relation to cost, barriers and risk. As a follow-on to this work, the Committee recommends that the Consumer Council be asked to work with NIHE, and the Department for Social Development and insurance companies to investigate low-cost house insurance options, which take account of the level of home contents insurance required by families on low income.

Promoting Employment

Making Work Pay

240. A recent report published by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation[115] on the role of non-means-tested benefits in proposing models for combining existing tax and benefit policies to meet Government child poverty targets for 2010 and 2020 concluded that tax and benefit models cannot be relied on solely to address child poverty.

241. A multi-faceted approach is required with a key long-term requirement to increase substantially the amount that parents earn from work. This has the double advantage of lifting families out of poverty while reducing the cost of the tax credit system and releasing resources for out of work benefits. Even with the poverty level below ten per cent, a third of poor children live in households with a single-earner.

242. Research strongly supports the link between poverty and employment status. Statistics included in an earlier section of the report indicate that a child in a workless household has a 58% chance of being in poverty compared with a risk of poverty of 14% for a child when one or both parents are working.

243. Research[116] however also emphasises that the most severe poverty is particularly associated with instability in employment status. Strategies to tackle child poverty therefore need to be mindful of the importance of creating employment opportunities and of improving job retention. Research[117] considered by the Committee highlighted the positive evaluation of the pilot of the Employment Retention and Advancement Programme in the UK which seeks to help those previously on long-term benefits who have found work to remain in employment, to work longer hours and to undertake in-work training.

244. The Committee was surprised by the number of children in poverty living in families with at least one parent who is working. In his evidence[118] to the Committee, Dr Peter Kenway, from the New Policy Institute discouraged the notion that increasing employment will in itself resolve the issue of child poverty.

We must not assume that jobs are a panacea, because almost half of the children who are in poverty in Northern Ireland live in households where one person is in paid employment. There are various issues there. The person may work part time, or one adult in the household may work full time and the other may not work at all. Therefore, the overall number of jobs must increase, but attention must be paid to the type of jobs and rates of pay for low-paid workers.

Barriers to Employment

245. The Committee in its inquiry did not seek to evaluate the economic strategy of the Executive, or its overall approach to education and skills, though it welcomes the recognition within the Programme for Government that strategies need to focus on increasing productivity and supporting growth in well-paid high-skilled jobs. Such an approach is critical if the maxim that “work is the best route out of poverty” is to be sustained.

246. This inquiry has necessarily focussed its attention on the barriers to work faced by groups at high risk of poverty. The particular difficulties faced by lone parents in obtaining and sustaining employment was a theme of many of the submissions considered by the Committee. In additional evidence[119] to the Committee, Gingerbread outlined the findings of research on lone parents and employment.

Lone parents are found to have the weakest incentives to work and progress when in employment. A report by Adams et al. (2006) is underscored by evidence emerging from Britain of high job exit rates among lone parents entering the labour market, particularly in their first year of employment (Evans et al., 2004). It is noted that while up to 15% of lone parents move into work each year – a rate similar to that of other non-employed people – lone parents have more than double the exit rate of non-lone parents. Low pay, especially when linked to part-time work and ill health were found to be important contributing factors.

247. Officials from the Department for Employment and Learning, in their evidence[120] to the Committee, argued that increasing employment levels were reducing child poverty levels in Northern Ireland, but that lone parents were not benefiting to the same extent as other household groups from rising employment levels.

One reason why those [poverty] figures have fallen is because there has been a reduction in unemployment. Whereas about 10 years ago, half of the children in workless households were in two-people, or multi-person, families, that number has now fallen and the main barrier now is lone parents. That is one reason why some of the provision that DEL is organising is extending later this year to better cover lone parents as well as our main target group hitherto which has been people on jobseeker’s allowance.

248. In correspondence[121] with the Committee, the Department for Employment and Learning provided details of pilots into a new range of measures being introduced under the Pathways to Work for Lone Parents Programme, including the provision of a dedicated Personal Adviser from the first work-focused contact, (including any subsequent compulsory or voluntary work focused interviews), through to accessing provision and receiving in-work support.

249. The Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network and the New Policy Institute highlighted the importance of the cost and availability of public transport to people on low income who are seeking to avail educational or employment opportunities[122].

Transport has a massive impact on children who live in disadvantaged communities. It also has an impact on disadvantaged households in communities that are not necessarily seen as being disadvantaged.

We suspect that fares are an especially important consideration for low income working households, and one of the factors that, if they are too high, discourage people from taking a job in the first place. Though long a Cinderella subject, this is something where the policy levers are very much in the hands of the Executive and local government.

250. The Committee also took evidence from a number of organisations, including Barnado’s, in relation to the barriers faced by people with a disability in seeking to enter the labour market[123].

Disabled children themselves face significant barriers to education, training and employment without the necessary preventative and support services. Recent research on education and employment amongst disabled young people found that despite similar aspirations, the experience of disabled and non-disabled young people diverged sharply in early adulthood

251. Of course it is not just people with a disability that face difficulties in obtaining employment. Caring for a person with a disability can also introduce significant barriers to employment and it was in this context that MENCAP[124] drew the Committee’s attention to a £340m package that was made available for disabled children’s services in England. This included a specific grant of £280m to deliver a step change in the provision of short breaks, £35m to pilot accessible childcare and £19m for a Transition Support Programme, modelled on the Early Support programme but focussed on young disabled people in transition to adulthood. Details were also provided of a further £90 million of additional capital funding for short break services, and an increased grant of £8.4 million for the Family Fund, to allow them to make grants to disabled young people aged 16 and 17.

252. During evidence sessions and in subsequent correspondence with departments, the Committee sought information on the support that is available for families, which include a person with disability, to enter and sustain employment. In a written response[125] to the Committee, the Department for Employment outlined a range of services that are in place to support people with a disability into employment. However, during oral evidence[126], officials quite rightly emphasised the importance of providing individualised support, as factors other than their disability, for example education and skill levels, may be a more important barrier to employment than a person’s disability.

253. In response[127] to a written question from the Committee on the funding implications arising from the UK package for disabled children’s services, OFMDFM outlined the position in Northern Ireland.

The £340m package for disabled children’s services..was funded from within the broader 3.1% real terms settlement for the Department of Children, Schools and Families ( announced as part of Budget 2007), on which the Executive received Barnett consequentials in the normal way…All allocations received from the Barnett formuala are un-hypothecated and are available to spend in correspondence with local needs and priorities. It is understood that Junior Ministers have raised this issue with the Minister for Finance and Personnel.

254. The Committee supports the intervention of Junior Ministers on this issue. The Committee considers that the introduction of measures to address support for young people with a disability during transition and to provide better support for families caring for a person with a disability have an important contribution to make to the delivery of policies to tackle poverty and social exclusion.

255. The Committee calls on OFMDFM to initiate a review, involving other relevant departments including DE, DHSSPS, DEL and DSD, to consider the issues addressed by the package for disabled children’s services in England in relation to the provision of short breaks, accessible childcare, transition support and parents’ fora and, based on the outcome of the review, to make recommendations to the Executive on the development of a resourced programme of action to deliver equivalent improvements in Northern Ireland.

Childcare in Northern Ireland

256. To the surprise of the Committee one of the early issues to emerge during the inquiry as one of the most significant barriers to employment faced by households at risk of poverty is the absence of affordable childcare. The Committee therefore commissioned detailed comparative research on the provision of childcare in Northern Ireland and on good practice in encouraging and supporting childcare provision in other parts of the UK. The research identified the importance of childcare policies to tackling poverty[128].

The Government’s anti-poverty strategy has focused on improving opportunities for parents to take and remain in work, providing assistance with moving ‘from welfare to work’, ensuring that paid work provides higher income than not working (‘making work pay’) and on providing security for those who cannot work. The success of the Government’s flagship policies, such as the New Deal, a scheme aimed at offering subsidised work or education to the long-term unemployed or young people, is dependent on the availability of childcare to allow parents to take paid work.

257. However, the research findings paint a picture of childcare provision that remains sparse and expensive in many parts of Northern Ireland. The research paper proposes that childcare in Northern Ireland remains “woefully inadequate” and women cite the lack of affordable quality childcare as the main barrier to seeking employment.

258. The paper noted that in addition to the high cost of provision, there are particular childcare problems for those facing multiple disadvantages such as low income, working part-time or outside the 9 to 5 pattern and families with one or more disabled members.

259. The research paper commented on a study undertaken by the Equality Commission in 2003, which found that nearly a quarter of employed mothers were constrained in the hours they worked by childcare problems, a further 20% were constrained in their choice of job and 67% of women surveyed cited the lack of affordable quality childcare as the main barrier to seeking employment.

260. The paucity of childcare provision in Northern Ireland may have come as a surprise to the Committee, but it would seem that for those working in the sector this has been a reality for sometime. The Western and Southern Area Childcare Partnerships[129] provided the following statistics to the Committee.

The Population of Children 0-14 years within the WHSSB Area as of Mid-Year 2006 = 63,426, which means that there is a childcare place for approximately 12% of the overall population of 0-14 year old with the majority of these being available to under-school aged children.

In the Southern Board area, there are 70,377 children aged between 0 - 14 years (source Article 20 Reports – August 07) There are some 7750 childcare places available in Registered facilities and this equates to 11% of the overall population of 0 – 14 year olds.

261. In oral evidence[130] to the Committee, representatives of Advice NI advised that people on benefits, especially lone parents, consistently state that the barrier which is preventing them from moving into employment, is access to affordable, accessible childcare. Gingerbread advised that 30,000 extra childcare places would have to be provided in Northern Ireland to support delivery of the UK government’s target to have 70% of lone parents in employment by 2010. This compares with the reality in Northern Ireland that, according to the review of the Northern Ireland Childcare Strategy, between 31 March 1999 and 2004 the total number of childcare places increased by only 5.7% to 42,367[131].

262. Whilst good quality affordable childcare is scarce in many areas, according to Disability Action[132], the availability of appropriate care for children with a disability would seem to significantly worse again.

The provision of day care is a fundamental right of every individual. A disabled child cannot be discriminated against; it cannot be the case that a child with a disability is denied that right. It should not be the case that if a child, because of a disability, has to have a full-time carer, then that carer has to be a parent of that child. That means that that parent earns no money, as they will not be able to enter employment. Then we are faced with what is being talked about here today — child poverty.

263. The research commissioned by the Committee also assessed the policies that are being put place in Northern Ireland and in other parts of the UK and Ireland to improve the availability of high quality, affordable childcare. The research identified that childcare policy is still governed by the Strategy Children First: The Northern Ireland Childcare Strategy, which was published in 1999, though the forthcoming Early Years Strategy, which is due to published shortly by the Department of Education, will include the areas of education, care and development for 0-6 year old children.

264. As a first step in seeking to identify how best to improve childcare provision in Northern Ireland, the Committee endeavoured, during oral evidence with officials, to seek clarification from the Department of Education and Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety on which department has policy responsibility for childcare. The Department of Education outlined its position during the evidence session on 2 April 2008[133].

The Department’s commitment is to develop the 0-6 early-years strategy — the early education and care strategy. The overall issue of school-age childcare beyond the age of six is not the responsibility of DE….. Before the transfer of the early-years policy, DHSSPS had responsibility for the childcare agenda. There are challenges when a policy, or part of a policy, becomes the responsibility of a different Department, and there will still be issues and ambiguities involved. However I want to put it on record that it is not the Department of Education.

265. One week later the Committee pressed officials from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety on whether the department was responsible for childcare policy. However, the response of officials[134] was to indicate that policy responsibility for childcare had transferred to the Department of Education.

Responsibility for Sure Start actually transferred to the Department of Education in 2007. Clearly, there is a linkage for us as regards our interest in Sure Start. We want to see it progress, survive and continue to provide the service that it offers at present. However, the matter sits primarily with the Department of Education…Under the legislation, responsibility for early-years and day care is for children aged from 0-12.

266. The disagreement between the Department of Education and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety on policy responsibility for school aged childcare is a totally unacceptable. The absence of clear responsibilities for childcare policy is not only preventing a strategic approach to the issue of childcare, and to the development of its role in supporting both economic and social policies, but is also creating a short-term crisis in school aged childcare provision, as neither department will accept responsibility for funding programmes previously resourced through the Children and Young People’s Funding Package.

267. The Committee calls on OFMDFM, as a matter of priority, to resolve the dispute between the Department of Education and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety for school aged childcare by assigning lead responsibility for childcare policy to the most appropriate department.

268. It is evident that whichever department is assigned this responsibility it will be taking on a very challenging remit. In addition to the above-mentioned problems in funding school aged childcare and reductions in the budget for extended schools, the Committee has been advised of delays in the childminding registration process and, that in a number of parts of Northern Ireland, the number of registered childminders is reducing, despite rising levels of employment which should be creating additional demand. In its evidence[135], the Committee for Social Development expressed its concerns about the implications of a shortage of childminders.

The Committee expressed some concern in relation to the shortage of registered child-minders in certain areas and the effect this may have on enabling parents to access the childcare component of Working Family Tax Credit (WFTC). Parents in the affected areas often have little choice but to use family members who are not registered and therefore do not qualify for the childcare component of WFTC.

269. Research considered by the Committee on the policies and programmes being put place in the UK and the Republic of Ireland identified just how far behind Northern Ireland is in recognising childcare as a key component of the welfare to work agenda.

270. The findings have direct relevance to the childcare policy but also highlight a wider issue in relation to the delivery of welfare to work reforms in Northern Ireland. Many of the welfare to work programmes in Northern Ireland are modelled on equivalent programmes developed in the UK. However, it would seem, that at least in some instances, whilst the front-line programmes equivalent to those in other parts of the UK are being adopted, programmes to improve support services, which are critical to policy delivery, are not necessarily being developed.

271. In their evidence[136] to the Committee, the Western Childcare Partnership highlighted a study undertaken within the Western Sure Start Projects which advised that the experience of parents investigating the possibility of returning to work was that they were not provided with information on childcare services by their Jobs & Benefits Personal Advisor. To overcome such difficulties Sure Starts within the UK have contact with a local Childcare Officer employed by the Local Authority, whose job it is to support parents through the whole back-to-work venture (i.e. careers advice, benefits analysis, form-filling, the interview process, and childcare).

272. The Committee calls on Executive Ministers to ensure that before introducing welfare reform programmes which have been developed in other parts of the UK, careful consideration is given to their implementation in Northern Ireland, and, in particular, recommends that an evaluation is carried out of whether necessary support services, such as childcare, are in place prior to their implementation.

273. According to the paper[137] prepared by the Assembly’s Research and Library Service, new legislation was introduced in England requiring local authorities to assess the local childcare market and to secure sufficient childcare for working parents. Childcare provision will only be deemed sufficient if it meets the needs of the community in general and in particular those families on lower incomes and those with disabled children. A transformation fund of £125 million was established to invest in high quality, sustainable, affordable provision. Importantly, the policy recognises that the quality of childcare is the most important consideration for parents and commitments have been made in relation to funding supply cover so that early years workers can take part in continuing professional development and enhancing the Graduate Leader Fund so that every full day care setting will be led by a graduate by 2015, with two graduates per setting in disadvantaged areas.

274. In the Republic of Ireland, a national childcare strategy has been developed which aims to invest €575 million over five years to increase the supply by 50,000 additional childcare places. The strategy also includes provision for a National Childminding Initiative, including the provision of capital grant of €630 under the Childminder Development Grant Scheme to purchase safety equipment, toys, make minor adjustments to the childminder’s home or to establish a childminding service. In addition, a €1000 Early Childcare Supplement came into effect in April 2006 to help parents of children under 6 years with the cost of caring for young children.

275. The Committee accepts the view that childcare provision in Northern Ireland is woefully inadequate and considers that the absence of a coherent childcare policy is a gaping hole in the Executive’s policy to tackle poverty and social exclusion and in Northern Ireland’s welfare reform programme.

276. The Committee calls on the Executive to set a date for the development of a long-term, properly resourced Childcare Strategy and to take immediate action to resolve the funding crisis for school aged childcare. The Committee recommends that the Strategy should include specific targets to:

277. In developing the Childcare Strategy, and in light of the link between childcare and welfare reform programmes, the Committee recommends that consideration be given to the introducing a statutory duty to require sufficient childcare provision to meet the needs of the community in general and in particular those families on lower incomes and those with disabled children.

278. Clearly the Department of Education and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety have particularly important roles in the development and implementation of the Childcare Strategy. However, childcare is a cross-departmental issue which, as identified previously, has critical links to welfare reform and economic development strategies. The Committee therefore welcomes the approach of the Department for Employment and Learning in seeking to facilitate participants on the New Deal for Lone Parents by allowing participants to claim help with the cost of informal childcare[138]. The Committee would however have liked to see more evidence during the session on 9 April 2008 that officials in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment recognise the contribution that good practice in relation to family friendly policies can make to reducing barriers to employment and the business opportunities that exist in the childcare sector.

279. The lack of childcare provision in rural areas was identified by the Rural Community Network as a significant barrier to employment[139].

The provision of quality, flexible and accessible childcare is a significant barrier to finding and taking up work in rural areas and disproportionately affects women and lone parents. Participation of women in quality, full time jobs would make a significant impact on child poverty.

280. However, it would seem that in the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development the importance of improving childcare provision has been recognised and the recommendations of a stakeholder group on rural childcare have now been presented to the Minister[140]. A copy of the report was also provided to the Committee.

281. The Committee welcomes the findings of the review of rural childcare initiated by the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development and recommends that specific targets for improving childcare provision in rural areas be included in the Childcare Strategy.

Making Work Pay

282. The welfare reform programme introduced by the UK Government has been developed with the aim of ensuring that through tax and benefits policy and the minimum wage there are sufficient incentives to enter employment, i.e., making work pay. A feature of a number of such policies has been the payment of a Return to Work Credit for a defined period (a year for Pathways to Work) for those entering employment. However, such payments may not necessarily make work pay, as returning to work may mean that other benefits such as housing benefit or rates relief are curtailed, as well as introducing new costs such as childcare.

283. The UK Government is therefore proposing to pilot a new Better off in Work Credit to reassure long term recipients of Incapacity Benefit (and Employment Support Allowance on its introduction), Income Support or Jobseeker’s Allowance that if they enter full-time work they will have an in-work income, including any in-work benefits or tax credits, of at least £25 per week more than they receive from their out of work benefits[141].

284. The Committee recommends that making work pay should be a specific objective within the Lifetime Opportunities Implementation Plan and recommends that the Department for Social Development, with the support of OFMDFM, should work with departments in the UK on the development of a pilot “Better off in Work” initiative in Northern Ireland.

Measures to
Tackle Long-term Disadvantage

285. In his evidence[142] to the Committee, Dr Gerry Mulligan, Head of the Equality/Rights and Social Need Division in Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, outlined the important role that policies, which are under the direct responsibility of the Executive, can play in tackling child poverty.

The long-term goal [to eliminate child poverty] is more likely to be addressed through the improvement of services such as education, health, and employment policies — areas that are within the gift of the devolved Administration.

Education, Health and Poverty Reduction

286. Research[143] considered by the Committee reported that in the UK the association between social class and educational attainment is much stronger and the tail of under-achievement longer than in other developed nations and that inequality in learning achievement begins at an early age. It also highlighted that there is considerable variation in educational attainment between schools with a similar proportion of disadvantaged children attending (as measured by Free School Meal Entitlement).

287. The Department of Education and the Department for Employment and Learning outlined to the Committee a range of policies and programmes that are in place to help tackle the low levels of education and skills among many young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. The correlation between lower levels of literacy with poverty and unemployment are now well established. It is not therefore surprising that both departments highlighted the importance of new policies to improve literacy and numeracy, including through the establishment of the literacy and numeracy taskforce.

288. Officials from both departments[144], [145] also highlighted the cyclical nature of educational underachievement and identified the benefits to children of approaches which improve the knowledge and skills of parents and increase parental involvement.

The [Essential Skills for Living] Strategy aims to support 38,000 Essential Skills qualifications by 2011. When people have good Essential Skills it can improve outcomes in other areas of their lives. For example, if parents have good skills and encourage and support their children with their homework, this has a significant impact on how their children perform in school. Family literacy is thus a key area for DEL working alongside DE. Good Essential Skills also bring financial rewards to adults through improved job and pay prospects and reduces the chances of being unemployed.

We know from research, from the evidence of extended schools elsewhere, and from the work that the Inspectorate has done with us on the first year of the programme, that it is capable of making a huge difference where it is working well.... Many barriers to learning relate to low self esteem and to people having low expectations of their own ability, therefore it is important that those people have the sense that someone can help them with that. Therefore, we know that the extended schools programme is making a difference and is capable of making a difference. We need another year or two to see that difference coming to fruition. The programme has worked effectively where links have been made between parents, communities and schools; where, for example, parents and communities are availing of the opportunities to use the school’s facilities or be actively involved in a “dads and lads” computer club, or suchlike.

289. In its written submission[146] to the Committee, OFMDFM provided compelling evidence of the need for continuing reform to more effectively tackle educational underachievement. Commenting on the table below, OFMDFM stated that between 1992/93 to 2004/05, roughly twice the rate of pupils entitled to free school meals leave education without any qualifications compared to all pupils.

Table 6 Pupils Leaving Education with No Qualifications

Year All
%		 Entitled to FSM
%
1992/1993
4.9
10.8
1993/1994
3.8
8
1994/1995
3.4
7.3
1995/1996
1.5
3.5
1996/1997
3.6
6.9
1997/1998
3.1
6.5
1998/1999
2.7
5.4
1999/2000
3.6
7.2
2000/2001
4.8
10.4
2001/2002
5.2
11.7
2002/2003
-
-
2003/2004
4.9
12
2004/2005
3.5
8.4

290. In the same submission, OFMDFM highlighted the impact of deprivation on children’s health, most worryingly through higher child mortality rates, and the legacy of that impact as they grow to adulthood. In its evidence[147] to the Committee, the Department of Health, Social Service and Public Safety identified that social deprivation is associated with greater incidence of childhood illness, poor diet, drug and alcohol abuse, teenage pregnancy and suicide and outlined the role of the Investing for Health Strategy in seeking to deliver the PSA target to achieve a 50% reduction in the life expectancy differential between the most disadvantaged areas and the Northern Ireland average by 2012.

291. Evidence considered by the Committee identified that parents of children who were in persistent poverty were significantly more likely to be in poorer mental health and well-being than the parents of children who were not in poverty. The Committee is particularly concerned about the impact of poverty on mental health and well-being and welcomes the additional investment announced in the final Budget for the implementation of the recommendations in the Bamford Review.

292. The departments with responsibility for health and education have critical roles in helping to address the cycle of deprivation. The Committee recognises the successes that there have been over the past decade in improving overall educational outcomes and in increasing life expectancy and reducing levels of preventable illness. However, the gaps in educational and health outcomes between children living in poverty and children from more affluent backgrounds remain stubbornly unaffected.

293. Whilst targets have been set to reduce differentials in educational and health outcomes, the Committee considers that more attention needs to be paid to identifying and targeting the population groups at most risk of poor educational or health outcomes with specific, evidence-based strategies that will deliver real improvements for such groups. It is vital that such strategies are sustained over the long-term and that the propensity for complex problems to be tackled through initiatives, supported by short-term funding, should come to an end.

The Case for Early Intervention

294. In its 2002 report[148] into educational disadvantage in rich countries, UNICEF put forward the following conclusion.

It is clear that the social, economic and cultural status of the child’s home is the most powerful influence on the likelihood of educational success, much recent research has focused on that relationship and on the possibilities for weakening the processes by which disadvantage is reproduced from one generation to the next. And perhaps the most significant of the insights gained in recent decades has been the realisation that such disadvantage becomes established, and measurable, at a much earlier age than was previously suspected.

295. Research[149] considered by the Committee on health outcomes also points to the need for early interventions.

Life course research suggests that, to a differing extent across health outcomes, inequality develops as a result of various socially patterned exposures and behaviours starting in early life. Improving social inequalities in adult health requires a range of targeted intervention strategies for infants, children, adolescents and adults.

296. During the inquiry there was almost universal support for increased investment in early year’s services which work alongside parents to address the learning, developmental and health and well-being needs of children. The views of Barnardo’s, the Eastern, Health and Social Services Board and the North Eastern Education and Library Board are typical of those presented to the Committee.[150],[151],[152]

Barnardo’s believes that in order to effectively address social inequality it is vital that government supports families and agencies working with pre-school children by demonstrating an increased commitment to early years intervention. This is even more important given that social and emotional skills learned between birth and the age of five years affects subsequent performance in both the school and workplace.

Children with complex health needs and/or disabilities also need to receive family support services as vulnerable children or children in need. Research would indicate that the earlier the identification of a child’s need for additional support or specialist services the better the outcomes for the child concerned.

We have an upside-down education service. Children entering Year 1 go into classes of approximately 20 pupils; however, in year 13 or 14, sixth form classes often contain only eight or 10 pupils.

297. It would seem that stakeholders are attaching significant weight to the role of the cross-departmental Early Years Strategy being led by the Department of Education in reducing the educational, developmental and health and well-being inequalities associated with poverty. It is therefore crucial that the Strategy is properly resourced and is quickly followed by an implementation plan containing SMART targets.

298. The Committee recommends that the Early Years Strategy should include specific targets on:

Joined up Planning for Children and Young People

299. Throughout the inquiry the Committee has heard concerns that services for children and young people are not sufficiently joined-up and that this is reducing the effectiveness of services aimed at reducing child poverty and minimising the impact of poverty on children and young people. There was also a concern that children’s services planning is not sufficiently linked with the Children and Young People’s Strategy and that the services covered by the Children and Young People’s planning process in Northern Ireland are too limited.

300. The Southern Health and Social Services Board, in correspondence[153] with the Committee, outlined the concern of the four Children and Young People’s Committees, which undertake planning arrangements in respect of children and young people, about the current system.

The requirement for inter-agency meetings is a statutory responsibility for the Health and Social Services Boards, contained in the Children’s Services Planning Order of 1998. This requires Boards to set up and run the Children’s Services Planning process, through Children and Young People’s Committees, with the involvement of statutory and voluntary agencies, and to draw up strategic multi-agency plans for vulnerable children and young people.

The four Children and Young People’s Committees have drawn up proposals to improve on the current arrangements, the core proposals of which are that there should be a regional process, that the statutory requirement to run the process should be a joint requirement on the Education and Skills Authority and the proposed regional Health and Social Care Board, and that the statutory duty should not just be on these lead agencies, but on all agencies – to take part in multi-agency planning and commissioning of services for all children and young people.

301. The Committee commissioned comparative research[154] on the legislation underpinning children’s services planning in Northern Ireland and compared this with approaches in other countries. The research identified that in Northern Ireland the statutory duty to prepare children’s plans extends only to health and social services boards, and only to children in need. There is a statutory duty to consult with partner agencies, but not to engage in joint planning.

The Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995 is the main statute governing the care of children in need in Northern Ireland. Under the Order, as amended by regulations, children’s services plans are prepared only in respect of children in need, and therefore in receipt of state assistance. Furthermore, the duty to prepare plans rests solely with the health and social services boards. While there is a duty to consult other agencies, there is no requirement for agencies to work together.

Under the Regulations, health and social services boards are required to prepare and publish plans in respect of services identified in the main 1995 Order. These are: provision for children in need and their families; accommodation of children; accommodation of children in police protection; accommodation and maintenance; and persons qualifying for advice and assistance. This can be contrasted with the statutory provisions applicable to other regions in GB, where the matters to be dealt with in the plan are more wide-ranging and refer to more general strategic concepts.

302. In England[155], the Children’s Act 2004 places a duty on children’s services authorities to make arrangements to promote co-operation between the authority, its partners and any other appropriate persons or bodies. The Act requires that arrangements for co-operation are to be made with a view to improving the well-being of children in each of five elements of the national strategy, Every Child Matters. Importantly, the Act also places a duty on authorities to co-operate to improve the outcomes for children in respect of their social and economic well-being. The Children and Young People’s Plan (England) Regulations 2005, place a duty on all children’s services authorities to prepare, publish, consult on and review children’s and young people’s plans, which must include a statement referring to the integration of services provided by the authority and its partners to improve the well-being of children and relevant young people.

303. The Committee understands that, in practice, the children’s planning process in Northern Ireland involves a much wider range of agencies than those listed in statutory guidance and, in recent years, the Children and Young People’s Committees have sought to align their work with the Children and Young People’s Strategy. Nevertheless, it would seem that the legislation underpinning children’s services planning needs to be reviewed to ensure that there is a focus on outcomes and to require organisations to fully co-operate in the planning and delivery of children’s services. Such co-operation should not be left to the good-will of organisations.

304. The Committee recommends that OFMDFM and relevant departments and agencies, including in particular, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and the Department of Education, review and update legislation underpinning children’s services planning with a view to:

Cross-Cutting Approaches

Poverty Proofing

305. The Committee received evidence from a number of organisations, including the Children’s Commissioner, advocating for the introduction of poverty proofing as a means of ensuring that all policies take account of their potential impacts on poverty levels. The Committee did not however receive detailed evidence of how such a process would work in practice.

306. In his evidence[156] to the Committee, the Chief Commissioner of the Equality Commission argued for the role of Equality Impact Assessments in contributing to poverty proofing.

Poverty and socio-economic disadvantage are antecedent barriers to equality of opportunity and they exacerbate inequality wherever it exists. Any approach by a public authority that does not recognise the implications of poverty in the discharge of section 75 duties will miss a key element in the process. For example, if a public authority considers the impact of a policy or practice on the grounds of age, it will look at the impact on children. However, that examination would be incomplete if the effects of a policy on children who live in poverty were not considered. Similarly, the consideration of the impact on people with disabilities would be incomplete if it were not recognised that the reality that households with a disabled parent — especially a lone parent — will be at greater risk of poverty than others.

307. The Committee is not convinced that introducing a proofing component without legislative standing into the policy process would have a significant impact. The Committee considers that a more effective approach should involve giving further consideration to how the process of Equality Impact Assessment[157] could better inform policies in relation to their impact on groups at high risk of poverty.

308. In addition, as outlined earlier in the report, the Committee considers that the Anti-Poverty Unit in the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister, with the support of the Department of Finance and Personnel when it comes to the issue of Budget setting, should have a role in challenging and reporting on whether key policies have taken adequate account of their impact on groups in poverty or at risk of poverty. This approach could be developed, through the Programme for Government process by the identification of a shortlist of policies that would be subject to such a procedure. In addition, the independent panel of experts, which is being proposed by the Committee, would have a critical role in assessing the impact on poverty of the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy and associated Delivery Agreements.

Awareness Raising

309. Organisations including the Children’s Law Centre and the Institute of Public Health have argued for campaigns and initiatives to raise awareness and understanding of poverty[158],[159].

The Government needs to spearhead a campaign to change public attitudes towards poverty and remove the stigma associated with living in poverty so that children and young people living in poverty are not further socially excluded through bullying etc.

Consideration should be given to producing a dedicated regular bulletin compiling information on the extent, intensity and impact of child poverty in Northern Ireland. This bulletin would keep the issue on the political and public agenda as well as fostering understanding and action across the full range of government departments and other sectors.

310. The Committee considers that organisations such as Save the Children and Barnardo’s have been very effective in bringing the reality of poverty in Northern Ireland to the public’s attention and that this work should continue to be supported.

311. The Committee has not heard convincing evidence of the value of a formal government campaign to raise awareness and understanding of poverty. However, there would seem to the opportunity, through the annual report that is to be produced on the implementation of the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy, to ensure that the objective of eliminating poverty is kept at the forefront of the public consciousness and public policy making. The Committee also recommends that OFMDFM should consider how to use the outcome of its work on Promoting Social Inclusion to improve understanding among policy makers and service providers of the groups which are most at risk of poverty and social exclusion and the steps that will have most impact in removing such groups from poverty and exclusion.

Groups at High Risk of Poverty

312. In its analysis of child poverty in Northern Ireland, the Committee identified a number of household groups at high risk of child poverty, including children in larger families, younger children, children in lone parent families, children in families living with a disability and traveller children. In the relevant sections of this report, the Committee has sought to integrate recommendations which will be particularly significant in helping to reduce the risk of poverty for such groups.

313. The Committee also recognises the value of Promoting Social Inclusion (PSI) initiative[160] which seeks to identify, in detail, the specific challenges facing excluded groups and considers that forthcoming reports can make an important contribution to the development of plans to tackle poverty and social exclusion among lone parents and people with a disability. However, there is a danger that such reports remain just that unless the recommendations arising from them are properly considered and prioritised. It is critically important that the key recommendations from the PSI reports are integrated into the planning and implementation processes for the Programme for Government and Lifetime Opportunities Strategy.

314. Towards the end of the inquiry the Committee was provided with a copy of the report from the British Irish Council on child poverty with a particular focus on lone parents. The Committee is also aware of North/South activity on social inclusion and supports efforts to develop and share good practice in seeking to reduce the risk of poverty and social exclusion among high risk groups.

Area-Based Approaches

315. During the inquiry the Committee heard evidence about specific neighbourhoods and areas which are facing multiple challenges in overcoming the cycle of poverty. In its evidence[161] to the Committee, the Department for Social Development outlined the role of the Neighbourhood Renewal in tackling inequalities in disadvantaged areas.

Tackling poverty in disadvantaged areas is delivered through Neighbourhood Renewal. It aims to make a real difference in the quality of the lives and life chances of people living in our poorest communities by tackling inequalities in the core issues such as health, education, employability and skills, crime and community safety. Neighbourhood Partnerships have been established in 36 Neighbourhood Renewal areas (15 in Belfast, 6 in Derry and 15 in other towns and cities). Work on developing local Neighbourhood Action Plans, to address priorities identified by communities is well advanced.

316. The Committee has not considered in detail the role of Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy in tackling child poverty, not least because of its relatively early stage of development. Clearly, any area-based strategy on deprivation will only reach a proportion of people experiencing poverty, but area-based approaches, such as neighbourhood renewal, can be an effective means of reaching large numbers of families living in poverty or at high risk of poverty. The Committee therefore welcomes the work of the Social Development Committee, which in its written submission[162], advised of its consultation with Neighbourhood Renewal Partnerships and gave an undertaking to take in to account the issue of child poverty in its considerations. The Committee is hopeful that over the next few years, the increasing involvement of local government can make an increasing contribution to the effectiveness of neighbourhood renewal in tackling poverty and social exclusion.

Rural Poverty

317. During the inquiry the Committee became increasingly aware of the reality of rural poverty. The Committee has already commented on the particular barriers faced by families on low income in seeking employment due to the very limited childcare provision that exists in many rural areas. The impact of inadequate transport provision in rural areas on families in poverty was however also highlighted as a priority. The difficulties associated with rural transport were highlighted by the Rural Community Network in their evidence[163] to the Committee.

Transport is an important issue in rural communities. A lady told me a great story the other day about the difficulty of getting her child transported to an after-schools club. She told me that she looked out of her window one day to see a yellow school bus pass her house, followed two hours later by a half-empty Ulsterbus. Following that, a white bus from the local health and social services trust drove by, and, finally, the community transport bus went by. Not one of those buses was able to pick up her daughter and take her to the after-schools club.

318. In its evidence[164] to the Committee, the Department of Agriculture advised that the department had been successfull in securing funding of £9•2 million over three years to tackle poverty and social exclusion in rural areas. Officials advised that the Rural Development Council and the Rural Community Network have been commissioned to conduct consultations with stakeholders to determine how best to utilise this funding and that reports from both organisations are being considered by the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development. During oral evidence, officials outlined the very wide range of factors that need to be addressed if poverty in rural areas is to be reduced.

The consultation reports have said that a range of factors contribute to rural poverty, including limited access to, or an inability to access, resources and services that are viewed by society as essential. Such factors also include lack of employment opportunities and lower-level incomes, which are particularly relevant to the farming constituency. In the reports, stakeholders talk about access poverty, which means lack of access to services especially when compared to urban areas. Issues affecting children include lack of access to education, affordable and accessible childcare provision, and adequate transport, which result in some of them being unable to get to school cheaply and easily. Stakeholders also referred to financial poverty which means lack of awareness of entitlements, including entitlement to child benefit; lack of investment in rural areas, which results in fewer jobs; lack of alternative employment opportunities, and, for farmers and producers, low income.

319. The Committee welcomes the initiative by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development in establishing a funding package to tackle rural poverty. There are a very wide range of potential priorities for this funding package. One of the key challenges, in addressing issues such as rural childcare and rural transport, will be ensuring the sustainability of any new initiatives. The Committee is of the view that consideration should be given to the use of incentive packages which will encourage existing service providers to fill gaps in provision, including through better co-operation and sharing of services.

320. The Committee wishes to encourage the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, in consultation with the Committee for Agriculture and Rural Development, to consider carefully how to utilise the funding package for rural poverty and social exclusion to maximise its impact on rural child poverty over the long-term.

Conclusions

321. Our starting point in seeking to develop new approaches to child poverty must be a recognition of the realities of child poverty in Northern Ireland. There are more than 100 000 children living in relative income poverty in Northern Ireland and unless we seek to substantially reduce levels of child poverty in Northern Ireland we will limit the aspirations and expectations of those children and, in addition, we will limit the growth and development of our economy.

322. Achieving the Executive’s targets to reduce child poverty by 50% by 2010 and to work towards eliminating severe child poverty by 2012 is going to be extremely challenging. Rising costs and difficult economic conditions represent a serious headwind to progress. If there is to be any chance of meeting these targets, and the Committee must honestly say that the odds are against the Executive meeting its short-term targets, a radical new cross-departmental approach is required. More of the same will not do and complacent attitudes indicating that we can just keep doing what we are doing, must be challenged and challenged now.

323. The Committee commended OFMDFM and the Executive for adopting ambitious targets to eliminate child poverty. In this report, the Committee has sought to identify the changes that need to be made if Northern Ireland is to become among the best regions in Europe in terms of reducing child poverty. Above all, what is required is leadership and political will. The Committee believes that in unanimously agreeing the recommendations in this report it has demonstrated that the political will to tackle child poverty does indeed exist. The Committee for the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister is also calling on the Assembly’s other statutory committees to demonstrate a commitment to tackling child poverty by agreeing to schedule a review of their department’s contribution to reducing child poverty during the next Assembly session.

324. There are no silver bullets in seeking to eliminate child poverty. No one individual policy will in itself change, what are after-all long-term patterns established over many years. However, the Executive can show real leadership and that it is committed to the elimination of child poverty by establishing an independent expert panel to review and report on the impact of the Programme for Government, Budget and Investment Strategy in seeking to eliminate child poverty and by introducing a robust system of rewards and sanctions relating to the delivery by departments of child poverty commitments.

325. The Committee is of the view that a collective approach to the elimination of child poverty in Northern Ireland, which involves all political parties, and key public, private, voluntary and community stakeholders, can be constructed. The starting point for a consensus on child poverty would be a comprehensive response to this report and its recommendations in terms of properly resourced, robust anti-poverty implementation plan.

[1] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 569

[2] http://www.socialinclusion.ie/documents/NAPinclusionReportPDF.pdf

[3] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 380

[4] Measuring Child Poverty http://www.dwp.gov.uk/ofa/related/final_conclusions.pdf

[5] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 569

[6] Volume 2, Appendix 7, pages 570-574

[7] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 331

[8] http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/dd/report16/ddreport16.pdf

[9] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 574

[10]http://www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk/childandfamilypoverty2006.pdf

[11] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 464

[12] http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/centre/2007mandate/reports/Report07_07_08r.htm

[13] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 483

[14] Volume 2, Appendix 9, Page 464

[15] Volume 2, Appendix 9, Page 730

[16] Volume 2, Appendix 7, Page 571

[17] Volume 1, Appendix 2, Page 282

[18] Volume 1, Appendix 2, Page 123

[19] Volume 1, Appendix 2, Page 283

[20] Volume 2, Appendix 9, Page 739

[21] Volume 2, Appendix 7, Page 534

[22] Volume 2, Appendix 7, Page 537

[23] Volume 2, Appendix 7, Page 537

[24] Volume 2, Appendix 7, Page 540

[25] Volume 2, Appendix 7, Page 540

[26] Volume 2, Appendix 7, Page 552

[27] Volume 2, Appendix 9, Page 730

[28] Volume 2, Appendix 7, Page 539

[29] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 322

[30] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 513

[31] Volume 2, Appendix 9, Page 740

[32] Volume 2, Appendix 7, Page 575

[33] Volume 1, Appendix 2, Page 176

[34] Opportunity for All http://www.dwp.gov.uk/ofa/

[35] Persistent Child Poverty in Northern Ireland : Key findings
http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/en/docs/Persistent_Child_Poverty_NIReport.pdf
http://www.ark.ac.uk/events/childpoverty2008.pdf

[36] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 124

[37] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 212

[38] What will it take to end child poverty? http://www.jrf.org.uk/child-poverty/

[39] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 423

[40] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 166

[41] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 233

[42] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 442

[43] http://www.rmhldni.gov.uk/

[44] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 356

[45] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 747

[46] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 580

[47] http://www.ark.ac.uk/events/childpoverty2008.pdf
http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/en/docs/Persistent_Child_Poverty_NIReport.pdf

[48] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 486

[49] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 329

[50] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 466

[51] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 303

[52] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 233

[53] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 666

[54] Ending child poverty: everybody’s business http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/3/F/bud08_childpoverty_1310.pdf

[55] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 238

[56] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 161

[57] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 238

[58] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 164

[59] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 466

[60] http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/3/F/bud08_childpoverty_1310.pdf

[61] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 300

[62] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 193

[63] http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/3/F/bud08_childpoverty_1310.pdf

[64] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 547

[65] http://www.pfgbudgetni.gov.uk/index/about-priorities-budget.htm

[66] http://www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk/antipovertynov06.pdf

[67] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 397

[68] http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/centre/2007mandate/reports/Report07_07_08r.htm

[69] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 282

[70] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 239

[71] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 739

[72] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 429

[73] http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/centre/2007mandate/reports/Report07_07_08r.htm

[74] http://archive.niassembly.gov.uk/centre/2007mandate/reports/Report_9.07.08R.htm

[75] http://www.pfgbudgetni.gov.uk/index/about-isni.htm

[76] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 207

[77] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 171

[78] http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/3/F/bud08_childpoverty_1310.pdf

[79] http://www.allchildrenni.gov.uk/strategy_action_plan_-_march_2007.pdf

[80] Volume 2, Appendix 4, pages 491 and 493

[81] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 470

[82] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 283

[83] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 241

[84] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 233

[85] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 323

[86] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 403

[87] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 425

[88] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 143

[89] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 554

[90] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 552

[91] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 582

[92] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 269

[93] Volume 1, Appendix 2, pages 151 and 153

[94] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 151

[95] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 269

[96] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 555

[97] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 430

[98] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 670

[99] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 586

[100] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 503

[101] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 152

[102] http://www.northernireland.gov.uk/news/news-dsd/news-dsd-140508-ritchie-establishes-task.htm

[103] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 626

[104] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 170

[105] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 268

[106] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 386

[107] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 327

[108] Volume 2, Appendix 9, pages 702 and 706

[109] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 336

[110] http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/A/0/pbr04_profininc_complete_394.pdf

[111] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 740

[112] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 701

[113] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 156

[114] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 335

[115] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 555

[116] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 580

[117] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 559

[118] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 178

[119] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 666

[120] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 257

[121] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 692

[122] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 182 and 183

[123] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 303

[124] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 668

[125] Volume 2, Appendix 9, pages 689-695

[126] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 259

[127] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 740

[128] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 588

[129] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 792

[130] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 156

[131] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 591

[132] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 186

[133] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 253

[134] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 274 and 275

[135] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 332

[136] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 790

[137] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 599

[138] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 139

[139] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 480

[140] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 244

[141] http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/3/F/bud08_childpoverty_1310.pdf

[142] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 284

[143] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 562

[144] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 362

[145] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 251

[146] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 468

[147] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 371

[148] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 562

[149] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 564

[150] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 300

[151] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 408

[152] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 231

[153] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 783

[154] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 633

[155] Volume 2, Appendix 7, page 639

[156] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 237

[157] Volume 2, Appendix 9, page 743

[158] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 325

[159] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 416

[160] http://www.ofmdfmni.gov.uk/capu-promoting-social-inclusion

[161] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 382

[162] Volume 2, Appendix 4, page 332

[163] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 200

[164] Volume 1, Appendix 2, page 244

Appendix 1

Minutes of Proceedings

Wednesday 20 June 2007
Senate Chamber, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Debbie Pritchard (Deputy Clerk)
Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Joe Sloan (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Officer)

The meeting opened at 2.02 pm in Public Session

1. Apologies

None.

Mr Wells left the meeting at 3.23 pm

10. Any other business

The Chairperson briefed the Committee on his meeting with representatives of Save the Children and suggested that the Committee may wish to consider the suggestion that the Committee inquire into child poverty during discussion of its priorities at next week’s meeting.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 3.52 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 4 July 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Joe Sloan (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Officer)
Eileen Regan (Senior Researcher)

The meeting opened at 2.03 pm in Public Session.

1. Apologies

Naomi Long

Mr Elliott left the meeting at 3.32 pm

7. Forward Work Plan

The Committee agreed to conduct an inquiry into child poverty and the Clerk was asked to develop draft terms of reference for consideration by the Committee after recess.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.20 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 19 September 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Tom Elliott
Francie Molloy
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt

In Attendance: Christine Darrah (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Officer)
Eileen Regan (Senior Assembly Researcher)

The meeting opened at 2.04 pm in public session.

1. Apologies

Dolores Kelly, Stephen Moutray, Barry McElduff, Martina Anderson.

Mr Elliott left the meeting at 2.30 pm

10. Correspondence

The Chairperson also asked Members to consider holding some committee meetings outside Parliament Buildings as part of the proposed inquiry into child poverty.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.10 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 3 October 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Christine Darrah (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Carla Campbell (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Officer)
Fiona O’Connell (Researcher)

The meeting opened at 2.05 pm in public session.

1. Apologies

Francie Molloy, Martina Anderson.

5. Committee Inquiry into Child Poverty

The Committee considered and agreed the terms of reference for its inquiry into Child Poverty; Members also discussed the timescale for completion of the work and agreed that an interim report should be produced to inform final Programme for Government and budgetary consultations.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.04 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 10 October 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Christine Darrah (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
David Douglas (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Officer

The meeting opened at 2.02 pm in public session.

1. Apologies

None

5. Matters arising

Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee was advised that advertisements would be placed in the newspapers in the near future inviting written submissions in relation to the Child Poverty Inquiry and that a detailed work schedule for the Inquiry would be tabled at next week’s meeting. Members agreed to request further information on the current status of the Lifetimes Opportunity Strategy.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.35 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 17 October 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Barry McElduff
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt

In Attendance: Christine Darrah (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Officer)
Lynn Gray (Clerical Officer)

The meeting opened at 2.02 pm in public session.

1. Apologies

Dolores Kelly, Stephen Moutray, Jim Wells.

5. Child Poverty Inquiry Forward Work Programme

The Committee discussed and agreed the work schedule for the Child Poverty Inquiry which aimed to deliver an interim report by 14 December 2007 and to complete the inquiry by early March 2008. The Committee agreed a press release announcing the launch of the inquiry.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.40 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 24 October 2007
University of Ulster, Magee Campus

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Jim Shannon
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Christine Darrah (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Joe Sloan (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Officer)

The meeting opened at 2.00 pm in public session.

1. Apologies

Naomi Long, Francie Molloy, Stephen Moutray, Jimmy Spratt.

4. Matters arising

Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee agreed the list of organisations to which the Clerk would write inviting a written submission in relation to the inquiry into child poverty with the addition of St Vincent de Paul and the Salvation Army.

5. Evidence Session in relation to the Child Poverty Inquiry with Save the Children

Officials from Save the Children joined the meeting at 2.22 pm

Representatives from Save the Children Mrs Tennant and Mrs Monteith gave oral evidence to the Committee in relation to child poverty inquiry. Key issues covered included the extent of the problem, the impact, the current strategy and actions, relevant experience elsewhere and proposals for further actions. This was followed by an informative question and answer session.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in due course.

Mr McElduff left the meeting at 2.50 pm

Officials from Save the Children left the meeting at 3.16 pm

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 3.55 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 14 November 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Dolores Kelly
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Christine Darrah (Assembly Clerk)
Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Joe Sloan (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Officer)

The meeting opened at 2.03 pm in public session.

1. Apologies

Martina Anderson, Tom Elliott , Naomi Long , Barry McElduff, Jimmy Spratt.

Mrs Kelly left the meeting at 3.03 pm

8. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee considered a research paper on Child Poverty and requested additional information in relation to the impact of including housing costs when calculating child poverty in Northern Ireland.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.07 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 28 November 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Joe Sloan (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)

The meeting opened at 2.05 pm in public session.

1. Apologies

Jim Wells.

5. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee considered proposals for taking forward its Inquiry and the development of its interim report before the Programme for Government / Budget / ISNI consultation period ends. The Committee agreed to schedule an additional meeting in week commencing 17 December to make final consideration and agree publication of its interim report.

The Committee agreed that the written responses received to date should be included in the draft interim report.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.17 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 05 December 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon

In Attendance: Christine Darrah (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.05 pm in public session.

1. Apologies

Tom Elliott, Danny Kennedy, Jimmy Spratt, Jim Wells.

7. Child Poverty Inquiry

A Senior Assembly Researcher briefed the Committee on measuring levels of poverty both before and after housing costs and answered Members’ questions.

The Deputy Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 3.50 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 12 December 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.03 pm in public session.

1. Apologies

Jimmy Spratt, Jim Wells.

8. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee considered and agreed the framework for the Interim report on Child Poverty. Members agreed to publish the report in early January.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 3.58 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 19 December 2007
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.04 pm in closed session.

1. Apologies

Naomi Long, Barry McElduff, Francie Molloy, Jimmy Spratt

2. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee considered and agreed the draft interim report on Child Poverty.

Paragraphs 1-7, read and agreed

Paragraphs 8-51, read and agreed

Paragraphs 52-55, read and agreed

The Committee agreed that the following papers should be appended to the Committee’s report:

Minutes of Proceedings

Request for written submissions

List of written submissions

Written submissions

Research paper comparing child poverty levels in Northern Ireland with other regions

Extract from the Public Service Agreement

The Committee agreed to launch the report in early January.

The Committee ordered the report to be printed.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 3.42 pm

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 9 January 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.07 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Naomi Long, Barry McElduff, Francie Molloy, Jim Wells

Jim Shannon joined the meeting at 2.15 p.m.

5. Child Poverty Inquiry

Children in Northern Ireland joined the meeting at 2.30 p.m.

Oral evidence from Children in Northern Ireland

Members took oral evidence from Elaine Conway, Marie Cavanagh and Pascal McKeown, representing Children in Northern Ireland. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Jimmy Spratt joined the meeting at 3.04 p.m.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Children in Northern Ireland left the meeting at 3.15 p.m.

Derry Children’s Commission joined the meeting at 3.19 p.m.

Oral evidence from Derry Children’s Commission

Members took oral evidence from Clionagh Boyle and Dominic Bonner from Derry Children’s Commission. They were accompanied by Gavin Melly, a young person who was involved in consultations during the development of the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked witnesses for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Derry Children’s Commission left the meeting at 4.00 p.m.

Future oral evidence sessions

Members agreed that they would hold a full day meeting on 23 January to gather evidence for the Child Poverty inquiry. Some Members indicated they may not be able to attend all day, due to other commitments in the Assembly.

Members also agreed to accept the offer from Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council to hold an evidence session in Dungannon in February.

Members agreed the timetable for future oral evidence sessions.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.45 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 16 January 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)
Tim Moore (Senior Assembly Researcher)

The meeting opened at 2.07 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Martina Anderson, Naomi Long, Barry McElduff, Jim Wells.

6. Child Poverty Inquiry

Lifetime Opportunities

The Committee was briefed by the Clerk on the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy, because a number of submissions to the Child Poverty Inquiry make reference to the Strategy. It was noted that the Strategy was developed by Direct Rule Ministers and has not been adopted by the Executive. Members noted the briefing and agreed to write to OFMDFM seeking clarification on whether any evaluation has been carried out of strategy implementation.

Research Paper

Mr Tim Moore, Senior Assembly Researcher, briefed the Committee on the approaches and measures which have been taken to reduce childhood poverty in other countries. Following discussion, Mr Moore agreed to provide clarification on a number of issues. The Committee also agreed to commission further research to inform the Child Poverty Inquiry.

10. Date of next meeting

To facilitate oral evidence sessions in relation to the Child Poverty Inquiry, it was noted that the next Committee meeting will be on Wednesday 23 January 2008, at 10.00 a.m. in the Senate and from 2.00 p.m. in Room 144, Parliament Buildings.

Mr Spratt and Mr Moutray advised that they were keen to support the evidence sessions but were unlikely to be able to attend the morning session due to a concurrent Assembly Committee meeting.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.08 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 23 January 2008
Senate Chamber Room 144,
Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Dolores Kelly
Martina Anderson
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 10.10 a.m. in public session in the Senate

2. Apologies

Tom Elliott

3. Child Poverty Inquiry

Representatives from Advice NI and Citizens Advice joined the meeting at 10.16 a.m.

Jim Shannon joined the meeting at 10.18 a.m.

Oral evidence session with Advice NI and Citizens Advice

Members took oral evidence from Kevin Higgins representing Advice NI, and Lucy Cochrane and Derek Alcorn representing Citizens Advice. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

The Chairperson noted the attendance of Junior Minister Paisley in the public gallery and thanked him for his interest in the Inquiry.

Stephen Moutray joined the meeting at 10.30 a.m.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from Advice NI and Citizens Advice left the meeting at 10.54 a.m.

Representatives from NCH (NI) and Children’s Law Centre joined the meeting at 10.55 a.m.

Oral evidence session with NCH (NI) and Children’s Law Centre

Members took oral evidence from Ross McCrea representing NCH (NI) and Natalie Whelehan representing Children’s Law Centre. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Jimmy Spratt joined the meeting at 11.43 a.m.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from NCH and Children’s Law Centre left the meeting at 11.46 a.m.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 11.46 a.m.

The Chairperson resumed the meeting at 11.59 a.m.

A representative from Playboard joined the meeting at 12 noon

Oral evidence session with Playboard

Members took oral evidence from Margaret Deevy representing Playboard. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witness for attending..

Dolores Kelly left the meeting at 12.21 p.m.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

The representative from Playboard left the meeting at 12.22 p.m.

Representatives of the Voluntary Sector Housing Policy Forum joined the meeting at 12.23 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Voluntary Sector Housing Policy Forum

Members took oral evidence from Tony McQuillan (Shelter) and David Carroll (Simon Community), representing the Voluntary Sector Housing Policy Forum. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Representatives of the Voluntary Sector Housing Policy Forum left the meeting at 1.04 p.m.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 1.05 p.m.

The Chairperson resumed the meeting in Room 144 at 2.07 p.m. with the following Members present: Danny Kennedy, Dolores Kelly, Barry McElduff, Francie Molloy, Stephen Moutray, Jim Shannon and Jim Wells.

6. Child Poverty Inquiry

Representatives from the Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network and New Policy Institute joined the meeting at 2.19 p.m.

Oral evidence session with NI Anti Poverty Network and New Policy Institute

Members took oral evidence from Frances Dowd, representing NI Anti-Poverty Network and Peter Kenway, representing New Policy Institute. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Naomi Long joined the meeting at 2.24 p.m.

Francie Molloy left the meeting at 2.50 p.m.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

NI Anti-Poverty Network and New Policy Institute left the meeting at 3.08 p.m.

A representative from Disability Action joined the meeting at 3.10 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Disability Action

Members took oral evidence from Kevin Doherty, representing Disability Action. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witness for attending.

Dolores Kelly joined the meeting at 3.24 p.m.

Stephen Moutray left the meeting at 3.24 p.m.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

The representatives from Disability Action left the meeting at 3.30 p.m.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 3.58 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 30 January 2008
Senate Chamber, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.04 p.m. in public session in the Senate

1. Apologies

Barry McElduff, Dolores Kelly.

9. Any Other Business

Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee agreed to hold a further four evidence sessions and noted that the meeting on 13 February would be held in the offices of the Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council.

With Easter being very early this year, Members noted that deliberations on the Child Poverty Inquiry would commence in April 2008.

The Committee noted that a meeting had been held with Participation Network to progress options for engaging with children and young people.

The Committee agreed to write to relevant Committees to obtain their agreement to invite officials, from those departments that have responded substantively to the Committee’s inquiry, to provide oral evidence to the Committee.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.12 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 6 February 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.04 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Danny Kennedy, Francie Molloy.

5. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee considered the itinerary for next week’s meeting in Dungannon and agreed to issue a press release in advance of the meeting.

The Deputy Chairperson asked Members to declare any relevant interests in advance of hearing oral evidence, as part of the Child Poverty Inquiry; none were declared.

Oral evidence session with the Institute of Public Health in Ireland

Representatives from the Institute of Public Health joined the meeting at 2.26 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Dr Jane Wilde and Dr Helen McAvoy, representing Institute of Public Health. A question and answer session followed. The Deputy Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from the Institute of Public Health left the meeting at 2.52 p.m.

Representatives from Eastern Health and Social Services Board and Southern Health and Social Services Board joined the meeting at 2.54 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Eastern Health and Social Services Board (EHSSB) and Southern Health and Social Services Board (SHSSB)

Members took oral evidence from John Duffy, a representative from EHSSB and Sean McKeever and Fionnuala McAndrew, representatives from SHSSB. A question and answer session followed. The Deputy Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from Eastern Health and Social Services Board and Southern Health and Social Services Board left the meeting at 3.34 p.m.

Representatives from Rural Community Network joined the meeting at 3.35 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Rural Community Network

Members took oral evidence from Karin Eyben and Raymond Craig, representatives from the Rural Community Network. A question and answer session followed. The Deputy Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from Rural Community Network left the meeting at 4.02 p.m.

Representatives from Barnardo’s joined the meeting at 4.04 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Barnardo’s

Members took oral evidence from Fiona McMillan and Mary Anne Webb, the representatives from Barnardo’s. A question and answer session followed. The Deputy Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Barry McElduff left the meeting at 4.12 p.m.

Representatives from Barnardo’s left the meeting at 4.23 p.m.

The Deputy Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 5.04 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 13 February 2008
Dungannon and South Tyrone
Borough Council Chambers

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.03 p.m. in public session

The Chairperson expressed gratitude to the Mayor, Councillor Barry Monteith and Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council for hosting the meeting and thanked them for their hospitality.

1. Apologies

Martina Anderson, Stephen Moutray, Jim Wells.

5. Child Poverty Inquiry

Members were advised that a written submission has been received from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety and that further information on the definition of poverty from the Northern Ireland Antipoverty Network has been included in the inquiry packs. Members were informed that a further research briefing on the measurement of child poverty is scheduled for next week’s meeting.

The Chairperson asked Members to declare any relevant interests in advance of hearing oral evidence, as part of the Child Poverty Inquiry. Members declared interests as follows:-

Mr Kennedy declared an interest as a Councillor in Newry and Mourne District Council;

Mrs Long declared an interest as a Councillor in Belfast City Council;

Mr Elliot declared an interest as a Councillor in Fermanagh District Council;

Mrs Kelly declared an interest as a Councillor in Craigavon Borough Council;

Mr McElduff declared an interest as a Councillor in Omagh District Council;

Mr Molloy declared an interest as a Councillor in Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council;

Mr Shannon declared an interest as a Councillor in Ards Borough Council.

Oral evidence session with Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council

Representatives from Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council joined the meeting at 2.23 p.m.

Mr Spratt joined the meeting at 2.25 p.m.

Mr Spratt declared an interest as a Councillor in Castlereagh Borough Council.

Members took oral evidence from Mayor Councillor Barry Monteith and Claire Linney representing Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from the Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council left the meeting at 3.04 p.m.

Representatives from Craigavon Borough Council joined the meeting at 3.05 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Craigavon Borough Council

Members took oral evidence from Davina McCartney, a representative from Craigavon Borough Council. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witness for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

The representative from Craigavon Borough Council left the meeting at 3.27 p.m.

Representatives from Western Health Action Zone and Western Investing for Health Partnership joined the meeting at 3.28 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Western Health Action Zone and Western Investing for Health Partnership

Members took oral evidence from Siobhan Sweeney, a representative from the Western Health Action Zone and Brendan Bonner, a representative from Western Investing for Health Partnership. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from Western Health Action Zone and Western Investing for Health Partnership left the meeting at 4.02 p.m.

Representatives from Western Area Childcare Partnership and Southern Area Childcare Partnership joined the meeting at 4.03 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Western Area Childcare Partnership and Southern Area Childcare Partnership

Members took oral evidence from Mia Murray and Gerry McDonald, representatives from Southern Area Childcare Partnership and Maura Mason, a representative from Western Area Childcare Partnership. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from Western Area Childcare Partnership and Southern Area Childcare Partnership left the meeting at 4.39 p.m.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.55 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 27 February 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Francie Molloy
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.06 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Tom Elliott, Dolores Kelly, Barry McElduff, Stephen Moutray.

5. Child Poverty Inquiry

Research Paper

Ms Jane Campbell, Assembly Researcher, briefed the Committee on the measurement of severe and persistent child poverty and examined some of the current approaches to the measurement of child poverty used by government and others working in the area in the United Kingdom and indicated the complexities of measuring child poverty.

The Chairperson asked Members to declare any relevant interests in advance of hearing oral evidence, as part of the Child Poverty Inquiry. Members declared interests as follows:-

Mr Kennedy declared an interest as a Governor of Bessbrook Primary School and Newry High School;

Mrs Long declared an interest as a Governor of Sydenham Infants School and a member of the Interim Board of Governors for the amalgamation of Strand Primary School and Sydenham Infants School;

Mr Shannon declared an interest as a Governor of Glastry College;

Mr Spratt declared an interest as a member of South Eastern Education and Library Board and Governor of Moneyreagh Primary School and Lisnasharragh High School;

Mr Molloy declared an interest as a Governor of Edendork Primary School.

Oral evidence session with North Eastern Education and Library Board and Council for Catholic Maintained Schools

Representatives from North Eastern Education and Library Board and Council for Catholic Maintained Schools joined the meeting at 2.55 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Mr Gordon Topping and Mr Gilly Irwin representing the North Eastern Education and Library Board and Mr Jim Clarke representing the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the witnesses for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from North Eastern Education and Library Board and Council for Catholic Maintained Schools left the meeting at 3.40 p.m.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.55p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 5 March 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)
Ivan Gregg (Bill Clerk)

The meeting opened at 2.01 p.m. in closed session

1. Apologies

Martina Anderson

Jim Wells left the meeting at 3.30 p.m.

Jimmy Spratt left the meeting at 4.13 p.m.

Jim Shannon left the meeting at 4.33 p.m.

9. Child Poverty Inquiry

Members noted the research paper from the Assembly Research and Library Services on tackling severe childhood poverty. Members commented on the high quality of the research papers that had been prepared for the Committee.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 5.00 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 12 March 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Francie Molloy
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.13 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Martina Anderson, Tom Elliott, Dolores Kelly, Barry McElduff, Stephen Moutray.

Mr Wells left the meeting at 2.28 p.m.

5. Child Poverty Inquiry

Research Paper

The Chairperson drew the Committee’s attention to the research paper prepared as part of the Child Poverty Inquiry, outlining current and previous childcare strategies and policies and funding within the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland.

Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People

Representatives from Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People joined the meeting at 2.34 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Mrs Patricia Lewsley, Commissioner for Children and Young People who was accompanied by Ms Seana Hume. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the Commissioner and Ms Hume for attending and congratulated the Commissioner on the publication of the NICCY Child Poverty Policy.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People left the meeting at 2.55 p.m.

Equality Commission for Northern Ireland

Representatives from Equality Commission for Northern Ireland joined the meeting at 2.56 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Mr Bob Collins, Chief Commissioner of Equality Commission for Northern Ireland, who was accompanied by Chief Executive, Mrs Evelyn Collins. A question and answer session followed. The Chairperson thanked the Chief Commissioner and Chief Executive for attending.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from Equality Commission for Northern Ireland left the meeting at 3.38 p.m.

The Committee agreed to issue a press release advising of the progression of the Child Poverty Inquiry into its final stage.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.32 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 2 April 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.08 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Martina Anderson, Jimmy Spratt.

5. Child Poverty Inquiry

Research Paper

The Chairperson drew Members attention to the Research Paper prepared as part of the Committee’s inquiry into Child Poverty. The Research Paper outlined the context in which decisions were made by the Scottish Executive to prioritise the well-being of children and young people. The Committee agreed to commission further research on the legislative base for ensuring effective inter-agency working to address the needs of children and young people.

Department of Agriculture and Rural Development

The Chairperson asked Members to declare any relevant interests in advance of hearing oral evidence from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development. No interests were declared.

Officials from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development joined the meeting at 2.25 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Pauline Keegan and Paul Donnelly from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD). A question and answer session followed, at the end of which the officials undertook to provide written responses to a number of questions from Members. The Chairperson thanked the officials from DARD for attending the meeting.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Officials from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development left the meeting at 2.58 p.m.

Department of Education

The Chairperson asked Members to declare any relevant interests in advance of hearing oral evidence from the Department of Education. Members declared interests as follows:-

Mr Kennedy declared an interest as a Governor of Bessbrook Primary School and Newry High School;

Mrs Long declared an interest as a Governor of Sydenham Infants School and a member of the Interim Board of Governors for the amalgamation of Strand Primary School and Sydenham Infants School;

Mr Shannon declared an interest as a Governor of Glastry College;

Mr Molloy declared an interest as a Governor of Edendork Primary School.

Officials from the Department Education joined the meeting at 3.00 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Katrina Godfrey, Louise Warde-Hunter, Mary Potter and Alan McMullan from the Department of Education (DE). A question and answer session followed, at the end of which the officials undertook to provide written responses to a number of questions from Members. The Chairperson thanked the officials from DE for attending the meeting..

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Officials from the Department of Education left the meeting at 3.37 p.m.

Department for Employment and Learning

The Chairperson asked Members to declare any relevant interests in advance of hearing oral evidence from the Department for Employment and Learning. Members declared interests as follows:-

Mrs Long declared an interest as a member of the board of the East Belfast Community Education Centre.

Officials from the Department for Employment and Learning joined the meeting at 3.38 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from June Ingram, Jan Harvey and Dave Rogers from the Department for Employment and Learning (DEL). A question and answer session followed, at the end of which the officials undertook to provide written responses to a number of questions from Members. The Chairperson thanked the officials from DEL for attending the meeting.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Officials from the Department for Employment and Learning left the meeting at 4.07 p.m.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 5.10 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 9 April 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.04 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Martina Anderson, Tom Elliott.

6. Child Poverty Inquiry

Written Submission from Consumer Council

The Chairperson drew the Committee’s attention to a written submission from the Consumer Council on the role of financial inclusion and financial capability in tackling poverty.

Response from the Southern Health and Social Services Board (SHSSB)

The Committee noted the response from the SHSSB regarding statutory requirements of interagency meetings and proposals for a statutory duty to be on all Agencies who take part in multi-agency planning for children and young people. Members were advised that a copy of the Vermont Model on utilising a multi-agency outcomes planning model had also been provided and would issue to Members.

Oral evidence session with Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment

The Chairperson asked Members to declare any relevant interests in advance of hearing oral evidence from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, as part of the Child Poverty Inquiry. No interests were declared.

Representatives from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment joined the meeting at 2.38 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Noel Cornick, Fred Frazer, Graham Davis and John Hinds, from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (DETI). A question and answer session followed, at the end of which the officials undertook to provide written responses to a number of questions from Members. The Chairperson thanked the officials from DETI for attending the meeting.

Mr Wells left the meeting at 2.57 p.m

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment left the meeting at 3.05 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Department for Social Development

The Chairperson asked Members to declare any relevant interests in advance of hearing oral evidence from the Department for Social Development, as part of the Child Poverty Inquiry. Members declared interests as follows:-

Mr Molloy declared an interest as the Chairperson of Coalisland Neighbourhood Renewal Partnership.

Representatives from the Department for Social Development joined the meeting at 3.07 p.m.

Mr Spratt joined the meeting at 3.11 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Dave Wall, Brian Doherty, Stephen Martin and Chris Morris, from the Department for Social Development (DSD). A question and answer session followed, at the end of which the officials undertook to provide written responses to a number of questions from Members. The Chairperson thanked the officials from DSD for attending the meeting.

Mr Moutray left the meeting at 3.34 p.m.

Mr McElduff left the meeting at 3.43 p.m.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from the Department for Social Development left the meeting at 3.44 p.m.

Oral evidence session with Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety

The Chairperson asked Members to declare any relevant interests in advance of hearing oral evidence from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety as part of the Child Poverty Inquiry. No interests were declared.

Representatives from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety joined the meeting at 3.46 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Andrew Elliot, Fergal Bradley, Patricia Nicholl and Dr Bernie Stuart from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety (DHSSPS). A question and answer session followed, at the end of which the officials undertook to provide written responses to a number of questions from Members. The Chairperson thanked the officials from DHSSPS for attending the meeting.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Representatives from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety left the meeting at 4.16 p.m.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 5.21 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 16 April 2008
Senate Chamber, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.08 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Martina Anderson, Dolores Kelly, Tom Elliott.

5. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee agreed the arrangements for the informal meeting, on 30 April 2008, to review evidence received during the Child Poverty inquiry. It was noted that there would be no Committee meeting on this date.

Responses from the Minister for Regional Development and the Minister for Finance and Personnel

The Chairperson drew Members attention to the responses received from the Minister for Regional Development and the Minister for Finance and Personnel to the Committee’s letters requesting further information on any assessments carried out on the impact on child poverty of proposals relating to domestic charges such as water charges and domestic rates. Members agreed that the responses should be included in the Committee’s final report on Child Poverty.

6. Child Poverty Inquiry

Oral evidence from the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister

Officials from the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister joined the meeting at 2.20 p.m.

Members took oral evidence from Dr Gerry Mulligan, Michael Pollock and Dr Stephen Donnelly from the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM). A question and answer session followed, at the end of which the officials undertook to provide further information to the Committee. The Chairperson thanked the officials from OFMDFM for attending the meeting.

Hansard recorded the evidence session for publication in the Committee’s report.

Officials from the Office of the first Minister and Deputy First Minister left the meeting at 3.18 p.m.

Mrs Long joined the meeting at 3.20 p.m.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.05 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 23 April 2008
Senate Chamber, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Dolores Kelly
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)
Martin Wilson (Principal Clerk of Bills)
Zoë Robinson (Assembly Researcher)

The meeting opened at 2.08 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Tom Elliott, Barry McElduff.

2. Chairperson’s Business

Review of Child Poverty

Members were advised of the plans for the informal meeting on 30 April 2008 to review the evidence received during the Child Poverty Inquiry. Members noted that the following expert witnesses have agreed to present to the Committee during the review meeting: Jim Walsh (Combat Poverty); Peter Kenway (New Policy Institute); Marina Monteith (Save the Children); and Goretti Horgan (University of Ulster).

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.50 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 07 May 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)
Zoë Robinson (Researcher)

The meeting opened at 2.05 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Naomi Long, Francie Molloy, Stephen Moutray, Jim Wells

7. Child Poverty Inquiry

Members discussed a paper from OFMDFM on the Lifetime Opportunities Strategy. Members noted the proposal that the Executive adopt the architecture and principles of Lifetime Opportunities and agreed to write to OFMDFM to advise that the Committee’s report will include a number of detailed recommendations to improve delivery in relation to the Strategy.

Jimmy Spratt left the meeting at 3.59 p.m.

Members noted the correction to the Save the Children press release considered at the inquiry review meeting on 30 April 2008.

Members also agreed to accept this paper, along with a number of other papers considered at the inquiry review meeting, as evidence for the child poverty inquiry.

Dolores Kelly left the meeting at 4.02 p.m.

Zoë Robinson, a Researcher from the Assembly Research and Library Services, briefed the Committee on Children’s Services Planning. The paper outlined the legislative basis for public bodies and authorities in the UK and Ireland working together to ensure an integrated approach to children’s services planning. Members sought and were provided with clarification on a number of issues.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.17 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 14 May 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)
Tim Moore (Senior Researcher)

The meeting opened at 2.10 p.m. in public session

3. Apologies

Tom Elliott, Naomi Long, Stephen Moutray, Jim Wells.

Ms Anderson left the meeting at 2.55 p.m.

9. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee considered the framework for the report on its inquiry into child poverty in Northern Ireland.

Ms Anderson re-joined the meeting at 3.45 p.m.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.12 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 21 May 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.05 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Barry McElduff

The meeting moved into closed session at 2.42 p.m.

7. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee considered Sections 1-3 of the report on its inquiry into child poverty in Northern Ireland and proposed a number of suggested amendments.

Mr Molloy joined the meeting at 3.31 p.m.

Mr Moutray left the meeting at 3.31 p.m.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 3.37 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 28 May 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Francie Molloy
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jimmy Spratt
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Lynda Mulholland (Clerical Supervisor)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.04 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Martina Anderson and Naomi Long.

The meeting moved into closed session at 3.26 p.m.

9. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee noted the draft report of the British Irish Council on Child Poverty and considered a written note by Martina Anderson MLA. Members requested further information on the role of the North West Gateway Initiative in tackling poverty.

The Committee considered Sections 3 and 4 of the report on its inquiry into child poverty in Northern Ireland and proposed a number of suggested amendments.

Mr Spratt left the meeting at 4.10 p.m.

Mr Moutray left the meeting at 4.14 p.m.

Members agreed to table the following motion for debate in the Business Office.

“That this Assembly approves the Report of the Committee for the Office of First Minister and Deputy First Minister (08/07/08R) on its Inquiry into Child Poverty in Northern Ireland”; and calls on the Executive to bring forward a detailed plan of action to deliver its targets to eliminate child poverty.”

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 4.39 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Wednesday 4 June 2008
Room 144, Parliament Buildings
Unapproved Minutes of Proceedings

Present: Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Martina Anderson
Tom Elliott
Dolores Kelly
Barry McElduff
Stephen Moutray
Jim Shannon
Jim Wells

In Attendance: Damien Martin (Assembly Clerk)
Antonia Hoskins (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Keith McBride (Assistant Assembly Clerk)
Marion Johnson (Clerical Assistant)

The meeting opened at 2.09 p.m. in public session

1. Apologies

Francie Molloy

Jim Shannon left the meeting at 3.58 p.m.

The meeting moved into closed session at 3.59 p.m.

Dolores Kelly left the meeting at 4.20 p.m.

Barry McElduff left the meeting at 4.23 p.m.

9. Child Poverty Inquiry

The Committee considered and discussed the draft report on Child Poverty. Following discussions the Committee agreed revisions to the section of the report on poverty proofing and to include the EQIA process stages as an appendix. Members also agreed to include supporting information on the British Irish Council report on child poverty, to make the link with the Sustainable Development Strategy and on the importance of public transport. The Committee also agreed a revision to the section of the report dealing with rural poverty.

Stephen Moutray left the meeting at 4.58 p.m.

The Committee considered and agreed the report on Child Poverty

Table of Contents, read and agreed

Executive Summary, read and agreed

Summary of Recommendations, read and agreed

Section 1 Introduction, read and agreed

Section 2 Approach of the Committee and focus of the report, read and agreed

Section 3 Definition and measurement of child poverty, read and agreed

Section 4 The evidence-base for the prevention of child poverty, read and agreed

Section 5 Strategies to tackle child poverty in Northern Ireland, read and agreed

Section 6 Policies to increase income, read and agreed

Section 7 Tackling rising costs and financial exclusion, read and agreed

Section 8 Promoting employment, read and agreed

Section 9 Measures to tackle long-term disadvantage, read and agreed

Section 10 Cross-cutting approaches, read and agreed

Section 11 Conclusions, read and agreed

The Committee agreed that the following papers should be appended to the Committee’s report:

Minutes of Proceedings

Minutes of Evidence

List of Written Submissions Received

Written Submissions to the Committee

List of Witnesses Who Gave Evidence to the Committee

List of Research Papers

Research Papers

List of Other Evidence Considered by the Committee

Other Evidence Considered by the Committee

List of Abbreviations

The Committee ordered the report to be printed.

The Chairperson adjourned the meeting at 5.19 p.m.

[EXTRACT]

Appendix 2

Minutes of Evidence

24 October 2007

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:

Mr Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Ms Martina Anderson
Mr Tom Elliott
Mrs Dolores Kelly
Mr Barry McElduff
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jim Wells

Witnesses:

Ms Marina Monteith
Ms Alex Tennant

Save the Children

1. The Chairperson (Mr Kennedy): Ms Alex Tennant and Ms Marina Monteith from Save the Children are here to give oral evidence to the Committee as part of our inquiry into child poverty. A written submission from Save the Children was circulated to members on Monday 22 October. The key issues that the Committee may wish to explore are listed in the Committee Clerk’s brief. This session will be recorded by Hansard for publication in our report.

2. I thank Ms Tennant and Ms Monteith for their attendance this afternoon and welcome them on behalf of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. Save the Children is the first organisation to give evidence to our child poverty inquiry. We thank you for your interest in the inquiry, and we look forward to hearing what you have to say. There will be an opportunity later for members to ask questions.

3. Ms Alex Tennant (Save the Children): I apologise to the Committee for not getting our paper to you earlier. I welcome the opportunity to make this presentation to the Committee’s inquiry into child poverty. It is a timely opportunity to focus on developing recommendations for eradicating child poverty by 2020. I will focus briefly on each of the six areas identified by the Committee for investigation. First, I will examine the extent, intensity and impact of child poverty in Northern Ireland.

4. The measure most commonly used by the UK Government to monitor improvements in tackling child poverty is the households below average income (HBAI) after housing costs (AHC) measure. The main measure uses an income-only AHC measure, where housing costs such as rent, mortgage, interest payments, rates and ground rent have been removed. That is intended to reflect the money that a household has to exist on after housing costs have been paid, and to take into account the wide geographical variations in housing costs across households and geographically. There are a number of other measures of child poverty, including mixed measures, which combine income and deprivation. The Department for Work and Pensions is developing a mixed measure, on which it will, hopefully, report next year.

5. Interestingly, the HBAI AHC measure is the only one in which Northern Ireland has lower levels of child poverty than the rest of the UK. By all other measures, Northern Ireland’s levels of child poverty are higher. Arguably, the AHC measure does not provide an appropriate comparison with Great Britain, as housing costs in Northern Ireland have, certainly in the past, tended to be lower than those in Great Britain, while other costs, such as food, fuel, childcare and clothing have been higher.

6. The most recent HBAI AHC statistics show that around 29% of children in Northern Ireland are living in poverty, which equates to 122,000 children. The methodology was changed slightly this year, which must be taken into account when comparing this year’s data to that of previous years. However, irrespective of the equivalisation scale used, the 2005-06 data showed a higher level of child poverty than previous years. By both methodologies, child poverty rates seem to have increased over the past year. The question is whether or not that increase is statistically significant. However, what is clear from the figures is that the child poverty rate has not decreased over the past four years in which it has been measured in Northern Ireland. That is, obviously, an issue of real concern.

7. Children in Northern Ireland are more likely to live in low income households than adults. Children have a higher risk of being in poverty if they live in a family where there is no working adults; where the mother is under 25 years old; where there is only one resident parent; where there are four or more children; where there is at least one disabled adult or child; or if they live in the west.

8. Lone-parent families are the household type most at risk of being in poverty. Almost half of lone-parent families live in poverty, compared with one in five couples with children, or pensioner households. There is a stark contrast between lone-parent households and all the other household types: working-age couples; pensioner couples; single pensioners; or working-age singles without dependent children.

9. Almost half of poor children live in families with at least one adult in paid work. That is a significant statistic, because people tend to think that poverty and child poverty are linked almost entirely to people being out of work and on benefits. It is important to remember that for half of children in poverty, that is not the case: it is in-work poverty.

10. We mapped the HBAI figures according to parliamentary constituencies, and there is a clear east-west split. There are higher than average levels of child poverty in Belfast and the South Down constituency, but the highest levels of child poverty are seen west of the Bann, at constituency level.

11. The intensity of poverty must also be considered. Our report, ‘Britain’s Poorest Children’, found that despite hundreds of thousands of children being lifted out of poverty in Great Britain over recent years, there was little change in the number of children experiencing severe child poverty. Our recent report, ‘Severe Child Poverty in the UK’, which includes Northern Ireland, analysed the 2004-05 family resources survey. It found that one in 10 children in Northern Ireland lives in severe poverty, which equates to 44,000 children.

12. The pattern in GB has been that, despite some success in lifting out of poverty those children who are just below the poverty threshold, in general the children in most severe poverty have not been affected by Government action. Therefore, we call on the Northern Ireland Executive to set targets for the eradication of severe child poverty, and the HBAI reports should monitor and report on progress against the targets.

13. In addition to studying the depth of poverty, intensity can also be examined using the persistence of poverty. The study of persistent poverty involves tracking the same group of people over a four-year period to identify who remains in poverty for at least three out of the four years. Although poverty is a transient state for many, for a small group poverty is, unfortunately, a long-term state, and these children suffer the greatest impact.

14. To date, the lack of data has made it impossible to study persistent poverty in Northern Ireland. However, since 2001, the Northern Ireland household panel survey has been collecting data that can now be used for this type of analysis. Save the Children, and its partner ARK (Access Research Knowledge) at Queen’s University, are currently carrying out analysis, which will be available early in 2008.

15. It is important to focus on the different ways in which poverty impacts on children’s lives — I will try to be as brief as possible. I will focus on income, education, health, home and neighbourhood, and play and social development. By examining the impact of poverty on children, we can identify the challenges to which we must find solutions.

16. A family that lives entirely on benefits is likely to be living in poverty. In Northern Ireland, a high proportion of the working-age population is not in paid work, and the benefit levels are set below the poverty line. For example, the weekly income of a couple with four children, who live entirely on benefits, is £289, which is £128 below the poverty line for that family type.

17. However, benefit levels are higher than the severe child poverty threshold. Therefore, if a family is in receipt of all the benefits to which it is entitled, it should not be experiencing severe child poverty. We think that, as an immediate action, a benefit uptake campaign could make all the difference in working towards the target of eradicating severe child poverty.

18. Earlier, I said that approximately 50% of all children in poverty are living in households where at least one parent is in paid employment. In Northern Ireland, in-work poverty is as big a challenge as poverty linked to economic inactivity. We have very high levels of low pay in Northern Ireland; indeed we have the highest levels of low pay for full-time workers in any UK region.

19. There is a mistake in our submission —

20. Mrs D Kelly: I was beginning to wonder where those jobs were.

21. Mr Wells: Can we apply for them?

22. Mr Shannon: Jim’s already got one.

23. Ms Tennant: The threshold for low pay is not £650 an hour, it is £6·50 an hour.

24. Save the Children has commissioned a survey across the UK to look at how families manage on low incomes. It is a very sorry picture. A survey of 1,600 parents on low incomes — across the UK, and including Northern Ireland — found that 85% said that they had found it difficult to make ends meet during the previous year, while six out of ten felt that they would never have enough money to make ends meet. However, 85% said that they were proud of the way that they had managed their finances, and the most common coping mechanism that they used was to go without themselves. Ninety-one per cent of those surveyed said that they regularly went without basic necessities in order to make sure that they provided for their children. There is a myth that child poverty is a result of poor financial management by families. I am sure that many Committee members are aware of constituents who are living on low incomes and doing a wonderful job in managing on their incomes.

25. Two thirds of parents said that they struggled to find a job that paid enough for the family to live on. A similar proportion said that childcare costs made it difficult to work. However, while the cost of childcare is a key problem, many find it difficult to find quality childcare. A review of the Northern Ireland childcare strategy found that, over the five-year lifetime of the strategy, the number of childcare places had only increased by 5·7%. In 2004, there was only one childcare place for every 6·4 children under the age of four.

26. In Northern Ireland, education disadvantage begins at a very early age. According to research undertaken by the Department of Education, preschool children from higher socio-economic backgrounds in Northern Ireland already show signs of higher cognitive and behavioural abilities than children from poorer backgrounds. Young children who live in areas of high deprivation score less well on verbal skills, early number concepts and general cognitive skills.

27. The impact of socio-economic disadvantage continues to be apparent throughout a child’s years at primary school. By the time that they reach GCSE level, we find that children who are entitled to free school meals are more than twice as likely to achieve no qualifications than the Northern Ireland average. There appears to have been little progress in narrowing the gap in educational attainment; if anything, that gap has grown. Many factors contribute to the impact of poverty on children’s educational experience, particularly the costs of education and the ability of parents to support their children’s learning; the aspirations with which children grow up; the relationship with teachers; the impact of going without a balanced diet and educational games; and bullying.

28. Even before birth, the impact of poverty on maternal health results in higher levels of infant mortality and low infant birth weight. The rate of infant mortality is one third higher in deprived wards than in non-deprived wards, and the gap appears to have increased in recent years. According to a Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety report in 2000, children born into poverty wee four times more likely to die before the age of 20 than non-poor children. They were 15 times more likely to die as a result of a house fire and five times more likely to die in accidents. The impact of deprivation on health continues into adulthood, with women in deprived wards living, on average, for 2·5 years less — and men living for 3·1 years less — when compared to the Northern Ireland average for life expectancy.

29. For thousands of children in Northern Ireland, having a place that can be called home cannot be taken for granted. In 2005-06, almost 7,000 families with dependent children presented as homeless to the Housing Executive. That constituted an increase of more than 50% over 1995-96. Spiralling house prices make it practically impossible, even for families on good incomes, to afford to buy property. There is a serious shortage of social housing. Many families on low incomes have no choice but to opt for private-rented accommodation, because they have no prospects of being offered social housing. In most cases the rent is higher than the housing benefit that they receive. That results in the family having to find a shortfall of £10 to £20 each week — perhaps even more — from an already restricted budget. Too often, that leads to real hardship.

30. The cost of heating is higher in Northern Ireland than in any other region in the UK. In 2003-04 the family spending survey found that the cost of heating a family home in Northern Ireland was 43% higher than the UK average. Twenty four per cent of the population of Northern Ireland are living in fuel poverty, rising to 50% of households with an annual income of less than £10,000.

31. Play is a vital part of childhood and, in the very early years, is a major source of a child’s learning. Play, cultural leisure activities and social interactions with peers remain essential for well-being and social development as a child becomes a teenager. Doing without those opportunities and experiences because of poverty can have a major impact on the quality of life of a child or young person. Indeed, when young people are consulted about their priorities, play and social development regularly top the list.

32. However, for many children in Northern Ireland, especially those living in poverty, access to, and the affordability of, good play and leisure provision can pose a major problem, cutting them off from a world of fun, adventure, learning and development. Being excluded from social participation can also have detrimental effects on a child or young person’s sense of self-worth and belonging.

33. I will now consider the approach taken when formulating the current strategy, including the extent of the engagement with key stakeholders.

34. Members will be aware that the Lifetime Opportunities strategy emerged from a review of New TSN commissioned by the Northern Ireland Executive in 2001. An evaluation found that the New TSN policy had been successfully mainstreamed into the planning and implementation of Government programmes and budgeting processes. However, it lacked strategic focus, was more focused on process than outcomes, and needed to broaden its scope. Of most concern, perhaps, was the finding that there was no evidence that the skewing of resources was having an impact on people living in poverty.

35. The findings of academics and non-governmental organisations in reviewing New TSN reiterated those criticisms and made strong arguments for change, including: that the policy needed to become a wider anti-poverty strategy with a strong strategic focus; that it needed to be financed by top-slicing of budgets, as opposed to skewing of resources; that strong co-ordination across Departments needed to be built up, to ensure a joined-up approach; that it was essential that people living in poverty and social partners be involved in the development, implementation and monitoring of the strategy; and that its success should be monitored by using key-outcome indicators, as opposed to process indicators. That is to say, its success should be judged by measuring the impact on those living in poverty.

36. From that it was decided that a new strategy needed to be developed, and the central anti-poverty unit went out to public consultation twice in developing its plans through 2004-05. However, that was a less than ideal policy-development process. Both consultations spanned summer periods, and the duration of the second was less than 12 weeks, which is contrary to standard good practice. Of particular concern was the lack of consultation with children and young people, with only one meeting occurring at the request of a group of young people. Furthermore, an equality impact assessment was not carried out on the strategy, against the advice of the Equality Commission.

37. On receiving the second consultation document, a number of groups felt that their comments on the first consultation process had not been taken account of. Key concerns again included the lack of focus on child poverty, the lack of budget for implementing the strategy, and the lack of strategic leadership in setting targets and directing Departments in developing actions. There were strong concerns that the strategy would merely become New TSN with a few add-ons. In order to take some of those concerns into account the central anti-poverty unit set up a “critical friends” group made up of representatives of civic society, representatives of the Department for Work and Pensions, the devolved administrations in Wales and Scotland, and the Combat Poverty Agency.

38. Through that process, and due to the added pressure emerging from the St Andrews Agreement, the strategy was completely redrafted and the action plan put on hold. The strategy, as members know, was published by the Secretary of State at the time, Peter Hain, on 13 November 2006.

39. While the reworking resulted, in our opinion, in a better, more focused document, a number of the key concerns remain, including: the lack of a ring-fenced budget; the ability of Departments to co-ordinate actions; and the suitability of a number of targets. In addition, without any timetable for publishing action plans, it is not clear how the strategy will be practically implemented.

40. We suggest that, given the length of time taken to develop Lifetime Opportunities, the document should be adopted by the new Executive, because there are a number of positive aspects that should be retained. Those include the strong focus on child poverty and the commitment to eradicate child poverty in Northern Ireland by 2020. Until Lifetime Opportunities, all we had was a commitment to “contribute to” its eradication across the UK and, given Northern Ireland’s small population, that does not really amount to much. We thought that that was a very positive change. The establishment of the ministerial forum and the commitment to involving people experiencing poverty are also positive.

41. However, we also feel that there are weaknesses in the strategy that largely reflect a lack of both political leadership at the time and strategic direction in its development. This has impacted in various ways on the strategy, most critically on the targets, which in many ways are the most important part of the document, as they will form the basis of developing the Lifetime Opportunities action plan.

42. We welcome the high-level targets of halving child poverty by 2010 and eradicating it by 2020. However, the lower-level targets need to be reviewed. We feel that they are largely the result of an administrative negotiation process with the Departments, based on what was already happening, as opposed to the result of an examination of the higher-level targets and of working down to determine the actions required to deliver them. They are inadequate for four reasons. They are not — for the most part — strategic, measurable, actionable, relevant and timely (SMART); they are mostly too general and fail to prioritise children in poverty; too many of the targets relate to social inclusion generally, rather than specifically to child poverty; and there are serious gaps. For example, there is only one health target for younger children, and it focuses entirely on breastfeeding. That will not fully address the huge inequalities in health outcomes for poor children.

43. Is the strategy capable of delivering the key targets for 2010 and 2020? Members are aware that the Committee on the Programme for Government, in the Transitional Assembly, reviewed the strategy in January and invited submissions. This resulted in a number of recommendations that have been put to the current Executive. However, with the return of devolution the Executive committed to reviewing the strategy over the summer recess. However, it is yet to be considered by the Executive. We have heard that it will not be considered before December. Along with many other groups, we are deeply concerned at the delay in reviewing the strategy. When he launched the strategy, Peter Hain stated that it would be one of the four priorities of the comprehensive spending review. We understand that the draft Budget and Programme for Government are to be released later this week — without an agreed anti-poverty strategy in place.

44. It remains to be seen whether any targets on child poverty will be included in the Budget, or how actions to deliver on strategic targets can be included without a strategy to guide the process. As a minimum, the documents should commit to the overall target of eradicating child poverty by 2020, with a series of interim targets set to monitor progress. A second target, as we have mentioned, should focus on eradicating severe child poverty well in advance of 2020. An action plan must then be developed to deliver on those targets.

45. It appears unlikely that over the last couple of months the Northern Ireland Administration have developed a full set of programmes and policies to deliver on the targets. To date, according to most child poverty indicators, things appear to be moving in the wrong direction. There are higher levels of child poverty, wider gaps in education and health outcomes, and higher costs of living, including fuel and housing costs. More of the same is not an option.

46. The investment strategy will also be very relevant in tackling child poverty. It must demonstrate that investment will promote overcoming inequality associated with poverty. Only by investing in those who are currently trapped in the cycles of poverty and economic inactivity will we be able to grow our economy in a sustainable way. We need all the children and young people currently in education to develop the skills to engage actively in the economy in the future, both to allow sustainable growth and to ensure that we can provide for our ageing population.

47. It should be remembered, or course, that the responsibility for meeting the 2020 target is not only held by the Northern Ireland Executive, but also the Westminster Government, which has responsibility for taxation and setting benefit levels. The Northern Ireland Assembly should hold Westminster to account on those issues.

48. Another issue is whether the implementation mechanisms, resources and monitoring arrangements that are currently in place are adequate to ensure the delivery of the key actions and targets. We cannot assess that without knowing the contents of the Programme for Government and Budget.

49. When the levels of child poverty in the UK are compared with other wealthy nations, it becomes clear that we have much to learn. A 2005 UNICEF report comparing child poverty across 26 wealthy nations found that, across a range of indicators, the UK came seventh from the bottom of the league table. At the top of the league table were Denmark and Finland, with child poverty rates of 2·4% and 2·8% respectively — around a sixth of the levels of child poverty in the UK and Ireland.

50. The UNICEF report concluded that much of the success of the Nordic countries has been as a result of implementing family-focused social policies. The countries with the lowest rates of children living in poverty allocate the highest proportions of their gross national product to social expenditure, including family and other related social transfers.

51. The report also found that in Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Belgium, child poverty rates were below 10%, and that at least 10% of GDP was allocated to social spending associated with reducing child poverty. In those countries, the proportion of benefits was highest for preschool children — there is a particular focus on preschool children.

52. Although much of the responsibility for social transfers clearly falls to the Westminster Government, the Northern Ireland Executive can also have a major impact through developing and resourcing a comprehensive range of actions designed to tackle child poverty.

53. A recent report by the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People on spending on children in Northern Ireland compared expenditure on children across the UK. I want to focus on preschool children. Analysing the amounts of money spent on Sure Start, the report stated that:

“Sure start is a clear example of where allocations to particular programmes vary along with regional priorities. Regional funding deviations for this particular programme appear to have stifled the development of Sure Start in Northern Ireland, particularly in relation to children’s centres and this might well hinder progress with regard to tackling child poverty.”

54. Using figures contained in that report, we have calculated that the 2006-07 spending on Sure Start in Northern Ireland was considerably lower than in either Scotland or Wales — £5·34 per head of population, compared to over £11 in Scotland and over £18 in Wales. We were unable to make a comparison with England.

55. There are no silver bullets and no quick fixes when attempting to eradicate child poverty. Child poverty is all-pervasive and affects every aspect of a child’s life. It is also unique to each child affected. A wide range of policies and approaches will be required to tackle child poverty, involving a wide range of actors. Some policy areas that might be considered in the Committee’s recommendations include the maximising of benefit uptake, which we believe would almost wipe out severe child poverty in Northern Ireland. Ensuring that quality affordable childcare is available will make employment feasible for many families, and, in particular, will help to get second wage-earners into work. Save the Children has also called for additional payments or seasonal grants to be given to families living in poverty at the times of the year when they find it most difficult to make ends meet. For example, the times of the year when there are additional costs associated with bringing up their children, including around July and in November. That idea is similar to the idea of the winter fuel payments that are given to the elderly.

56. The Chairperson: Thank you very much indeed. You have helpfully highlighted all of the key points. I am conscious that a couple of members want to leave the meeting shortly, therefore, I want to open up the discussion for questions. If there are any particular key issues with regard to income, education, health, home and neighbourhood, and play and social development that you wish to discuss further, that would help to move the discussion along.

57. Ms Tennant: Education policy must focus on narrowing the gap in attainment and dealing with the costs of education — making it truly free for families who are in poverty. Health policy must also focus on narrowing the gap in health outcomes, improving maternal health and increasing the spend on children. NICCY research shows that 14·1% of the personal and social services budget in Northern Ireland is spent on children, compared with 24% in England and 26% in Wales. Home and neighbourhood is a key area as it concerns housing costs that families must face. Affordable, quality housing must be made available to all families with children. I shall leave it there and allow others to read the points themselves.

58. The Chairperson: On behalf of the Committee, thank you very much for your excellent presentation. You have spoken about the issues in considerable detail. As you are aware, this afternoon’s session is being formally recorded so that the Committee can include your presentation when it publishes its report. I can, therefore, assure you that the full benefit of your presentation will be made available. Mr McElduff has indicated that he wants to ask a question.

59. Mr McElduff: Thank you, Chairman, for allowing me to go first. I need to be at Stormont for around 4.30 pm. I am delighted to receive Save the Children’s important presentation, which contains so much information.

60. I want to focus on the map that shows the areas of deprivation, where children are more likely to experience poverty. It is appropriate that the meeting is in Derry, because Foyle, West Tyrone and Mid-Ulster are the parliamentary constituencies where child poverty is greatest. The map is one of the most startling that has ever been presented to any Committee. Of course, there is deprivation in areas that are east of the Bann. However, look at where the blue and dark-blue areas are on that colour-coded map of deprivation and child poverty.

61. Does Save the Children recommend that a special, west-of-the-Bann approach — or some kind of interdepartmental working or task force approach — be taken to deal with the needs of children in those areas?

62. Can Save the Children also tell the Committee what it believes to be the value of Sure Start initiatives?

63. Ms Tennant: Save the Children is considering whether the area-based approach that is currently in place is the best way forward. The wards with the highest concentration of child poverty are in Belfast and Derry. However, uniform experience of child poverty tends to be a west-of-the-Bann occurrence. Therefore, Save the Children is not convinced that focusing on a small number of wards where there is the highest incidence of child poverty is the right approach — certainly, not for rural areas. When neighbourhood renewal was developed in England, it initially focused on small wards but quickly expanded to cover larger areas. Therefore, entire council areas are designated neighbourhood renewal areas, including, I believe, the city of Birmingham. I am not sure of the size of its population. However, it could rival that of Northern Ireland.

64. Save the Children is currently carrying out analysis on that issue. The indication is that, perhaps, neighbourhood renewal should be applied to larger areas. If that were the case, I believe that the west-of-the-Bann would be well addressed.

65. In Northern Ireland, the Sure Start programme has not been extensively evaluated. However, it does focus on the preschool years and on attempting to get resources and support to families with children of that age. The way in which the programme has been rolled out and the resources that have been put in have not been as great as in other areas of the UK. However, even in England, where Sure Start has been better resourced, there are concerns that the programme is not reaching those who are most in need. When developing policies and programmes, we must focus on providing services for those in most need. Often, those are not the families that will bang on doors or lift the phone to ask for help. We must think about how we can deliver support and resources to those families in most need.

66. Mr Shannon: I have a couple of questions; however, I wish to warn Barry McElduff about traffic branch on the way home. He should be careful. On the way down, they were there. They missed me, but I hope that you do not get caught.

67. Mr McElduff: I have a little bit more time than I let on to.

68. The Chairperson: They may be more interested in Jim Shannon than in Barry.

69. Mr Shannon: I thank the witnesses for that detailed presentation. It contained lots of good stuff and food for thought for all of us. However, I have one point of caution. Although your presentation showed that there are higher levels of deprivation to the west of the Bann, there is a lot of deprivation in the area that I represent. Every day, in my office, I meet people who suffer deprivation, and I know that other members of the Committee could say the same thing. Deprivation is not necessarily focused in areas in the west of the Province. In the east, we too suffer, and I could take you to houses in which it is evident.

70. Although your presentation was clear, population levels in the UK and the number of economic migrants was, coincidentally, a big story on last night’s news. In your presentation, you did not mention those factors. Government figures show that large rises in the population are in the numbers of migrant workers. Do you have any thoughts on that subject?

71. Mr Chairman, shall I ask all of my questions at once?

72. The Chairperson: Not all of the questions —

73. Mr Shannon: I just have three.

74. The Chairperson: Do your best.

75. Mr Shannon: You mentioned the possibility of a policy to maximise the uptake of benefits. In the area that I represent — and I am sure that it is mirrored elsewhere — I have noticed concerns relating to tax credits. Tax credits are an incentive of which people on low incomes should take advantage. One reason that people come to me is to highlight mistakes that have been made on benefit applications. A single parent, who cannot afford to balance the books at the best of times, might suddenly find themselves with debts of £1,000 or more. In fact, I came across a scary situation in which a lady had arrears of £7,000. In your presentation, you did not consider such circumstances, and I would like to hear your comments. I agree that benefits should be maximised; however, only if we can ensure that there will be no fallout for those people most in need.

76. Finally, childcare targets are not being met, and it is important that they should. Barry McElduff asked a question about Sure Start that I wanted to ask, so I will not repeat it. However, that organisation has the potential to reach out and address child poverty at an early stage. I should like to hear your comments on that point.

77. Ms M Monteith (Save the Children): To clarify, we are talking about maximising benefit uptake and tax credits. Northern Ireland Electricity is currently running an interesting pilot project, and it spoke to 2,000 of its most vulnerable customers. Of those, more than 40% were not receiving the full benefits or tax credits to which they were entitled.

78. Those people were going without over £30 per week on average, and that sum would make a difference to them. Tax credits and benefits are a big issue, but, as you rightly say, some families have a fear of tax credits and they are unwilling to claim them because of the problems that have been highlighted in the press about people ending up in debt as a result of overpayments. That comes through in some of the qualitative research, and overcoming that will be difficult. People must be supported to claim the tax credits to which they are entitled.

79. Ms Tennant: Perhaps the Committee might consider whether it would be good for responsibility for tax benefits to be passed to the Department for Social Development, because currently it is not the responsibility of the Northern Ireland Administration to administer tax credits. When we have spoken to officials from the Social Security Agency about how they would maximise benefit uptake, they say that they cannot do anything around tax credits, which causes problems.

80. The number of children being lifted out of poverty in GB has been, to a large degree, as a result of tax credits. We assume that similar numbers have been lifted out of poverty here, but we do not have the data to confirm that. Although there have been many problems with tax credits, they have been successful in helping to make work pay for families. However, there is perhaps an issue about whether more responsibility for the administration and rolling-out of tax credits in Northern Ireland should rest with the Northern Ireland Administration.

81. Any area-based strategy on deprivation will only reach a proportion of people experiencing poverty, and that is one of the weaknesses of these approaches. That is why we must highlight the types of groups and families who are most likely to experience poverty, particularly to ensure that we address the experiences of lone parents, large families and people who are currently out of work and living entirely on benefits. We must consider both approaches when we try to tackle income poverty.

82. Mr Shannon: It is not a matter of being able to pinpoint areas of deprivation on coloured charts.

83. Ms Tennant: No, you are quite right about that.

84. With regard to migrant workers, I was at a meeting this morning with the junior Minister Gerry Kelly and Dungannon District Council to discuss child poverty, because the Dungannon area came out in the last Households Below Average Income report (HBAI) report as having the highest levels of child poverty. That has been linked by the council partly to migrant workers and the low pay that they earn. There is an issue there, but it is difficult to find statistics that cover the situation of migrant workers. We must carry out more research on their situation, but we do know that many migrant workers live on very low incomes and send a lot of their earnings back home.

85. Mr Elliott: Thank you for your detailed presentation. I do not have time to go through it in detail, but it was very good. A number of dedicated options have been presented to us, which is always good, because quite often we receive submission that do not give us suggestions on how to move forward. Therefore, we must consider those suggestions and perhaps try to target and streamline some of them, because we will not be able to do everything at once. I have a query about the terminology of child poverty. If an average household income increases, will the child poverty average baseline also increase, meaning that some households will never get out of that situation?

86. The benefit uptake has been discussed, and that is also important. I share Jim Shannon’s concerns about people’s bad experiences. The cost of childcare is another issue, and the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development is examining the rural childcare issue, because it is massive, and the cost in rural areas is phenomenal.

87. Preschool education is something that the principal of my local primary school keeps banging on to me about. Will you explain in more detail how preschool education can help to lift some families out of child poverty? Finally, what type of work is being done with employers regarding the issue of flexible working hours? Recently, I met families who have benefited significantly from having flexible employers; for example one parent works from 8.00 am until 4.00 pm, and the other works from 12.00 pm until 8.00 pm. That may not seem like a good family life, but those families have told me that is a lot better than alternatives. A lot of employers have been very flexible, so what work is happening with them?

88. Ms Tennant: I will start with some of the easy questions, and then hand over to Marina to the harder ones. It would be useful to ask Departmental officials about work that is being done with employers about flexible working hours. I agree that flexible working hours can make all the difference for families. Our submission illustrates that the two groups with the highest proportion of children in poverty are in lone-parent families without work and in couple families with work, in which, often, one parent is working and the other is not. In many cases parents feel that one of them has to stay at home to ensure that they are around when the children need them. Flexible working is a useful way of enabling the second parent, or the only parent in lone-parent families, to get into work.

89. Although others can speak with more authority about the value of preschool education, Save the Children — with the Joseph Rowntree Foundation — has commissioned research on the impact of poverty on the educational experience of children in primary schools. That is produced by Goretti Horgan from Magee College at the University of Ulster, and will be launched in November. The study found that, too often, poorer children were arriving at primary school without even the necessary vocabulary and language skills to start learning. Preschool education and Sure Start can do a lot of work to help children prepare for education and help parents to develop the skills to work with their children. In the early years of their lives, children go through a number of different developmental stages, and parents require help to support their children through these important stages.

90. Save the Children suggests that developing a set of actions and options — and we provided the Committee with a very long list of potential actions — is something that the Committee does through its inquiry. From its evidence sessions, the Committee might decide on the three or four big breakthrough areas for the Assembly to tackle, and that can make all the difference. Preschool education and childcare might be two of those; however, by the end of this process, the Committee will be in a position to decide for itself what the key breakthrough areas are.

91. Ms Monteith: An important role in preschool education is the identification of learning needs for children. For example, it is nearly too late for speech therapy by the time children start school because after being on a long waiting list, they will be six or seven and already left behind the other children.

92. Preschool, therefore, plays a very important role in identifying children’s learning needs. If those services are in place for children, both at preschool and primary school, then children do not get left behind. That is really important.

93. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation report on ‘Monitoring poverty and social exclusion in Northern Ireland’ identified that we have the highest childcare costs of anywhere in the UK. That is a major issue.

94. As well as the availability of quality childcare, the other issue that emerged in some of the qualitative research is the need for flexible childcare. People who have to work unsociable hours need childcare that can accommodate that. Childcare must match the jobs that are available.

95. Mr Elliott asked whether the incomes of those below poverty threshold will ever rise meaningfully, lifting children out of poverty. That is possible; it is a matter of reducing the gap in incomes. Those who fall below the median income, or 60% of the median income, can be brought much closer to the median income. It is quite a complex issue. By bringing the worst-off much closer to the median income, they can be brought over the 60% threshold without the median being moved.

96. Ms Tennant: It is a median rather than an average.

97. Ms Monteith: The median is not the same as a mean or an average. It is quite a technical point. Basically, the median is a middle-ranking income, and the bottom proportion of families would be brought much closer to that middle-ranking position. Therefore, they could be brought over the 60% threshold. It is possible to lift everybody out of poverty and not really move the median too much.

98. Ms Tennant: As has been shown, other countries have child poverty levels that are a sixth of ours, using the same measure. Therefore, it is possible to have very low levels of child poverty by using that measure.

99. Mr Wells: When Gordon Brown was in power, the Government —

100. The Chairperson: Gordon Brown is in power.

101. Mr Wells: I mean when Gordon Brown was the Chancellor. At that time, the Government boasted that the tax-credit system, and its predecessors, lifted some 100,000 or 200,000 families out of child poverty each year. However, your figures indicate that none of that benefit has come to Northern Ireland.

102. Ms Tennant: The period to which you refer pre-dates the start of the family resources survey in Northern Ireland, but we could reasonably assume that we would have had a similar trend over that period. Over the last four years, we have not seen a decrease in child poverty, and GB has had the same experience. However, before that, there was a drop in the GB figures.

103. Mr Wells: What confuses me is that, with other benefits, such as the disability living allowance (DLA), Northern Ireland has the highest take-up rate of anywhere in the UK. We seem to be extremely good at applying for and getting DLA and incapacity benefits.

104. Mr Shannon: That is because people need it.

105. Mr Wells: My point is that people also need child-tax credits and working-tax credits, yet the same principle does not seem to apply. There are 134,000 DLA claimants in Northern Ireland, which represents an enormous proportion of the population, compared to, say, London or Birmingham. However, we do not seem to have had the same success in getting people to apply for working-tax credits and family-tax credits. I cannot understand why that is the case. What is it about those benefits that take-up of them is much lower?

106. Ms Tennant: I cannot help you with that one.

107. Mrs D Kelly: If people are already in receipt of some benefits, for example, housing benefit, they should not have to continuously fill out forms. The benefits agencies already hold the relevant information on those individuals. It should almost be the case that people who are in receipt of other benefits should not have to apply separately for family-tax credits. The agencies already have the basic information, and they should simply tick the boxes to show the benefits that those individuals are eligible to claim. The system should be reversed. Has any research been carried out on that issue? I know that there is an A to B initiative, and some other agencies are looking at the issue of benefit take-up. However, agencies are going about this matter in the wrong way.

108. The Chairperson: Although the member raises an important issue, which is related, I am conscious that our inquiry is on child poverty.

109. We are not asked to investigate whether the benefit agencies work or not.

110. Ms Tennant: Benefit uptake is a key issue. It would be useful if people who apply for a benefit were to be given a benefit health check to see what other benefits they might be entitled to. We have also suggested that when a mother has a baby, the person who comes round the hospital with the child benefit forms could give her a voucher entitling her to a free benefit check-up.

111. Many different options could be put in place. However, in reality, the Social Security Agency has limited resources, and it largely focuses on pension-credit uptake. It is only just starting to pilot work with families and to recognise that it has a role in tackling child poverty. More of its budget should be put towards encouraging benefit uptake by families.

112. Mrs D Kelly: You commented on the social policies in Finland and Denmark and other Nordic countries, do you have specific examples of successful social policies? Is there further work to be done on that?

113. Ms Tennant: I cannot claim to be an expert on that. There are different social protection and benefits systems, and that is clearly beyond the remit of the Northern Ireland Assembly. However, there is more focus on childcare. I understand that the subsidisation of childcare is much higher in those countries. It could be argued that, if childcare was to be subsidised, many more people would take up work and come off benefits, and more money would be raised through tax. There is a strong argument for subsidising childcare.

114. Mrs D Kelly: I wish to pick up on that point. In my office, some people have informal childcare arrangements. They cannot claim the tax benefits or credits towards childcare that are available because their childminders are relatives. A child being cared for by relatives is in a win-win situation. That key area must be addressed, but you did not mention it in your presentation.

115. Ms Monteith: Two points about the Nordic countries are their investment in preschool services and investment in childcare. That is particularly evident in Finland, for example, where single-parent families are at no greater risk of child poverty than are two-parent families. The services that are available and access to quality childcare allow single parents to work. We can learn particular lessons, of which those are just two brief examples, from the Nordic countries.

116. Ms Anderson: I welcome you to the Committee. As one of the MLAs from the city, I appreciate you coming here. I consider your briefing to have been one of the most important that I have ever heard, as a member of the Committee. It was powerful.

117. I take on board all that Jim said about child poverty elsewhere in the east. However, I have also been looking at the Noble deprivation index of 2005 and the 890 super-output areas that were identified. Derry ranks high in the scale of deprivation — some areas fall third and fourth in certain indexes — particularly with regard to the measure that deals with how income-deprivation affects children.

118. This morning, the Committee visited the ILEX development site at Ebrington and we talked about Fort George. Considering the developments in the city, and elsewhere in the North, MLAs have a role to play in ensuring that the prosperity that is being built here is matched by measures to tackle deprivation.

119. On the list at the end of your presentation — and I know that it is not inclusive — I saw a wide range of required policies and approaches, and I was surprised that employment was not included as a heading. If we are going to focus on children’s life chances, we must look, for instance, at how procurement contracts, worth thousands of pounds, are established, and try to build in social requirement, so that they impact on those who are most in need.

120. I spoke to Nigel Dodds, the Minister of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, in the Chamber and asked him a question about that. The central procurement directorate set up a pilot study in 2002 in relation to an employment plan built into contracts and it succeeded. We have heard nothing else about it. I keep harping on about that.

121. Definitely, early intervention is needed in education. The statistic that you produced on infant mortality — that rates are 33% higher for those suffering poverty and deprivation — is alarming.

122. You also talked about home and neighbourhood. If an holistic approach is to be taken, a recommendation on employment is needed as well. That should be flagged up in your submission. Opportunities are presented to the Assembly in procurement contracts, and those should have social requirements built into them, so that those in most need can be targeted.

123. Tomorrow, the Programme for Government, together with the ISNI II strategy, is presented on the Floor of the House. Obviously, in those documents, we want to see investment going to where it is needed most, not just following previous investment. I take on board what Jim was saying. Obviously, there is poverty and deprivation across the North, but it is intensive and acute in the north-west and in the city of Derry. It is alarming.

124. I have one more point about fuel poverty. My party has been dealing with many constituents who buy 20-litre containers of fuel because they cannot afford to fill a tank to heat their homes. Buying 500 litres in that way will cost £320; whereas, to fill a tank with 500 litres might cost only £160. Those people simply cannot afford to buy fuel in economical quantities. Fuel poverty and related topics are live issues in Derry. One can drive around the city and see the development going on, but people who live there do not benefit from it. They live in poverty and deprivation.

125. Ms Tennant: Ms Anderson is quite right. There is a gap. Investment must be directed to areas of high poverty. I mentioned the investment strategy; it is a key way of ensuring that investment is made in areas of poverty. Furthermore, I mentioned the need to tackle Northern Ireland’s low-pay culture. We should ensure that pay levels are above £6.50 per hour, which is the threshold figure for low pay. Government and their contractors should pay at least that much.

126. We are concerned about PPP and PFI schemes. When privatisation takes place, staff who previously earned reasonable wages find that their wage levels drop, and that must be examined. Fuel poverty is a key issue. The cost of fuel in Northern Ireland is 43% higher than in the rest of the UK. Recently, Northern Ireland Electricity tariffs were announced for November. The cost of Economy 7 electricity rose by 14% while the cost for business users went up by only 1%.

127. Ms Anderson: Have you looked at the procurement contracts? Have you looked at building social requirements into them? That is another way to address poverty, as well as through education, health and all the other elements.

128. Ms Tennant: We have not looked at that in detail, but we agree with that approach. It is a key way of tackling poverty.

129. The Chairperson: I thank members for their questions. On behalf of the Committee, I thank the witnesses for their attendance and presentation. You not only gave us a detailed overview of the problem; you also provided us, helpfully, with a great many suggestions as to how the problem can be dealt with. We look forward to seeing you again.

9 January 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:

Mr Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Ms Martina Anderson
Mr Tom Elliott
Mrs Dolores Kelly
Mr Stephen Moutray
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jimmy Spratt

Witnesses:

Mrs Marie Cavanagh
Mrs Elaine Conway
Dr Paschal McKeown

Children in Northern Ireland

Mr Dominic Bonner
Ms Clionagh Boyle
Mr Gavin Melly

Derry Children’s Commission

130. The Chairperson (Mr Kennedy): I remind members that this session will be reported by Hansard. Please ensure that all mobile phones are switched off.

131. Good afternoon. We welcome you here today to present oral evidence on your submission on child poverty in Northern Ireland. We are looking forward to your presentation. We would ask that you keep your introductory remarks relatively brief, and we will then open up the floor for questions. We expect the session to last for approximately 30 minutes.

132. Mrs Elaine Conway (Children in Northern Ireland): Thank you for inviting us to give oral evidence, which is on the back of our written submission to the Committee.

133. Children in Northern Ireland is the regional umbrella body for the children’s sector in Northern Ireland. We have 114 member organisations, which we support by providing policy-, training- and participation-support services. We are a member of the Save the Children-led child-poverty coalition, which was recently formed to campaign for an end to child poverty. We support the submissions that Save the Children has made already to the Committee.

134. All our lobbying and campaigning work is carried out through partnership alliances that reflect the current priority areas of work of Children in Northern Ireland and its members. I am happy to be joined by some of our colleagues who represent those alliances: Marie Cavanagh is a member of our early years and childcare alliance, and she is the director of Gingerbread Northern Ireland; Paschal McKeown is a member of the children with disabilities strategic alliance, and she is policy and information manager for Mencap Northern Ireland.

135. I will quickly make a couple of points that will inform our discussion today, and I will then hand over to Paschal and Marie to supplement the evidence that we have already submitted to the Committee.

136. First, we reiterate our welcome of the Executive’s commitment in the draft Programme for Government and the draft Budget to take action on child poverty, and we note the targets that have been set for doing that. However, we question seriously how the Executive will deliver on those commitments, because we are unaware of any evidence in the draft Budget that any further provision will be given to many of the current early intervention and prevention services, projects and initiatives. Those projects were set up principally to tackle the high levels of child poverty in Northern Ireland. We see a contradiction between the strong commitment and very challenging target that has been set for tackling and eradicating child poverty and the fact that, due to a lack of future provision, services are being fundamentally undermined and will close soon if the situation is not addressed.

137. Highlighting the problem as we see it, past Administrations have attempted to address historic patterns of disadvantage and marginalisation, which go back for generations. It is undeniable that those patterns are inextricably linked to a society that has lived through, and is emerging from, a period of conflict. All through the process of trying to address the problem, past Administrations appear to have thrown at it short-term pots of money that last for a maximum of two years. Funding has been stop-start in nature, with programmes being withdrawn just as they were getting started.

138. All the evidence demonstrates that in order to tackle historic patterns of disadvantage and marginalisation, it has not been enough to look at the issues in a short time frame, providing two-year funding packages. What is needed is a long-term, outcome-focused approach that is backed up by resources being committed in the long term. That could be done by linking funding to the 10-year strategy for children and young people, on which the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) is currently taking the lead and which it has set outcomes for children right across the board.

139. We must highlight to the Committee the impact that short-term, stop-start funding has had on the children’s sector. It has had a very serious impact on families and children. People are becoming increasingly disillusioned and disenchanted with the promises that Government have made to them. In fact, the policy has served to push children further into poverty, hence the levels of very severe local child poverty.

140. We accept, appreciate and support the fact that the Committee needs time to carry out a robust inquiry into child poverty. However, we are conscious that time is running out to decide what can be done in the next three years, given that the Executive are likely to make their final decisions on the Budget in the next few weeks.

141. We are asking the Committee to take immediate action on several matters, before the inquiry ends and before the Executive finalise the Budget. It would be useful for the Committee to lobby the two junior Ministers, who are responsible for children’s issues, to publicly champion the Government’s commitment to end child poverty. The junior Ministers, supported by the Committee, must ask all Departments to identify transparently the amount of money in their budgets that will go towards tackling child poverty. That money must be ring-fenced so that it is protected, and the public need to see how it goes directly to those services for children and young people that tackle child poverty.

142. We have also noted the increasing pressure on the Government to deliver resource-releasing efficiency savings. We highlight the point that, in the past, children’s services have experienced such efficiency savings as cuts. We are asking the Committee to lobby the Executive immediately to ensure that any resource-releasing efficiency savings are transparently redirected and reinvested in front-line children’s services.

143. We are aware that the ministerial subcommittee on children and young people will be reconvened soon. It should not be delayed any longer; it must be set up again immediately. Furthermore, it should meet before the Executive make their final decisions on the Budget so that, in its capacity as a cross-departmental ministerial subcommittee, it can agree on the actions that are required to address child poverty.

144. When it comes to dealing with child poverty, children’s voices are not heard, and we are aware that that is the greatest shortcoming in addressing the matter. As we stated in our written submission, the Committee and the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister’s anti-poverty unit should avail themselves of the free service that is offered by the OFMDFM-funded participation network. It will provide members with training and consultancy support that will help them gain the skills and expertise that are required to consult directly with children and young people who are experiencing poverty. In the short or immediate term, the participation network can act to signpost members to organisations that can help them to meet and hear directly from children who are experiencing poverty. That will assist members in their inquiry and in preparing their final report on the inquiry.

145. The Chairperson: I am happy to tell you that the Committee has invited the junior Ministers to attend an evidence session to discuss the issue. You mentioned that Committee members should engage with some of the young people who are affected. Members are content for you to make the necessary arrangements for such engagement, and that will be actioned as a consequence of this meeting.

146. Dr Paschal McKeown (Mencap and Children in Northern Ireland): I work for Mencap in Northern Ireland, which is an organisation that works with people of all ages who have a learning disability. I am also a member of the children with disabilities strategic alliance, which brings together voluntary organisations that are involved with children with disabilities in Northern Ireland. I will provide the Committee with some information about learning disabilities, the reason that disabled children are more at risk of living in poverty, and what we think needs to happen.

147. There is increasing evidence of a link between disability and poverty. That link might be due to the fact that families who care for a disabled child are at increased risk of poverty, or possibly because the child lives with a family member who is disabled — a disabled parent, for instance. Consistent research shows that benefits paid do not reflect the true additional costs of disability.

148. Learning disability is a lifelong disability, and over 8,000 children with a learning disability, aged up to 19, are known to service providers in Northern Ireland. There is evidence that strong links exist between areas of deprivation and mild and moderate learning disabilities. There is less evidence and fewer strong links between severe learning disabilities and areas of deprivation, but there are strong links between poverty and learning disabilities — be they mild, moderate or severe.

149. The Bamford Review of Mental Health and Learning Disability (Northern Ireland) drew attention to the fact that there is a growing population of people who have a learning disability — particularly children who have multiple disabilities — and who are dependent on technology. Multiple disabilities bring with them extra costs that such people’s families must bear.

150. Childhood disability is often seen as a trigger event for poverty, and there are a couple of reasons for that. Additional and continuing costs arise from having a disability, and money is required for extra laundry and heating and for the added travel expenses that are required for visits to professionals. Research shows that it costs three times as much to bring up a disabled child as it does to rear a non-disabled child. Increasing numbers of lone parents are caring for children with special educational needs. That means that the break-up of families is also linked to poverty. Parents of a child who has a disability face difficulties in entering or sustaining employment, and that is sometimes due to the lack of available support services to assist their family or the child.

151. Such support is particularly important not only in a child’s early years, but when they leave school. For example, we have received an increasing number of calls from parents with children aged from 16 to 19 depending on the school that their child attends. They say that they are faced with the same childcare issues that they faced when the child was born and are now suffering because of a lack of alternative community care and support for their child or as a result of a lack of accessible and affordable childcare. For some people with a learning disability, that support may be required into adolescence or adulthood. In fact, research in England found that childcare costs were twice as expensive for disabled children, and other research stated that families with a disabled child pay five times more for childcare than they do for a non-disabled child.

152. Another point that is linked to employment is that parents are often unable to take up career opportunities or to move when their work demands it. Clearly, that has an impact on their ability to move up the financial ladder. It also means that many families are storing up poverty for the future: they have less in savings and a reduced ability to put money into pensions. Consequently, those financial problems will not only be with them when they are supporting or caring for their child, but they will be stored up for the future.

153. If I move on to what must happen, Mencap is involved with the Every Disabled Child Matters campaign in England, which has produced a useful briefing paper that identifies a wide range of actions that are required to deal with disabled children and poverty. I will not discuss all those actions because some refer to what the Government must do in England. For example, if disabled children and their families are to be brought out of poverty, the benefits system must reflect the true costs of disability. However, in Northern Ireland, targeted measures must be adopted in conjunction with the development of indicators in order to create a strategy and tackle the poverty that is experienced by disabled children or children living with disabled parents. There must be investment in services — such as respite or short-break services — that support families and actually help them to stay together. A review, similar to that carried out in England, must be conducted into the services and circumstances of disabled children. The English review successfully resulted in additional funding, brought about real changes and put disabled children at the heart of public policy. We would like to see something similar happening in Northern Ireland.

154. The Chairperson: Thank you.

155. Mrs Marie Cavanagh (Gingerbread and Children in Northern Ireland): I thank the Committee for allowing us the opportunity to give evidence. Elaine Conway and Paschal McKeown covered several areas, so I will not repeat what they said. However, I will make similar points to those that were made about lone-parent children, and that will give members some idea about the child-poverty issues that are relevant to lone parents.

156. I will begin by giving a little background information about Gingerbread Northern Ireland, which is the lead organisation in Northern Ireland representing the needs of lone parents. In addressing some of the issues that lone parents and their children face, we work closely with Departments, the community and voluntary sector, and, in some instances, even the private sector. Those organisations include Children in Northern Ireland, Save the Children and the Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network.

157. In Northern Ireland, there are currently around 92,000 one-parent families, incorporating approximately 150,000 children. Statistical evidence and recent research indicates that more than 70% of those children are living in poverty. Such information comes from research undertaken by ourselves, Save the Children and several other organisations.

158. The statistics also indicate that more than 90% of lone parents state that they wish to work outside of the home. Over the past number of years, Government have indicated that they consider work to be one route out of poverty, and they have set a target of getting 70% of lone parents into work by 2010. Although Gingerbread acknowledges that work can be a route out of poverty, we believe firmly that putting more pressure on lone parents in order to force them into work is not a solution.

159. Whenever lone parents move into work, more help must be made available to them to address issues that enable them to keep working. That help includes the greater availability of childcare and assistance to pay for it. There must also be more widely available flexible working arrangements. Often, work in itself is not enough.

160. The low-wage economy means that over 23% of children who live with a working lone parent are poor. Lone parents are also less likely to have academic qualifications than, for example, mothers who are in a coupled family, and they are therefore less likely to find well-paid jobs. Lone parents need good jobs — not just any jobs — and, unfortunately, some of the current policies are geared more towards the low-wage end of the economy than to the better-paid and sustainable jobs. If the target to have 70% of lone parents in Northern Ireland employed by 2010 is to be achieved, more than 30,000 extra childcare places would have to be provided and an additional 10,000 jobs created. All those factors are likely to have a significant impact on future developments.

161. Elaine mentioned that I am involved in the Early Years Strategic Alliance, which examines childcare issues. It is acknowledged that Northern Ireland has the lowest childcare provision ratio in Western Europe, with less than 8 places for each 1,000 children who are under four years old. If attempts are to be made to improve the earning capacity of parents — including lone parents — and to achieve a route out of child poverty, it is critical that the Government address that situation.

162. They must take a lead initiative and take account of developments that have taken place in childcare in other European countries. A comparison of the provision in Northern Ireland to the Scandinavian models of provision, which offer almost universal childcare, shows the substantial impact that it has on families. Poverty in Scandinavian society has been reduced, most parents work, and, more importantly, more than 70% of lone parents work. The correlation between poverty and lone parenthood in Sweden, for example, has almost been annihilated because of the increased provision of childcare and the opportunity for lone parents to go out to work should they choose to do so.

163. However, those systems do not come about without cost or investment. Therefore, the tax system must reflect childcare needs and provision, which must be Government subsidised. The Government must take a clear lead in providing increased childcare provision. If it is left to employers, it will not happen, whereas if the Government take the lead, there is no doubt that employers will follow suit. If not, increased childcare provision will be difficult to achieve.

164. In partnership with the Department for Employment and Learning and the University of Ulster, Gingerbread recently conducted major research into the equality of opportunity in training and the work environment for lone parents. Part of the research examined poverty in relation to well-being.

165. In conclusion, I have selected one or two comments made by some of the lone parents who were interviewed. They were asked what it is like to live on a low income, and, throughout the interviews, we heard first-hand how poverty restricts the choices and opportunities that are available to them and their children. Lone parents spoke frequently about the impact of living on a low income. That included the constant stress that resulted from the relentless struggle to make ends meet and the inability to buy children things to which other children had access. That stress had an impact on the health and well-being of lone parents.

166. One lone parent, referring specifically to money said that they cannot do the things that they want to do because they are always watching one thing or another and thinking that they have to do one thing first and then the other, with the result that they always put themselves at the back of the queue. That parent said that they have to put their child first. As a result, they said that they had to be careful.

167. The majority of lone parents interviewed — more than 96% — said that they suffered from stress, and a significant proportion of those — almost 70% — described it as long-term stress. That contrasts sharply with 2005-06 research that indicates that 10% of the general population have very high stress levels, with 67% indicating that they suffer little or no stress at all.

168. Therefore, coping alone has been cited as a major cause of stress, and it encompasses issues connected to poverty. Another lone parent spoke about the stress of continually looking after a child, disciplining them, providing for them financially, having to take them to parties or out for the day, and keeping up with the Joneses. That is indicative of the fact that family poverty and child poverty can create low expectations for parents. That parent considered that the everyday activities of family life included keeping up with the Joneses. That clearly indicates that their expectations of what they should be able to offer their children are extremely low.

169. In conclusion, some lone parents stated that there is still a great deal of stigma attached to lone parenthood, much of it to do with poverty. However, the job of a lone parent should be put on a pedestal.

170. The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentations. We have a limited amount of time, so I will now invite questions from members.

171. Mr Shannon: Thank you for your presentations. You all made very important points. Paschal commented on single parents who have children with learning disabilities and the fact that the benefits system lets them down repeatedly.

172. You mentioned the importance of the strategy to tackle child poverty, and the Committee and the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister are committed to and have prioritised a strategy to eradicate it. Would you comment on the importance of the other Committees, such as the Committees for Social Development, Education and Health, prioritising the issue of child poverty? I will ask that one question, given that I am conscious that time is limited.

173. The Chairperson: Thank you for that.

174. Mrs Conway: I agree, and we would like the Committee to use its influence to ask other Committees to have their Departments identify explicitly what proportion of their budgets will go towards tackling child poverty. It is not simply an OFMDFM responsibility or initiative: a cross-governmental, joined-up approach must be taken. That is the reason that we feel that it is essential that the ministerial subcommittee be set up. We understand that it will be set up at the end of this month, but we feel that that is too late. The subcommittee must be set up now, and it must meet before the Executive take decisions on the final Budget. It must examine the issue of child poverty and find out how much money Ministers will commit and what action they will take to meet the challenging targets that have been set by the Executive in their draft Programme for Government.

175. Mrs D Kelly: Thank you for your presentation. This is not the first time that eradicating poverty has been set as a target. What has been your experience of the success of past strategies, and how they have monitored targets and asked for transparency and ring-fencing?

176. With regard to the childcare element of the child tax credit system, one of the complaints that I hear from constituents is that there are many informal carers who are not accredited by social services, and those people who want their children to be cared for by relatives are not eligible for childcare vouchers. What correspondence have you had on that?

177. Mrs Conway: To reiterate some of my earlier points, we have seen strategic attempts to tackle child poverty, but we need more robust targets. Those must be backed up by actions on resources to deliver on targets.

178. Again, just to emphasise the point, short-term stop-start funding streams are not the way to tackle child poverty. We need a long-term cross-Government commitment of moneys for at least five to 10 years. These are not problems that can be addressed by a two-year fund, but are long-term goals that include improving children’s educational achievement and attainment and helping them to reach a standard of health and well-being that will enable them to reach their full potential and move into their communities as active participants.

179. Mrs Cavanagh: I agree entirely with the second point about tax credits, because the issue of unregistered child minders haunts our advice services all the time. It is a difficult scenario, because our research, as well as that carried out by others, indicates that many lone parents rely on the extended family to provide childcare.

180. We have campaigned rigorously, and will continue to do so, to try to persuade the Government to broaden the criteria. We can see one example of a slight deviation in eligibility criteria in the work that we have done with the Department for Employment and Learning (DEL) on the New Deal for Lone Parents programme. Although that is a UK-wide initiative, DEL operates a slightly varied arrangement in the regulations, in that allowances are made for childcare for lone parents who undertake training through New Deal and who have less formal, or unregistered, childcare arrangements. That is a small step, but it could be examined and broadened. Our colleagues in our sister organisations in Britain have been examining that model and would be keen to follow something similar.

181. Given the lack of childcare provision for children under the age of four — there are fewer than eight places per 1,000 — it is critical that we think outside the box for ways in which to address the issue.

182. Mr Elliott: Thank you, you are very welcome today. Marie gave us interesting figures on the lack of childcare provision for the under fours. I did not realise that the problem was so significant.

183. It never fails to amaze me how the vast majority of lone parents, in particular, cope so well under very difficult circumstances, albeit with help from their families. However, there is almost a similar pressure on some people whom one would not expect to be living in a poverty trap. Some people, perhaps two parents, might have reasonably good jobs, expect to live on a higher level, and struggle almost as much. Parents, especially those who should not be in a poverty trap, have a responsibility to try to live within their means. Do you find that, or do I see something different?

184. Dr McKeown: In our experience families struggle and work hard to stay within their means. However, some families encounter extra costs, for example, in having to care for a disabled child and, because of the lack of available services, they may have to pay for therapy services, respite care, equipment or extra nappies because their child requires more than the quota given. People find themselves trying to manage those extra costs within their income.

185. Your point is correct in one respect. Caring for a disabled child is usually unplanned for; it is not something that most families expect. Both parents might have expected to go back to work after the baby’s birth, or they might have bought a house in a particular area. They are faced with a big decision that affects their life. As Mr Elliott said, some families might be perceived as well off, and perhaps they live in good areas, but they may struggle just as much as those in deprived areas because their income has been reduced — and may continue to reduce — because they cannot move up the career ladder in the same way as their peers.

186. Ms Anderson: I thank the witnesses for their presentation. It is unacceptable, and everyone agrees that in the twenty-first century child poverty has no place in society. Caring for a disabled child is estimated to cost ten times more than an able-bodied child and the knock-on effect of a parent having to stay home as opposed to returning to work results in the family experiencing different kinds of poverty, such as fuel poverty.

187. I have a particular concern about fuel poverty, particularly in the north-west and in the Derry area I come from. Children who are immobile feel cold much more than others.

188. I have looked at what has been done in places in London and Boston, where there are areas of concentrated poverty. They have been in negotiation with Government for oil to be brought in from Venezuela or, at a lower cost and then provided to citizens at a cheaper rate via an international trade agreement.

189. I do not think that existing action plans outlined in the Lifetime Opportunities strategy will adequately tackle fuel poverty.

190. I wonder whether there are other initiatives that could be introduced that would tackle child poverty more effectively. Perhaps we could look at international trade agreements with Venezuela to see if such an initiative could work here.

191. We should be thinking outside the box.

192. Dr McKeown: The briefing report was entitled ‘Every Disabled Child Matters’. It is recognised that children who are immobile feel cold much more than others, and the report called for families with disabled children to be included in winter fuel payments to cover the costs that you mentioned. However, that is an ask: it has not been delivered.

193. Mrs Conway: Dr McKeown is right. We need to look at creative, innovative and outside-the-box approaches to tackling child poverty. In the draft Budget, we are faced with the fact that current services are under threat. We are unlikely to have enough resources to sustain them at their current level, never mind have an opportunity to look beyond the box at innovation and creativity around solutions. … [inaudible].

194. We need to look beyond just retaining and protecting what we have on the ground and what has been demonstrated to work. We need some capacity in the think tank’s funds to look at other solutions.

195. Mrs Cavanagh: I endorse what Elaine said, and her view that we should look outside the box. It is important that Government has a leading role; but it is also important to bring the business sector and the private sector along with us. That is related to my earlier comments. There must be family-friendly policies to allow people to go out to work without fear of losing their jobs if a child becomes ill.

196. I speak in particular of lone-parent families, but I am sure that it applies equally to many other families. We must create initiatives that will allow development, so that responsibility does not just fall on the shoulders of Government, the voluntary sector or the private sector, and, rather that a shared, or joined-up, approach is adopted.

197. The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. That completes the questioning.

198. Mr Shannon: [inaudible].

199. Let me ask one further supplementary question.

200. The witness mentioned lone parents and the position in Scandinavia. In all honesty is it realistic to believe that by 2010, 70% of lone parents will be in sustainable employment?

201. Mrs Cavanagh: In the short term, it is not realistic to assume that, by 2010, 70% of lone parents in Northern Ireland will be in sustainable employment, simply because so many other variables are present — not least of which is training, which is necessary to achieve a level that will make the jobs sustainable. A whole collection of things will have to be done.

202. However, unless we actually start to do it, the target will never be achieved. I cited the example of Scandanavia: that has been developing over many years.

203. Mr Shannon: Tax breaks are another significant incentive.

204. Mrs Cavanagh: I understand that, and Paschal McKeown referred to that earlier. Obviously, some things are currently outside the control of the Assembly and the Executive, but that does not mean that we should not consider the matter as a long-term objective, and those considerations should be built in. However, some things must be done instantly, and services must be maintained inaudible improve the situation. We must also begin to think creatively about the future and about significantly improving the situation.

205. The Chairperson: Thank you. Are you aware of any specific child-poverty services that are under immediate threat?

206. Mrs Conway: There are a range of initiatives that have been funded under the Executive programme fund for children, which was an initiative of the previous Executive, as well as under the current priority funding package for children and young people and the relatively new supporting families package that was launched in January 2007. Within and across those packages, a wide range of services and initiatives are under threat and are due to close in three months. Organisations are now faced with a situation in which they are entering into statutory redundancy negotiations with staff, and those sectors are likely to lose the knowledge and expertise that those staff have accumulated. Obviously, there are also vulnerable children and families who will become much more disillusioned and disadvantaged, but … [inaudible].

207. Dr McKeown: I add that, from a child’s point of view, this is such a contrast with what is happening in England, where the Government has been investing in services for disabled children, who have been championed and were made a priority by the Treasury before the comprehensive spending review. Northern Ireland has, in fact, received Treasury funding as a result of that, although it is up to the Executive to decide how to use that funding. In England, there are continually statements from relevant Ministers about additional funding to be directed towards disabled children or their families. Here, however, that priority is absent, and it is sad that the Executive’s first Budget has not prioritised disabled children.

208. Mrs Conway: I wish to draw attention to the fact that a no-day-named motion on that point has been submitted to the Assembly and is currently with the Assembly Business Committee. We seek the support of MLAs to have the motion debated on the Floor of the Assembly. It concerns the prioritising of people with disabilities, ensuring that moneys are ring-fenced and that inquiries are held into how such money is used, and we would appreciate the support of Committee members’ to ensure that that motion reaches the Floor.

209. The Chairperson: We will take note of your comments on that matter. Thank you for your attendance, your presentations and your answers to our questions. If you wish to provide any further information as a consequence of today’s session, we will be happy to receive it.

210. I advise members that there has been a query about the audio recording, which, in places, has been barely audible. Is that just a problem for Hansard, or does it affect the wider network?

211. The Committee Clerk: I suggest that it is checked before we hear from any other witnesses. A paper relating to the next item on the agenda has been submitted. In the meantime, Members might wish to take a minute to consider that.

212. Mr Spratt: I wish to apologise for my late arrival. I was tied up in another meeting in the city centre.

213. The Chairperson: That is fine; we are glad to see you.

214. The Chairperson: This afternoon I welcome Clionagh Boyle and Dominic Bonner, who are joined by Gavin Melly, the young person who was involved in consultations during the development of the Lifetime Opportunities strategy, and his brother, Derrin. I hope that I have the pronunciation right, because those of us from south Armagh sometimes cannot pick up the intricacies of other regions.

215. Members are aware of your written submission, so I will ask you to make an opening statement and then be available for questions. Approximately 30 minutes has been allocated for the session, to which you are most welcome, and I thank you for attending.

216. Ms Clionagh Boyle (Derry Children’s Commission): Thank you for the invitation and the opportunity to give evidence to the inquiry. For the information of members of the Committee I will provide a brief background on each of us who make today’s presentation on behalf of Derry Children’s Commission.

217. I have worked with Derry Children’s Commission for the last six years in the field of children’s rights and, prior to that, for over 10 years with Derry Women’s Centre in women’s education and training, supporting disadvantaged women and their children, including young and lone parents, in access to education and employment.

218. Dominic Bonner heads the Commission’s flagship ‘Play for a Change’ project, which provides play opportunities for children right across the council area. Previously, Dominic had over 20 years experience in the youth sector, working with children and young people, mainly in the Bogside area, although he worked also with young travellers, and in cross-community and interface projects. Dominic has been key in supporting young people from disadvantaged areas to recognise and realise their potential.

219. Our third, and very important, speaker is Gavin Melly, who is an inspiring and positive role model for young people. When he was younger he became involved with Youth First in the Bogside, where he showed great initiative and leadership. For example, along with other young people he designed an award-winning game, called ‘Beat the Bully’, which provides excellent support for young people who experience bullying. Gavin is also a play worker on the Play for a Change project and will present the young person’s perspective on the issue, which is really important.

220. That is who we are. We are not statisticians and economists, so please do not ask us questions of that nature.

221. The Chairperson: You are particularly welcome on that basis. [Laughter.]

222. Ms Boyle: We do not know what you are going to ask us, but we will do our best to give reasonable answers. However, we do have considerable real experience of working directly with children, young people and families who are living in poverty.

223. We have given a brief outline of our presentation. We would have used PowerPoint; however, our facilities do not stretch to that. As background to the Derry Children’s Commission, our central ethos is about children’s rights and making children’s rights real. Those rights are not abstract things or notions. They should be the real experience of a child or young person. Poverty is one of the most persistent barriers to children or young people realising their rights, overcoming barriers and achieving their potential.

224. We are a community-led, inter-agency partnership, established in 1999. Our focus is on ensuring that children and young people have a voice in decisions that affect them. We are a small organisation. Our direct focus is with children who experience most disadvantage or exclusion; therefore, we focus on young people and children who experience poverty, as well as young people with disabilities, children from minority ethnic communities and young travellers. Our focus is on children who most need support and whose voice must be heard.

225. The Committee is aware that the levels of child and family poverty in the Derry City Council area are not only among the highest in the North of Ireland, but are among the highest in the UK.

226. We have supplied the Committee with copies of our report, entitled ‘Wise Up to Child Poverty’, which gives an overview of child poverty in the Derry City Council area — our area of benefit — and in the rest of Northern Ireland. Furthermore, it puts that in the context of comparative data from the UK and the Republic of Ireland and draws on international comparisons. The report shows that we actively engaged with children and young people as part of that research. We have given members copies of drawings from very young children who live in poverty which portray their notion of poverty. From the outset, I point out that the concept is not about how children and young people who live in poverty would describe themselves: it is a concept, for example, that they relate to children living in Africa. We will discuss how we should, perhaps, change the language that is used. Young people will not necessarily relate to that.

227. As part of the research into ‘Wise Up to Child Poverty’ we actively engaged the views of young people experiencing poverty. It was the only group of young people to engage directly with representatives from the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister on the issue of child poverty in the Lifetime Opportunities consultation and to put questions to them. That was a meaningful engagement process, and the young people prepared for the process for about six weeks before the meeting. They had a lot of time to think, to process the issues and to develop their perspectives. They wanted to develop the way in which they expressed those, and they did that in the form of a drama.

228. Another aspect of ‘Wise Up to Child Poverty’ is that it examines in particular the relationship between educational attainment and poverty, which is a crucial area. It examines comparative data at super-output-area level in the Derry City Council area, and clearly shows the correlation between disadvantage and lack of educational attainment.

229. Dominic will look a bit more at the impact of child poverty in the Derry City Council area and at educational disadvantage in particular.

230. Mr Dominic Bonner (Derry Children’s Commission): Evidence will show the importance of investment to deal with poverty. In 2007, Save the Children’s report on child poverty showed a picture that has not changed and indicated that the risk of living in poverty is 34% higher for children of families living in the west. In the Derry City Council area, 36% of children live in poverty, compared to an average of 24% in Northern Ireland.

231. Research has shown that children living in poverty are more likely to be in poor health, which — among other reasons — is due to a lack of sporting and play facilities, and a poor diet. Children living in poverty are more likely to be overweight: research from the Health Promotion Agency has shown that, at 12 years old, one third of boys and one quarter of girls carry excess weight, which will lead to future health problems such as diabetes, high blood pressure, and psychological problems such as low self-esteem and lack of self-confidence. Children from areas of high deprivation are less likely to be immunised, more likely to have poor dental health and more likely to have an accident — a 2005 report by the Chief Medical Officer indicates that the highest child death rates in Northern Ireland are in the Western Health and Social Services Board area, with 25% of those having been caused by accidents.

232. Young people living in deprived areas are more likely to be involved in teenage pregnancies. In 2006, 136 babies were born to teenage mothers — that is 29 out of 1,000 teenage girls aged 15-19, compared to a rate of 12·4 out of 1,000 in non-deprived areas of Northern Ireland.

233. Over the last few years, there has been an increase in the suicide rate among young people, many of whom come from deprived areas and suffer from depression, a lack of opportunities, unemployment and no support. Many of the peers of those who commit suicide follow in their footsteps.

234. Child poverty also has an impact on educational attainment. Derry has the highest proportion of young people who leave school with no qualifications — 9·35% compared to an average of 5·68% in Northern Ireland. Although there are some exceptions, children from poorer backgrounds generally do less well at school than their more affluent peers. For example, 17% of young people in Shantallow, which has a child-deprivation rate of 89%, achieved two or more A-levels. In contrast, 83% of young people in Pennyburn, where the child-deprivation rate is 18%, achieved two or more A-levels.

235. Research by the University of Ulster has shown that young people who attend disadvantaged schools have a more negative outlook on life compared to those who go to advantaged schools. The research also demonstrated that young people who attend advantaged schools are more positive about their school, aspire to go to university and have a more positive outlook on life. In contrast, children from disadvantaged areas are more inclined to leave school at a younger age and are more negative about school. One 10-year-old boy from a disadvantaged school told me:

“I hate school, I hate doing school work and I hate teachers shouting at me. If you don’t go to school your dad will end up going to jail.”

236. In contrast, a girl of the same age from an advantaged school was given a score of eight out of ten for attendance and recognised the importance of education and going to university.

237. The question of who needs to have a say is a vital part of the presentation. It is vital that children, young people and parents from disadvantaged areas are directly engaged throughout any consultation on child poverty. Young people from disadvantaged areas are less likely to engage with general youth participation structures than their better-off peers. The Derry Children’s Commission held ‘Pitch Out Poverty’ workshops in the Bogside and Brandywell areas, which was a six-week preparation programme before the consultation started, and it was long term rather than parachuted in. The group sat down with young people who were affected by poverty. The young people had to perform a drama showing educational and employment barriers. From past experience of working with many young people who live in poverty, we know that there are issues around not being able to afford certain clothing — for example school uniform.

238. As a matter of fact, many families do not go on family holidays or outings because of the cost that is involved.

239. I will now pass you over to Gavin, who will give a young person’s view.

240. Mr Gavin Melly (Derry Children’s Commission): During the consultation process, some of the young people commented that schools should offer more practical subjects that will help them get jobs such as hairdressing and plumbing. They also said that schools should listen to young people about what they want to learn and how they want to learn it. School can be very difficult, and some young people might learn better in a different set-up; education, including university, should be free. The dole keeps people poor, but given that it is hard to get off it, it should be made easier for people to do so. For example, a young person has told me that his mother told him to leave employment for the simple reason that he was better off on benefits.

241. Young people also said that free facilities and activities should be available for them, and that those who have left school without any qualifications should be encouraged to learn again. A 13-year-old girl from the Bogside area said:

“A lot of young people from this area do not even think about going to university, because it’s so expensive and hard to get in. People have to take out big loans to go to university. But now even going to school is getting expensive because you have to pay for school trips, stuff for home economics and now taxis because we don’t have a school bus anymore. My question for the government is: do you not think education should be free?”

242. The fact that education is not really free is supported by recent research in Wales that estimated that the average hidden cost of education is £1,300 for each child — that figure comes from research that was done in 2007 by the End Child Poverty Network Cymru.

243. Ms Boyle: If we look at where we go to deliver change for children and how we can meet those targets, our view is that it needs to be about delivering real change in children’s lives. We should not just describe what Departments or agencies are already doing; the change needs to have a child-focused outcome. It needs to be properly resourced, with clear, ring-fenced budgetary allocation across Departments. We need clear information on how the Programme for Government will deliver on the child poverty targets. The strategy needs to be implemented through a regional action plan — of course, coming from the west, we know the importance of regional targeting — and have measurable targets and timescales.

244. Poverty has an impact on absolutely every aspect of a child’s life, therefore our actions must be cross-departmental. For example, we must have the Departments of Education and Health working together, not separately, to address child poverty.

245. This issue falls within the Lifetime Opportunities strategy, in that we need to equip children with the skills to be citizens of tomorrow. That is all very well, and employability is an important issue, but children are citizens today, not just tomorrow, even though they will grow up. That means that they have needs today, therefore the anti-poverty emphasis needs to have a broader focus than employment and employability.

246. We also need to ensure that the key strategies, such as extended schools and Sure Start, actually reach those children who are most in need and are not driven merely by pressure to spend. That is very true where the extended schools strategy is concerned. Had it not for the urgency to spend or to roll-out the strategy, extended schools could have been much more clearly targeted to benefit those children who need it most. For example, something such as a breakfast club, which is a favoured option for an extended school, will not necessarily deliver to the most disadvantaged children. If you have a wee child whose parent, who may also have mental-health or alcohol problems compounded by poverty problems, has not got the wherewithal to get their child out the door at 8.15 am, which is earlier than they would normally leave for school, in the absence of a range of support systems, the chances of that child availing themselves of a breakfast club are minimal. Therefore, we need to ensure that the key strategies, such as extended schools and Sure Start, are actually reaching the most disadvantaged children. That is really important. If the strategies are driven by pressure to spend in a very short timescale and cannot be thought through, the chances of the strategies reaching those children are decreased.

247. Looking at how we can learn from what is happening elsewhere, last year’s UNICEF report on child well-being in rich countries indicated that the UK is ranked bottom, with the Netherlands, Sweden, and Denmark at the top. We have had opportunities to do some work, particularly with groups in the Netherlands, that has shown that higher Government spending on family and social benefits is clearly associated with lower child poverty rates. Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY), Department of Finance and Personnel (DFP) and OFMDFM research showed that 14% of the personal and social services budget was spent on children in Northern Ireland, compared to 24% in England, and 26% in Wales.

248. The UNICEF research shows that no country that allocates 10% or more of its GDP to social transfers — benefits for families, children, and so forth — has child poverty rates of higher than 10%. Conversely, no country that allocates less than 5% of its GDP to social transfers has a child poverty rate of less than 15%. Therefore, the correlation is clear.

249. In Northern Ireland, a child’s educational attainment is linked directly to his or her father’s educational status and income. Experience in Denmark has shown that by investing in children’s services it is possible to break that cycle.

250. Our experience of working with our partners in the Netherlands is that, in contrast to Northern Ireland, they have a clear practical, strong commitment to cross-sectoral, interagency and cross-departmental working. When I visited the very deprived Poptahof neighbourhood, which is just outside Delft, I saw stunning examples of educationalists working with road services engineers, health workers and other parts of the public sector. Such joined-up working ensured collaboration on, for example, reducing child accident death rates, which, as Dominic said, are of concern. I found such work in the Netherlands highly impressive: there is no silo mentality, and agencies clearly work together. We could learn from that interdepartmental approach.

251. Gavin will conclude the presentation by detailing how we want to communicate to young people our commitment to addressing child poverty.

252. Mr Melly: We must send young people a message of hope, rather than one of doom and gloom. For example, as I drove through a wee town in Canada on my holiday, I saw a sign in a local shop that said that 73% of the town’s citizens were volunteers. Every time that someone mentions that town to me now, that sign comes straight to my mind. Rather than sending out negative messages to young people about what they cannot do, we must instil positive messages into their minds.

253. To keep telling young people about the barriers they face becomes depressing. Young people do not see, or describe, themselves as living in poverty even if they are. A different way to talk about poverty must be found. We must believe in young people and celebrate their positive efforts in the community. Secure funding must be found for the good youth and community projects to ensure that they are not constantly struggling to survive. Most importantly, we must listen to what young people want.

254. The Chairperson: Thank you very much indeed, Gavin, for your final piece of advice to us and for your earlier presentation. I also thank Clionagh and Dominic. Committee members will now put questions to you.

255. Mr Shannon: Thank you very much.

256. The Chairperson: The same rule of a one-question limit applies.

257. Mr Shannon: I suspected that would be the case, which is the reason that the Chairperson mentioned it.

258. Your presentation showed that you are aware both of the needs of young people and of child poverty in what I call the Maiden City. With that in mind, and, given your involvement with young people, have your efforts reduced the level of child poverty in the Maiden City? That question is not meant to be critical, but I would like to know. Has there been a significant change in the numbers of children with whom you are involved? If so, that is good news, but, if not, what more do you need to do to reduce child poverty to a level that we, as a Committee, and indeed the Assembly, are all committed to trying to achieve?

259. Ms Boyle: Thank you for your question. I will start by clarifying that ours is a small organisation, and we secure our resources from, for example, charitable trusts. We also receive small amounts of funding from our interagency partners. We are an advocacy body, and, therefore, we are concerned with lobbying for change rather than being involved in service delivery.

260. Our organisation is not tasked with reducing child poverty as such. Perhaps behind your question is whether, given our awareness-raising work, we have seen measurable changes. From where I am sitting, the change to ensure that there is investment in children in the west must come from the highest level of Government. That is the single most important way to address child poverty. It is therefore important that that investment is targeted in ways that will reach the most disadvantaged children.

261. Aspects of Mr Shannon’s question are interesting. The situation in the west would be worse were it not for the excellent work taking place in the community and voluntary sector and in childcare and youth projects. I am concerned that if all of the activity is piecemeal, sometimes fragmented and dependent on short-term funding, it will be difficult to make a long-term impact on the children’s lives. What chance will we have of making a difference in the children’s lives and changing their education and health outcomes? We will have no chance. Investment must come from both levels: action and investment in children must come from the Government; and the targeting of the funding to those who need it most must come from the lower levels, which should also ensure that the money is used through the proper interventions. Sure Start is an example of such an initiative. A neighbourhood renewal manager in my local area told me that Sure Start — a bottom-up led initiative — is successful. Even health professionals recognise that the community development approach works, but that approach is under threat in our city and in other areas of the North.

262. Mr Shannon: Some of your work addresses child poverty issues. I appreciate that you receive resources from charitable organisations and that the Government has a broad brush approach to funding. However, some of your actions are addressing child poverty. Has your work succeeded in reducing child poverty in the small section of the city in which you are working?

263. Ms Boyle: We produce information on advocacy and research, and we published ‘Wise Up to Child Poverty — an information guide for decision makers’. In working on that publication, we discovered that community groups and youth groups were using our information and research to draw down resources for their groups. Therefore we have been able to provide community groups and youth groups with the information that they require to lever resources. Not all voluntary youth groups have access to that type of information, so one can bring change in that way.

264. We are an interagency partnership, so we constantly work with the health boards, Derry City Council and the public-sector bodies in our area to influence change in how they think and to address issues. Under the review of public administration, for example, councils will have an increased responsibility for localised poverty issues. There will, therefore, be relevance there.

265. Mrs D Kelly: Thank you for your presentation. Dominic referred to education and the advantaged and disadvantaged schools. Are those schools defined by whether their pupils are successful in the 11-plus? Gavin said that there should be a better way of defining child poverty, because people do not see themselves as living in poverty. I understand that, because many people look to their television screens and think that they are well-off compared to those in African countries. How do you redefine child poverty?

266. Mr Bonner: There are many reasons why children who live in poverty have a negative outlook on life, and one of the main reasons is their environment. They carry that negativity with them from primary to secondary school and all their lives. However, it can depend on which school a child moves to. There is a stigma attached to some schools in the city 90% of whose pupils are entitled to free school meals. Some people see those schools as schools to which only the disadvantaged from the Bogside and Brandywell go. Nobody else wants to send their children to those schools, or children do not want to go. Performance in the 11-plus is not the deciding factor in how schools are described. There are a number of issues that decide that categorisation, but the children are brought up in poverty from a young age, and they carry that through their lives.

267. Mr Melly: I mentioned the positive messages that I saw in a small town in Canada. I am thinking of securing funding and getting a group of young people to erect billboards, for instance, at Free Derry Corner that will display positive messages to young people. When I was young, I created a board game on bullying, for which we secured funding. We won several awards in the United Kingdom and here for that game, and we distributed 400 board games, free, across Northern Ireland. One hundred games have been translated into Irish.

268. The media would need to put across a positive message as well. We were all 13 years of age, and it was a big thing for us. We were all approached to go on a local TV show, but at the last minute we received a telephone call saying that we had been dropped because a local celebrity had arrived in the town. The media need to control the negative aspects and put out a positive image.

269. Mrs D Kelly: The media are listening and perhaps they will hear that message from Gavin.

270. The Chairperson: It was very clearly said.

271. Ms Boyle: It is a crucial point. If we continually lambaste children, young people and parents with negative images and statistics it will destroy hope, belief and esteem in young people. We need to do the opposite of that.

272. Ms Anderson: I thank all the witnesses, especially since you are talking about an area that I know well. It is important to refer to places like the Fountain that object to poverty and deprivation. The witnesses have been doing a lot of work in such areas.

273. Clionagh’s point that children are today’s citizens, as opposed to “citizens of tomorrow”, is crucial. It makes an impact. As a society, we do not view children in that way.

274. One aspect that is worth considering is the big investment conference due to take place in the North in May. In the past, investment has followed investment. However, the Committee has looked at the Strategic Investment Board and has considered where investment should be located. It has argued that regional disparities should be tackled. Obviously, areas across the North, including the north-west, have been neglected for a number of years. That is worth keeping an eye on, and challenging.

275. All that Gavin said left an impression on me. This morning I was interviewed on this topic by Radio Foyle. A comment was made that there is a belief in our city, and across the North, that the cross-party political will to address this issue does not exist. That is not the experience of this Committee.

276. I want to send out a hopeful message, even though we must unpack this concept, and, in doing so, we will hear what child poverty is like to live with and how it impacts upon rights in general and children’s rights in particular. That is why I argue for a Bill of Rights. The Committee has, however, sent out a positive message by carrying out the first inquiry into child poverty. The political will to tackle it is evident across the board and across the Committee Table, and it is not just confined to the Committee; it is also found in the Chamber.

277. We are all grappling with how to address child poverty at the moment. We are considering how best to deliver outcomes. Jim Shannon was focusing on the witnesses’ work. He asked what you were doing, how you were delivering and whether you could measure outcomes. Are there other initiatives and programmes that you are aware of, which, given greater priority and more support, would deliver for Derry and people across the North? The statistics that we have been given throughout the inquiry are alarming: scandalous situations exist, as you know. You are the people at the coalface.

278. Ms Boyle: The member has made a range of relevant points. Allow me to clarify a couple of things. Some of the examples that we have used reflect the work that we have done with Youthfirst in the Bogside. However, that is by no means the only area where we work; we work throughout the council area.

279. One of the issues raised in ‘Wise Up To Child Poverty - an information guide for decision makers’ is that there are some areas of deprivation where young people are doing surprisingly well, in spite of high levels of deprivation. At the moment we are seeking resources to explore that further.

280. There is a differential in two areas of the city side, Ballynashallog and Shantallow West, and in two areas of the Waterside, Clondermot and Victoria. Further exploration of that differential must be carried out in order to determine why young people in those areas do better in spite of the odds than others. That pattern can be seen in both the city side and the Waterside. Therefore, it is absolutely not the case that it is only found in one section of the community. Children and young people live in poverty throughout the city council area.

281. Citizenship is important. At present, poverty strategies focus on employability and on getting young people into jobs. We tend to forget that childhood is short. That a child’s parent has a low income or an alcohol or mental-health problem does not mean that he or she does not deserve the same opportunities as the next child. We must be clear about children’s rights. Children have rights from birth. They are citizens, as has already been pointed out.

282. With regard to investment in the west, the previous submission pointed out that not only are jobs needed, but they must also be of good quality. For example, as a student, my son got a part-time job in one of the call centres that were set up in the west. It is the type of job that we are encouraged to get excited about. It was OK for a student. However, not long into the job, my son’s shifts changed to 4.00 pm to 11.00 pm. I could not help but wonder how a lone parent would have dealt with that sudden change in shift. Therefore, it must be ensured that the type of jobs that are created will be suitable for people who have families and will be an incentive to get them out of the benefit trap.

283. A range of education matters must be considered, such as how education is working well at community level. It is not just the education system that delivers education. Sometimes, when young people fall out of mainstream education, they need alternatives. They need to be educated in a context that suits them better. We have seen evidence of that in our area. For example, young people have been actively engaged in a project in Shantallow that has examined other options, such as sport, through which they can be involved and connected with education. Therefore, a range of innovative, outside-the-box approaches must be considered. If the same old approaches are replicated, the same old outcomes will occur year after year. The commission does not want that.

284. The Chairperson: Thank you very much indeed.

285. Mr Elliott: As someone who also comes from the west — the real west of the Province, Fermanagh —

286. Mrs D Kelly: The wild west.

287. Mr Elliott: — I am interested in youth facilities, which were referred to briefly. I wonder how much work has been done through interaction between youth facilities and agencies in order to bring young people of different age groups together through, for example, sport, career opportunities, volunteering opportunities, social opportunities, and so on. How much work is being done and how successful is it? I have noticed that, sometimes, poorly managed or poorly controlled services can be more detrimental to young people than if they were not provided at all. What is the situation in Londonderry?

288. Ms Boyle: My colleagues will want to speak on that issue; particularly Mr Melly, who has strong views on the nature of youth services. The commission has consulted over 3,000 children and young people during the past three years. Facilities and services always come at the top of their list. In fact, play and the lack of opportunities for it always come at the top of young children’s lists. So, too, does the lack of opportunities for young people to socialise. I imagine that Mr Melly can provide a good example of the fact that mainstream and resourced facilities do not always attract young people. Alternatives must be examined, such as those facilities that are not mainstream but manage to engage with young people.

289. Mr Melly: I have certain views on youth facilities. Throughout my life, I attended different youth clubs. I switched from one to another. Now that I work with young people, I can see that they are doing exactly the same activities that children were doing when I attended youth clubs — football every night or snooker; that is it. It is no wonder that young people do not access the facilities any more — they get nothing out of them.

290. What I was trying to say is that young people go to school wanting to learn an instrument or drama but it is very dear — £10 or £15 for a half hour. Why do youth facilities not provide such classes out of their budget and attract people with them? Currently they are doing the same old crap day in, day out. [Laughter.]

291. The Chairperson: I think Hansard got that recorded all right. [Laughter.]

292. Mr Bonner: To start on a negative point, before leading to a positive part of the project; youth facilities across the north-west are all under-resourced in such a way that most have only two workers, so that if a youth worker is off sick, the centre has to close down. In deprived or disadvantaged areas, these facilities are one of the main resources during summer time, when children are off school. I talked earlier about a lot of families not getting holidays — this is what such families rely on. Each year the Government cuts the youth budget, and youth facilities are at the bottom of the education budget. We get youth intervention money coming in now and again to youth facilities — it comes in a bit too late, a month before a programme is delivered — but it is the lack of resources that is causing big problems. As Clionagh said, in one of the consultations which has been done with 3,000 young people in the city, the issue of play was top of their concerns. Therefore, Derry Children’s Commission — through an inter-agency partnership with Derry City Council, the North West Regional College, St Columb’s Park, and the Playtrail — put together a proposal to meet the needs of these young people and to develop the Play for A Change project. This project brings young people from disadvantaged backgrounds — regardless of their culture or religion — to a shared space to play; not to sit and discuss religion, politics, or their backgrounds. The project gives young people their right to play. The programme has been running quite successfully since April of last year, and we are in the process of building an adventure playground in St Columb’s Park in the Waterside, which is just one example of a number of projects that we are hoping to implement which would tackle some of the issues relating to poverty, such as poor health or children being overweight.

293. Ms Boyle: I think it is important to point out that there is not a necessarily a correlation between play deprivation and social deprivation, and I think there is something hopeful about that. A child from an affluent background can be very play deprived, because they can be sitting behind a computer or at a playstation, or not allowed to play in the street. A child from a poorer background can actually have quite a rich play life given the right circumstances, and we believe in the importance of working at play; actually having people out there engaging with children, encouraging them to play, sometimes using only very basic materials. We do not need state of the art theme parks, we just need the basic materials and the will to get children out into the natural environment, or into the urban environment for street play. So, on a hopeful note, not all of these interventions cost a fortune. Supporting children to have good play opportunities takes a certain amount of resourcing and creativity, but it does not involve massive costs and can make a huge difference in a child’s life. Play will impact on every aspect of a child’s life in a positive way, and play deprivation will impact in a negative way. So, I think that promoting opportunities for play is one area that we would see as a really hopeful intervention for younger children that really needs more resources. It does not take a fortune.

294. The Chairperson: Thank you very much indeed, and thank you for your insight, ideas, your presentation and for answering the questions with such clarity. If you have any other information that you want to submit to us we would be happy to receive it. Thank you for your attention this afternoon.

295. Ms Boyle: Thank you very much for the opportunity.

296. The Chairperson: The Clerk wants to advise members for the suggested timetable for future oral evidence sessions, including a potential meeting outside Parliament Buildings. Hansard have now completed their work. I thank them very much indeed: I hope you got all the words, I look forward to reading it.

23 January 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mrs Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Ms Martina Anderson
Mrs Dolores Kelly
Mr Barry McElduff
Mr Francie Molloy
Mr Stephen Moutray
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jimmy Spratt
Mr Jim Wells

Witnesses:

Mr Derek Alcorn
Ms Lucy Cochrane

Citizens Advice

Mr Kevin Higgins

Advice NI

Mr Ross McCrea

NCH Northern Ireland

Ms Natalie Whelehan

Children’s Law Centre

Ms Margaret Deevy

Playboard

Mr David Carroll
Mr Tony McQuillan

Voluntary Sector Housing Policy Forum

Ms Frances Dowds

Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network

Mr Peter Kenway

New Policy Institute

Mr Kevin Doherty

Disability Action

297. The Chairperson (Mr Kennedy): Good morning, and welcome to this session of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister. My name is Danny Kennedy, and members’ names — many of which are already household names — are in front of them. Welcome to Kevin Higgins, from Advice NI, and Lucy Cochrane and Derek Alcorn from Citizens Advice. We look forward to listening to what they have to say, which will be followed by an opportunity for members to ask questions. We expect this evidence session to last for approximately half an hour.

298. Mr Kevin Higgins (Advice NI): Advice NI made a submission in November and has sent additional evidence in advance of this session. I will concentrate on what we consider to be two key child-poverty issues: benefit uptake and the uptake of free school meals by children from low income families.

299. Advice NI has been involved in benefit-uptake matters since 2005-06, when we were engaged with the Social Security Agency in pilot exercises targeting a relatively small number of people— just over 2,000. Those exercises generated approximately £400,000 in arrears and £500,000 in awards for people who had not been accessing their benefit entitlement. In 2006-07, the Social Security Agency rolled that programme out via a tender exercise, and we won one of the tenders. The whole 2006-07 exercise generated approximately £6 million in benefits for some of the most vulnerable people in Northern Ireland. In 2007-08, the Social Security Agency again put the issue of unclaimed benefits in Northern Ireland out to tender.

300. There are some issues that we want to highlight relating to benefit uptake. As the exercise progresses, we recommend that remuneration costs should be reviewed — both central administration costs for organisations such as Advice NI and costs for providers on the ground in order to sustain and deliver the work of checking benefits and helping people to fill in social-security claim forms.

301. Advice NI advocates a longer-term commitment to Social Security Agency benefit-uptake contracts. Currently, that is a year-on-year exercise, with particular tenders lasting for only three months at a time. We suggest that there should be a long-term commitment over, say, a three-year period, in which benefit-uptake work could be carried out continuously on a month-by-month basis.

302. We also believe that the method of benefit-uptake work is as important as what is done. Currently, trawling databases and sending out letters is the sole mechanism used by the Social Security Agency. We understand that there is only a 50% response rate for that method — 50% of people do not respond to letters from the agency. We have developed various alternative methodologies, including engagement with key champions — people in the community — to encourage people to come forward and undertake benefit checks. We invite and ask the agency to explore other such methodologies.

303. Incidentally, Northern Ireland Electricity is also involved in benefit-uptake work, and it is keen to explore alternative methodologies. A recent evaluation exercise showed that such methods work, and we are eager to push them forward.

304. Finally on that issue, the Social Security Agency needs to prepare the ground for benefit uptake. Today, in the press, there were stories about the agency not doing enough to combat benefit fraud. That puts off many people who should be claiming full benefit entitlements. We have come across many people for whom we have identified benefit entitlements but who will not pursue them because they are afraid of doing something wrong.

305. Advice NI understands that there are approximately 60,000 children in Northern Ireland receiving free school meals. I do not think that there has been any robust research, but Adrian Kennedy — head of administration and management in the Western Education and Library Board — informs me that an additional 10% of children are not accessing their free-school-meal entitlement. We are calling for work on ensuring that children from low income families may access free school meals and thereby have access to proper diets. Those children could be guaranteed at least one good meal, five days a week.

306. There should also be a streamlining of the administrative and application processes, whereby people could be deemed to be in until they opt out. The claims process for school meals and the take-up of free school meals could be much improved.

307. Benefit uptake — for children, particularly — and free school meals for children are the two issues that I want to raise today.

308. The Chairperson: I acknowledge the attendance of junior Minister Ian Paisley. Thank you for your attendance, and I am pleased that you are with us.

309. Ms Lucy Cochrane (Citizens Advice): Citizens Advice made a number of recommendations in its written submission, the first of which related to the administration of tax credits. There are issues around that, because it is administered by HM Revenue and Customs, which is UK-wide. However, there are problems, and tax credits are approaching their fifth birthday. This is one of our largest policy issues. We have received evidence from clients relating to the administration of tax credits, problems with overpayments, and a range of other issues that are included in our appendix.

310. A recent report by Citizens Advice UK stated that one third of crisis loans that are borrowed from the Department for Social Development or the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) in GB are required due to delays in the administration of tax credits. That is a high figure. Citizens Advice recommends that more needs to be done on the administration of tax credits at a Northern Ireland level; we have recommended the formation of an all-party working group on that. On numerous occasions, we have suggested that there be better customer contact at Northern Ireland level. To date, that has not been rectified. The Northern Ireland office was closed in 2005.

311. We have also looked at childcare provision. Many of the issues around child poverty arise from people being prevented from returning to work because of childcare commitments. That is a significant problem for people on lower income levels and tax-credit claimants. There are many obstacles for parents, particularly lone parents. There are issues with having relatives look after their children, and there are problems relating to waiting lists and getting registered childminders. Therefore, we recommend that that be streamlined and standardised.

312. We also recommend that more resources be focused on financial capability. The Department for Social Development should look into disability living allowance (DLA) claims for children, because we are getting evidence from DLA claimants that it takes a long time for claims to be processed and appeals listed.

313. We carried out an online survey of parents who have school expenses, and we recommend that that be addressed. Grants for uniforms, or the eligibility criteria for those grants, should be increased.

314. Mr Derek Alcorn (Citizens Advice): The Social Security Agency’s model of contracting for benefit take-up is two or three years old, and we welcomed it because the agency has a database of families with high social need. For example, because retirement pension is claimed by almost 100% of those entitled to it, the agency has the names and addresses of every elderly person in Northern Ireland. The agency can, therefore, focus in and target. At present, we are doing a benefit take-up contract with the agency. It has written to families with three or more children and to families with a child on DLA. They have put families through those filters and sent 5,000 families a letter stating that they may be entitled to extra benefit and should contact Citizens Advice.

315. That model is well ahead of anything that has been done in GB; it is an innovative business model. We have publicly welcomed it on a number of occasions, because it is easy to understand, the agency itself can verify the outcomes and it is not expensive. The agency will produce a report by March that will show how much extra benefit has been claimed per pound spent. I recommend that model, and you may wish to talk to the agency about it. We have welcomed it enormously.

316. I want to draw your attention to a report published by DWP, where they were not meeting the child-poverty targets. It is a specialist report, written by Lisa Harker, and we have included the executive summary of that in our evidence. She makes a number of specific points about helping people into work, helping them stay there and helping them through the transition that that entails. The detailed points are in the appendix that I have given you, so I am not going to repeat them. She also makes recommendations for adjustments to benefits, etc, which is obviously a matter for the Westminster Government.

317. That report is geared towards tackling the issue of child poverty, and it concentrates particularly on the way to help people into work, and what flexibility and support they can be given to take them off benefits and help them to stay in work.

318. Mr Shannon: I apologise for being late. I missed some of your contribution at the beginning, but I heard you mention free milk. How do you see getting that milk to the people who really need it? What system do you have in mind that could deliver free milk to those suffering from poverty? I have a couple of questions, and that is the first one.

319. Mr Higgins: I have spoken to Adrian Kennedy in the Western Education and Library Board, who is also the chairperson of the Northern Ireland group on free school meals and clothing allowances. He and I are committed to addressing the issue of the non-uptake of the entitlement to free school meals, and of any other allowances that low income families could receive but are not, for whatever reason.

320. The benefit-uptake work that the Social Security Agency has undertaken has shown that the advice sector can play a role. We could be invited to promote uptake of those allowances, but more important is the application processes that people have to go through — for free school meals, for example — when the Social Security Agency holds the information on all those families and the benefits that they are claiming. That can be a barrier. There could be more data-sharing behind the scenes. There is a lot of data-sharing between the Social Security Agency and HM Revenue and Customs for the purpose of verifying incomes. Data-sharing could be very positive between the educational boards and the Social Security Agency to ensure that families and children at school receive all their entitlements. That would cause little or no expense, but would streamline and improve the sharing of information for the good of low income families and children living in poverty.

321. Mr Shannon: I was interested in your comment on the filling-in of forms. I agree with you, because the forms are almost prohibitive. We need a system in which forms do not have to be filled in, but which delivers free milk to those who are entitled to it. Whether it is the education board, through the schools, or the Social Security Agency, we need a system that does not involve form-filling.

322. Mr Higgins: As well as filling in that form, people have to go their local social security office to get another form or to get verification that they are on certain benefits. Those are all barriers to people accessing what are their full and free entitlements. There should be a review of those barriers and how they can be removed. I agree with you.

323. The Chairperson: There is growing evidence that quite a lot of families — for reasons of social status — do not avail themselves of free school meals. How do you address that?

324. Mr Higgins: It can be approached in a variety of ways. As a starting point, why not have free school meals for all? A Child Poverty Action Group campaign advocating that approach has been rolled out across the country from London. Obviously, there would be financial implications. However, one could compartmentalise it; for example, one could have free school meals for children in P1 to P3. Children of that age do not consider the social status aspects of one child paying for school meals while another does not. It could be looked at on a smaller scale.

325. On a smaller scale again — if one wishes to continue with the current system — one could ensure that people who are entitled to free school meals actually claim them. I am aware of one particular school where those children who pay get a certain colour of ticket and children who get free school meals get another colour. In that way, children who get free school meals are identified and there is, perhaps, a stigma attached to that.

326. In another school, all the children have a pass that they swipe on entering the school canteen. Therefore, no one knows what the child’s family income is or whether the child is receiving a free school meal. Again, there might be financial implications to that system. It is not beyond the wit of school authorities to come up with a system that does not discourage children from accessing an entitlement because of a stigma that is attached to it. There must be ways around that.

327. Mr McElduff: I will forgo asking my question, because the information that I was seeking was provided by Mr Higgins when he talked about the need to streamline information with the Social Security Agency.

328. Ms Anderson: I thank the witnesses for their presentation and their attendance at today’s Committee meeting. On the way to the Assembly, I listened to ‘The Stephen Nolan Show’ — as, perhaps, many others did. During that programme, Steven Nolan talked about south Belfast and the Village area. I was conscious of how the levels of child poverty have affected that area, as they have other areas across the North.

329. Mr Higgins talked about the trawling of data and sending out of letters, and the resultant 50% uptake in entitlements. Mr Alcorn talked about how successful the benefit uptake model has been. I was wondering about those two statements. Mr Higgins, you mentioned engaging with key champions and working with the community for benefit uptake. Were you advocating that attention should be paid to that? How successful was that? Perhaps it has been feeding in to the success that Mr Alcorn referred to.

330. Mr Alcorn: I was trying to say that the benefit uptake model is quite a radical departure for the agency and that it is in its infancy. It has happened in the past couple of years. Coming out to the advice sector and engaging with us in that way has been a big change in their business model. It has been successful in monetary terms and in the amount of benefits claimed per pound spent. The ratio might be 20:1. Although it is highly successful, it is not the only model.

331. The big thing that the agency brings into play is its database. It is sitting on an enormous database of names and addresses of people who are in social need. As part of the child poverty exercise which we are currently undertaking, the agency was able to identify, and write to, families with three or more children and families with a child who is on DLA No one else in Northern Ireland else has that information and the capacity to do that.

332. I imagine that that model will evolve. The agency could also, for example, write to pensioners who are receiving retirement pension but not pension credit. There is enormous potential in the proactive use of that database. In the past three years, rather than saying that that is entirely our job, the agency has engaged with us by means of contracts. It is an innovative model and could be built on. However, it is not the only model. I am flagging up the fact that it presents a big change, and one which we welcome. It is rolling forward because it is so efficient.

333. The agency can verify the results from its own records, so it will be able to give the Committee a report on its child-poverty exercise by March or April. That does not in any way exclude the use of other methods — social workers; health visitors; people in the community. Those methods have served the advice sector well for over 20 years.

334. Ms Anderson: By gathering the evidence, targeting individuals and measuring outcomes, we can tell whether there has been any impact on people’s lives. It is reminiscent of the equality impact assessment process, which we have argued is necessary if outcomes are to change. In that way, we can measure whether a policy or programme is delivering on the ground.

335. Mr Alcorn: The model that has evolved at the agency over the last three years does that.

336. Mr Higgins: Although Advice NI totally welcomes the Social Security Agency’s approach, the statistics show that a whole swathe of people are not being reached, so we advise the agency not to rest on its laurels. It is great that the approach is successful, and that methodology should be kept in place, but for the 50% of people for whom it is not working, our advice is to keep going — keep exploring, innovating and proposing other methodologies. For example, the benefit uptake work that we have done with Northern Ireland Electricity has been shown to work. We hope to reach as many of those hard-to-reach people as possible.

337. Ms Anderson: The evidence is there, but the targeting is also important. You can actually reach those most hard-to-reach people through more engagement with stakeholders in the community.

338. Mr Higgins: The Social Security Agency can send letters to 100% of those who are eligible for benefits, but if only 50% respond — whether it is because the letter is an official letter, or for whatever reason — then they are not being given sufficient encouragement to come forward and claim the benefits. Therefore, other means must be explored, too.

339. Mrs D Kelly: My question is about the working poor and, in particular, the tax-credit system. What has your experience been of the removal of the HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) customer-care facility in Northern Ireland, and how do you feel about the absence of a Northern Ireland-specific tax-credit centre?

340. Ms Cochrane: It has been problematic since the customer-care services were removed in 2005. We have provided a great deal of evidence to HMRC and to the Treasury subcommittee on the complex issues with which Northern Ireland families are faced. The difficulty is that HMRC is so fragmented. Whether one is debt collection, overpayments, administration, fresh claims or compliance, it is very difficult for an experienced adviser, let alone a member of the public, to get through to HMRC and have their case dealt with. Many HMRC offices are located in different parts of England, which means that customers in Northern Ireland are even more isolated and find it even more difficult to get their queries dealt with.

341. Until 2005, there were specialist HMRC support workers in Belfast, and they dealt with complex and difficult cases. We have requested that those posts be reinstated, but HMRC has taken the line that because England, Wales and Scotland do not have their own dedicated centres, why should we? We still do not feel that that is a satisfactory answer, and we feel that more sway from people in Northern Ireland, especially from politicians, would make the process easier, particularly when dealing with very difficult cases. As I said earlier, the tax-credit system is the biggest social-policy issue for our clients.

342. Mrs D Kelly: All of our constituency offices get a lot of contact about tax credits, particularly as regards overpayments. It is driving people to distraction.

343. Mr Alcorn: When the customer-care centre was based in Belfast, we had specific phone numbers and fax lines, and direct access to customer advisers, but all of those services have been removed to Liverpool. There is a strong case for pressing HMRC to bring that facility back to Northern Ireland.

344. The Chairperson: Is there any clear evidence that we are worse off than other regions of the UK in that respect?

345. Ms Cochrane: As I have said, the tax-credit system is the biggest issue coming through to Citizens Advice. The national statistics show that it is a bigger issue in Northern Ireland, from our point of view. Statistically, more households per population claim tax credits in Northern Ireland than the rest of the UK, so that is an issue for families here.

346. Mr Molloy: Advice and support are important for dealing with how to get out of child poverty. On that basis, are there particularly critical times when families require benefit and support? One of the achievements that we hope that will come out of the inquiry is that legislation will be changed to allow for easier access, and that benefits will be more constructive for families. How would you change the legislation, particularly on tax credits, to prevent people from getting into debt? The tax-credit system is supposed to take people out of debt, but it seems to be putting more families into debt than taking them out of it. The issue of legislation is very important. The grant and loan schemes are largely used to support families at certain times. Would it be of more benefit to introduce a bonus scheme that would be available to all families, rather than requiring people to fill out countless forms to get grants or support in that situation?

347. Mr Higgins: In our submission, we said that an examination could be made of the social fund. There is currently a grant system and a budgeting loan system. Although the loans are interest-free, they are paid back through deductions from a person’s benefit. The benefit is supposed to be the minimum amount that should be coming into that household in the first place, so people are being pushed further into poverty as they try to meet their week-to-week expenses.

348. The critical points for low income families with children are to do with school, as well as birthdays and Christmas. At those times, people will try to access credit through traditional registered sources or, if they cannot get it there, they will find other means, which may be through their families or through unscrupulous lenders. I agree that the social fund could be used at times when low income families need help. One must be on means-tested benefits to be able to access the social fund. Work could be done on that but, as it stands, it is hit and miss whether one will get the payment or whether one will get a grant or a loan.

349. As we said earlier, the Social Security Agency holds information on the birthdays of children. It would be a great step forward to introduce a guarantee that, without applying for it, a person would receive a grant — like the winter fuel payment that is made to older people. Birthdays and Christmas are the key times. If the issues of free school meals and clothing for schools were resolved, that would also be a great step forward.

350. Mr Moutray: I apologise for being late. I am divided between two Committees this morning.

351. Mr Alcorn, can anything be done by the Executive to address the issue of irresponsible lending?

352. Mr Alcorn: We are close to the point where we would feel that the finance industry should be regulated, in much the same way that utilities are regulated. Citizens Advice runs a contract for money advice with the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, and, during that contract, we have dealt with £15 million of debt, 50% of which came from credit cards, store cards or bank loans. With Northern Rock, people were lent multiples of their salary and offered 100% mortgages. A huge avalanche of credit has been offered to people; they have been given second, third and fourth credit cards when they should never have got the first one. Therefore, our agency is close to the point of saying publicly that the financial industry should be regulated as closely as the utilities.

353. The Chairperson: As organisations, what changes do you feel should be made to the registration system for childcare to encourage parents to take up employment opportunities?

354. Ms Cochrane: The length of time it takes for an interested party to become a childminder is not consistent — it can vary between three months and a year. There should be a full investigation into what is delaying what should be a relatively straightforward process. I believe that there are protocols that must be observed and POCVA checks that must be carried out. However, a huge number of people are interested in going into childcare and may have started the process but were put off by the enormous amount of red tape involved. I recommend that a full investigation be carried out into why the process takes so long and what is delaying it.

355. Mr Higgins: When people on benefits, especially lone parents, are asked to state the barrier that is preventing them from moving into employment, access to affordable, accessible childcare is consistently at the top of the list of answers. I agree with Ms Cochrane that there are opportunities for new business start-ups to be generated to help address the lack of childcare facilities in Northern Ireland. All of the checks should be in place; however, it should not be the case that they cause a bottleneck, taking months to be carried out, and preventing all this from happening. In many ways, it is the application process, the administration and the behind-the-scenes work that need to be examined. Correcting those may not take a huge financial outlay, but it will have a great impact in progressing childcare initiatives in Northern Ireland.

356. Ms Anderson: In view of the answers to Mrs Kelly’s question, there seems to be a need for a fundamental review of the tax credit system. The Committee should call for a moratorium on repayments in cases where tax credit has been overpaid to low income families. Such families have been put under undue pressure, through no fault of their own, because the system made a fundamental mistake in overpaying them.

357. Those people did not realise that they had been overpaid; and they are now being faced with having to try to make repayments, which impacts on a family budget that should be spent on feeding their children. The problem could be rectified at the stroke of a pen, if we could get ministerial approval. The Committee should recommend, as a result of child poverty inquiry, that there is a moratorium on repayments in cases in which tax credit has been overpaid to low income families through no fault of their own.

358. The Chairperson: There may be an issue in that that power is not devolved, and may not be in the gift of the Assembly.

359. Ms Anderson: The Committee discussed this matter at an earlier meeting, and members were told that it was within the Minister’s gift to waive repayment when an individual was not at fault.

360. Mr McElduff: The facility is underused. The Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister has responsibility, in the Executive, for liaising on reserved and excepted matters. Members often hear the excuse that something is not a devolved matter. However, on an issue such as this, the Committee should press the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister to liaise with the NIO.

361. Mr Shannon: I would like to think that Mr McElduff is right, however, I submitted two questions to the Minister this week on tax credits and was told that because tax is not a devolved matter the Department could not respond. I suspect that we may not get the answer we want.

362. In relation to what Ms Anderson said, some of my constituents have told me that they completed the forms correctly, or so they thought. However, I spoke to a person last week who had been overpaid £5,500. To start with, the forms are not easy to complete, and people need advice on how to fill them in. In some cases, a wee box must be ticked: and if the applicant does not tick that box, he or she may find that after receiving a year’s payments an official will phone to say that a mistake has been made.

363. The system is sluggish and does not help people, and people need advice and help. Perhaps an adviser could be made available to talk people through the filling in of application forms.

364. What we need, and I think that you will agree, Mr McCrea, is a radical overhaul of a system that has failed the people. Indeed, it has put them deep into debt. You mentioned earlier that people could apply for loans, but that is only a short-term fix, and people must still struggle with the long-term repayments. I would suggest that recommendation, which is within the remit of the Committee. The tax credit system has failed the people.

365. Ms Anderson: During a briefing from civil servants, the Committee was told that there was scope in the ministerial remit for a Minister to address an issue if the fault did not lie with the recipient. Therefore, it may not be that this issue cannot be addressed because it is not a transferred matter: there may be some scope to ask for that information. If that is so, we should pursue the matter and seek clarification.

366. The Chairperson: We can seek for clarification on that. Are there any final comments?

367. Mr Higgins: We are also part of a group called Tax Credit Casualties, which is a lobby group for victims of tax credit overpayment. Its motto and mission is: justice is an amnesty for people with tax credit overpayments. We agree with the Committee in trying to get an amnesty for people who have received overpayments through no fault of their own.

368. The Chairperson: That will keep people awake in this Building when they hear about it.

369. Mr Alcorn: Mr Molloy asked a question about data sharing. More support should be given to people to come off benefits and into work and more support should be targeted at them to keep them in work. The report by the Department for Work and Pensions, which we have given to the Committee, contains specific recommendations on that. It is difficult for non-departmental public bodies such as the Housing Executive, executive agencies such as the Social Security Agency and Land and Property Services and, increasingly now with prospect of water bills, Northern Ireland Water, to share information because of data protection legislation.

370. I have been told that someone in the NIO is looking at a specific piece of legislation for Northern Ireland that may come before the Assembly to facilitate data sharing between Departments. That would greatly ease background co-operation. The Committee might want to take that matter forward as that is legislation could be passed by the Assembly.

371. Ms Anderson: Could members have a copy of that report?

372. The Chairperson: The Committee would be happy to receive the report. Thank you for your presentations and for your exchange of views.

373. I welcome Ross McCrea from the NCH The Children’s Charity and Natalie Whelehan from the Children’s Law Centre. After their opening statements, members will have an opportunity to ask questions. I anticipate that the session will last for 30 minutes.

374. Ms Natalie Whelehan (Children’s Law Centre): On behalf of the Children’s Law Centre I thank the Committee for the opportunity to give evidence today. The Children’s Law Centre welcomes the Executive’s commitment in the draft Programme for Government to work towards reducing child poverty by 50% by 2010 and eradicating it by 2020, including lifting 67,000 children out of poverty by 2012. We endorse the oral and written submissions of our partner organisations, Children in Northern Ireland, Save the Children and Gingerbread.

375. As a children’s rights organisation, we wish to focus on the rights of all children in Northern Ireland to live a life free of poverty, in which each child has the opportunity to thrive and develop to their maximum potential. It is vital that child poverty is urgently addressed by Government, because of the impact that it has on children’s rights and the quality of life experienced by a third of children and young people in Northern Ireland.

376. Our written submission outlines the huge disparities that exist in access to services for children living in poverty, and the grave consequential impact that poverty has on their lives. There are clear links between children in poverty and much higher mortality rates, which is a breach of the most fundamental children’s right of all — the right to life. Suicide rates are three times higher for those children in the lowest income groups, and there is a well-recognised link between mental-health problems and poverty.

377. It is recognised that there is chronic underinvestment in child and adolescent mental-health services. Unfortunately, that is evidenced much too often in the most disadvantaged wards in Northern Ireland — in the Derry City Council area, and in north and west Belfast. This issue is further compounded by the fact that children living in poverty are totally dependent on severely under-resourced child and adolescent mental-health services, while children from more advantaged economic backgrounds can more easily either challenge the denial of services, or access private health services.

378. Access to an effective quality education is an important issue. Children from the poorest households are twice as likely to leave school with fewer qualifications than their better-off counterparts.

379. The Children’s Law Centre operates a free advice line for children and their parents, which receives in excess of 1,500 calls a year. In our experience, children living in poverty are greatly disadvantaged when it comes to accessing services. For example, parents of children with special educational needs are often unhappy about assessment delays, and are ultimately disappointed and frustrated with the provision that is made for their children at the end of the process. Children from better-off families are in a much better position to immediately obtain initial assessments, access private services and pay for independent reports, which are essential when challenging board provision.

380. Children in poverty cannot pay for private assessments, services or reports, and can wait for up to three years for service provision, which is a huge amount of time in the life and development of a child. Mounting an effective challenge to board provision is outside the scope of families in poverty. Independent reports are often the only way of presenting evidence, and they cost money that families in poverty do not have.

381. Legal aid is not available for representation in special educational needs and disability tribunals. The Children’s Law Centre is the only organisation currently offering free representation in Northern Ireland, in a very limited capacity. The majority of parents who wish to challenge board decisions relating to assessments and provision must pay, which families living in poverty cannot do.

382. The Department of Education has the power to end differential access to services for children living in poverty, and to ensure that all children with special educational needs have access to appropriate support. All Departments must ensure that all children enjoy equal access to essential services and that no child is denied access to services such as child and adolescent mental-health provision and special educational needs support as a result of economic disadvantage. OFMDFM, as the lead Department for the anti-poverty and children’s strategies and the equality agenda, must take all the necessary steps to ensure that Departments do so.

383. In addition, young people aged 16 and 17 years have no automatic right to social security benefits. They also receive a lower level of income support and jobseeker’s allowance than adults over 25 years of age. Thousands of young people in Northern Ireland are in part-time employment as a result of economic necessity. Young people under 16 years of age have no right to the minimum wage, and those aged between 16 and 18 years of age receive a lower rate, even though they may be living independently, working full-time and doing the same job as their older colleagues.

384. Although the Assembly has limited power over benefits and the minimum wage, it must lobby the Westminster Government to ensure that benefits, wage levels and entitlements do not discriminate against children purely on the basis of age and are adequate to lift children out of poverty.

385. It is vital that the Executive adopt the Lifetime Opportunities strategy to build on, and that an action plan with measurable targets — which are monitored by outcome-focused indicators — is developed, which will tackle the root causes of child poverty. To have a chance of meeting the all important child-poverty targets, adequate, transparent and ring-fenced budget allocations, which are subject to a full equality-impact assessment, must be made by each Department in finalising and re-prioritising their budgets for the next three years.

386. As the Department with responsibility for children and tackling child poverty, OFMDFM must take the lead in combating child poverty — supported by a ministerial subcommittee — to agree, after full consultation, the cross-departmental action that is necessary to end child poverty and the huge disparities faced by children living in poverty. If the targets are to be met, children must be able to have their voices heard to ensure that the reality of child poverty, and the impact it has, is fully understood by the Government. The Government have a duty to uphold children’s rights — allowing children to live in poverty is a breach of that duty.

387. Mr Ross McCrea (NCH): I thank the Committee for inviting me to give evidence. I also commend the Committee for initiating this inquiry, and for how far it has developed. As Members have my submission on behalf of the NCH, I will not dwell on the evidence and statistics. I will talk briefly about what we do, what must change, and the general areas that are key to tackling child poverty.

388. As Members can see in the submission, NCH is a UK-wide organisation with a long history and a lot of experience as a service provider. We recently invested in setting up a range of services for children and families in Northern Ireland, which addresses social exclusion, vulnerability and poverty. We also lobbied for change in those areas.

389. NCH works with some groups in the hard-to-reach groups that are hardest to reach, and they can be divided into four key areas. First, there are the vulnerable children, young people and those at risk. Secondly, there are the children who cannot live with their birth families; in other words children who are in, or leaving, the care system, and those who are on the edge of the care system and are at risk of entering it. Thirdly, there are those who are disabled, and, fourthly, there are the families who need support including those using family centres, Sure Start and children’s centres.

390. As members can see in our submission, we have emphasised the need for a strategic approach to ending child poverty, which we feel should have three key elements: first, tackling income inequality; secondly, providing children with opportunities to fulfil their potential; and, thirdly, offering them high-quality, timely and non-stigmatising public services.

391. Like Ms Whelehan, we agree that a range of co-ordinated actions must be taken across Government and across sectors to address child poverty and improve outcomes for children and young people. We appreciate that there are limits to what can be done to directly affect the level of social benefits for children and families. Nevertheless, that area must be highlighted to ensure that family incomes are maximised.

392. The recent debate, led by members of the all-party group, and together with the findings of Professor Heckman, is reflecting that long-term commitment to early intervention and investment for children and young people, which is needs-led and outcome-focused, is critical. Members will be aware, due to the nature of that debate, that NCH’s two services are at risk because of changes in the way that funding is coming through in the Budget.

393. However, we would also stress that early intervention, which the evidence supports, is not just about working with the youngest children: it is also about helping to keep older children and young people safe so that they are included and can become active citizens who contribute to society. For us, the issue is about breaking the cycle of poverty, and we should never give up on children and young people.

394. NCH is in the process of commissioning its own piece of a UK-wide programme called Counting the Costs, which is about highlighting the need for preventive and early-intervention services for children and young people. It also aims to analyse the economic and social costs and benefits of shifting the balance from crisis to prevention. We would be very happy to share that proposal with the Committee. The research for that three-strand piece of work is just beginning.

395. As regards the three things that the Committee could focus on that could be done to reduce child poverty, we would suggest the following. First, it must be recognised that some families have multiple problems that are associated with being in poverty and which impact on children’s emotional health, well-being and stability. That is why NCH has launched its Growing Strong campaign, which is about promoting children and young people’s emotional health and well-being.

396. Secondly, it is essential to provide a range of early intervention services for children and young people, including intensive family support services for those families who need them. We have developed a range of intensive family support models and interventions to help bring stability to children’s lives, build their resilience and ability to cope with transitions and life circumstances and help them avail of the opportunities to learn and to reach their potential.

397. Thirdly, the barriers such as benefits uptake must be identified — and I know that the Committee has been hearing submissions on that subject. For example, people might have problems understanding entitlements, filling in forms or getting access to advice and support services. For some families there is a stigma attached to claiming benefits, which can prevent them from accessing public or statutory services.

398. In our work with the hardest-to-reach of hard-to-reach groups using Sure Start and children’s centres, we have found evidence that people resist top-down, Government-led approaches that tell them to use certain services. People prefer to use what they perceive to be non-stigmatising services, such as those provided by NCH and others, which can provide a link to mainstream or universal services.

399. That concludes my statement. If members wish to ask questions, I will do my best to answer them.

400. Mr McElduff: I have listened carefully to both presentations and I thought that I might have heard reference to the particular characteristics of child poverty in rural areas. I feel that the Committee needs an assessment of the scale of child poverty in such areas. When social deprivation is mentioned, we tend to hear about Derry or west and north Belfast; which I totally understand because those areas are coloured deep blue on the map of social deprivation.

401. However, I was surprised that there was no reference to rural areas. Any map of social deprivation includes areas in Tyrone, west Tyrone in particular, and Fermanagh that are also coloured deep blue. Perhaps Ms Whelehan would indicate whether any of the 1,500 calls that the Children’s Law Centre receives come from rural areas, or is all of its work focused in urban areas?

402. Ms Whelehan: The Children’s Law Centre operates a regional service, so we receive calls from all over Northern Ireland. I am well aware of the situation in rural areas as I am from a rural area. The centre encounters the difficulties that are being faced by families in rural areas all the time. Specific issues include extra transport costs and difficulties in accessing services.

403. The issue that we are encountering more and more as regards rural areas involves children with disabilities or children who live with a parent who has a disability. Those circumstances impact hardest on families who live in rural areas, mainly because of the difficulty they have in accessing services. We campaign on that issue quite a lot. Raising a child with a disability costs three times more than raising a child with no disability — that shows the pressure that those families are under.

404. The issue is far-reaching and, in our experience with the Chalky advice line, we are seeing it more often in rural areas. It must be addressed by better services and better access to services. In rural areas, children with disabilities are having to be educated in mainstream schools in order to avoid their having to travel across the country to get access to the same sorts of services that are available to people in urban areas. The Children’s Law Centre is well aware of that, and it is trying to do as much work as it can to raise awareness of those issues, particularly the disparities in access to services and transport.

405. Mr R McCrea: I want to mention the work that my organisation has been doing on the issue. When NCH initially became interested in setting up services here to help children and young people, its deliberate strategy was to ensure that there was no duplication. It endeavoured to develop services in places beyond those where there tends to be a concentration — in the east and, to some extent, in the greater Belfast area. At present, we provide a floating support service for children of age 16 and over who are coming out of the care system or who are at risk of becoming homeless. That service is provided in the Omagh area, and is currently being extended to Enniskillen. The service is therefore being provided in the southern area, which is now covered by the Western Health and Social Care Trust.

406. The NCH is also leading the western area family support strategy, with respect to children’s services planning and family-support work. Two dedicated and capable people are helping us to lead consultations with families and communities in order to develop action plans for areas in which there are gaps in services. The process involves engaging communities in having a say about where they believe the gaps in services are and need to be filled. The work involves inter-agency and inter-sectoral issues.

407. Ms Anderson: Mr Spratt is absent because he is attending another Committee meeting. He will be here later this afternoon. Like all of us, he is interested in poverty. When he was interviewed earlier, he described the levels of poverty in the North as being a scandal. Ms Whelehan referred to the link between child poverty and mortality rates. What can the Assembly do to tackle mortality rates?

408. Mr McCrea talked about the need to break the cycle of poverty. It is obvious that that will involve a culture of change in the new political dispensation. He advised us not to give up; and he knows that the Committee has not given up and that it knows that efforts to break that cycle must be needs-led and outcome-focused. As regards transparency in the budget, how can outcomes be measured? What methodology can be established to ensure that money goes to the groups that need it?

409. Ms Whelehan: I refer the member to our written submission, which illustrates the link between higher mortality rates and children who live in poverty. The statistics are alarming, and I completely agree that that is a scandal.

410. Infant mortality rates in deprived electoral wards are 23% higher than the Northern Ireland average. Children who are born to less-well-off families are more likely to be smaller and to die at a higher rate than those who are born to better-off families. Children who live in poverty are 15 times more likely to die as a result of a house fire; five times more likely to die in accidents, and four times more likely to die before the age of 20. Those are shocking statistics. Suicide rates are also higher among those who are less well off.

411. The fifth of the population who are most well off in Northern Ireland have a life expectancy that is among the best in Europe; for the poorest fifth, it is close to that of eastern European countries. One cannot dispute that that is scandalous. There is an urgent need to deal with the effect of poverty on health and to break that cycle. For many families, the experience of persistent poverty means that they are caught in an ongoing cycle of ill-health, which makes escaping poverty extremely difficult.

412. The Children’s Law Centre believes that immediate investment is required to narrow the gap in health outcomes and mortality rates for those who are living in the poorest areas. There must also be a substantial commitment of additional resources to ensure that those children enjoy the same level of healthcare as those who live in better-off areas.

413. Additional targets are required, particularly regarding the adoption of Lifetime Opportunities as a strategy to proceed with. An action plan and targets are required to ease the plight for particular groups of children and young people who are more likely to be in poverty, including children with disabilities, children of lone-parent families, and traveller children — who, alarmingly, are ten times more likely to die in infancy than their settled counterparts.

414. Also, Government Departments need to collect disaggregated data to ensure that resources can be effectively targeted to address the extreme inequalities in health that children in poverty suffer. Ongoing monitoring using outcome-focused indicators is required to ensure that change is actually taking place, and, where it is not, that that can be quickly identified and remedial action taken.

415. The inequalities are scandalous. Adequate protection is required for children who are facing those inequalities, particularly with regard to health and mortality and the implications for the right to life under article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights. An amendment to section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 is required to include socio-economic status as one of the areas protected by that legislation.

416. The legislation for a bill of rights should recognise socio-economic status as one of its grounds and ensure that suitable protection in included, as should the single equality Bill, so that such grave inequalities in health and mortality rates are no longer tolerated and can no longer exist.

417. Mr R McCrea: Martina Anderson asked specifically about breaking the cycle of poverty and how this Committee — through its evidence sessions — can address that issue. Ms Whelehan has referred to some of the issues that need to be considered.

418. A good system is in place under the umbrella of children’s services planning, which — as Committee members may be aware — is an inter-agency, inter-sectoral arrangement that has been developed over a number of years and is led by the four health boards. Currently, a more strategic and regional approach is being taken, linking in to the children’s strategy and the six outcomes that are defined in that strategy. Therefore, action planning is being further considered.

419. The particular benefit of closer engagement and harnessing that process is that there are two core areas that the boards are overseeing regarding that work: one is assessing need in their areas; and the other is developing priorities for developing services in their areas. One of the great benefits that we noticed has been that, at the time of the setting up of the children’s fund, the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety closely engaged with the children’s services planning mechanism in order to identify priorities regarding the most vulnerable and in-need children. That led to an effective programme, which, in our view, should be targeted. Those mechanisms in children’s services planning — as I outlined in the example regarding the family support strategy work — are close to where the needs are.

420. My understanding is that there is an ongoing piece of work examining outcome indicators across a range of different children’s services and planning groups. Some of those groups were defined in the Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995, including children who may be at risk of homelessness, those leaving the care system, children with emotional and behavioural difficulties and children with disabilities. There are five, six or seven common areas grouped, and that is now becoming a more strategic arrangement as the boards are starting to liaise to consider that issue. That is an example of the available information that can be used.

421. Evidence from our research clearly points to some groups being more at risk than others. We need to use and harness that evidence. From the Committee’s perspective, the evidence must be incorporated into a policy framework that has clear linkages to how funding is allocated on the basis of targeted need. The framework should set out how the Committee can subsequently assist by assessing how Departments and others — because everyone has a responsibility — are progressing and addressing issues of poverty.

422. Mr Shannon: Clearly, the Assembly has no control over tax, although it may have some small influence. We want to get down to the nitty-gritty of the system and address some of the issues. We want to try to get to the core of the matter in order to make the biggest possible difference.

423. This morning, you have produced evidence of influential programmes that have brought about change. Where can we make the greatest difference in trying to address child poverty? What do you want to see changed, and, specifically, what do you want to see happen tomorrow?

424. Ms Whelehan: It comes down to investment, but it is not a question of simply throwing more money at the problem. Disaggregated data must be collated, and Departments must carry out research to ensure that the existing services are having the intended impact. If not, those resources must be more effectively targeted so that they have an impact and reduce the inequalities.

425. Mr Shannon: I agree that simply throwing money will not solve the problem. There has to be co-ordination between all the different Government Departments. Sometimes I think of the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister as having responsibility for reducing child poverty — and it has overall responsibility — but all the Departments, such as Social Development, Enterprise and Health have to come together and come up with a co-ordinated plan.

426. What specific areas should the Departments target? Free milk? Better education? Improved transport? I agree with Barry’s comments about rural transport; I can prove that it has been a success in my area.

427. Ms Whelehan: The investment of additional education resources in the most impoverished wards has made an impact, and, in my view, should be increased — better school nutrition, after-school clubs, preschool education places, school-based breakfast clubs and health services, and so forth.

428. Targets must be set, particularly in education and health, to ensure that the cycle of poverty can be broken. Time and time again, we see that the education outcomes for children in poor areas are just not improving. Initiatives such as those I have mentioned must receive adequate investment to provide places for children who need them, so that they can improve their education performance and break that cycle.

429. There must also be substantial investment in healthcare initiatives and introducing better nutrition to the most impoverished areas. It is well established that children who come from really poor areas are more likely to suffer from poor health even before they are born. There must be a concentration on maternal health to ensure that those children have a better chance in life, in education and health terms.

430. Those are the two areas that must be targeted in the most impoverished wards. The resources must be targeted to ensure that they go directly towards addressing the problems of the people on the ground who need the help — top-down policies have little impact on people’s lives.

431. As this is a child poverty inquiry, the children must be asked about the issues. Their voices must be heard. We must find out how poverty impacts on children in Northern Ireland, what needs to be done for them, and how they think a difference could be made. Until we hear the children’s voices, we will not realise the impact of poverty on the lives of those families who suffer from it and the resources that are needed to address the issue.

432. Mr R McCrea: One possible strategy could entail targeting support towards families who are experiencing multiple problems — a non-stigmatising approach whereby we could intervene to support those families for a limited but intense and structured time. Our experience has been that such support helps to stabilise families that are at risk or have children who are at risk.

433. There is an issue around the need for equal access to opportunities, as there are some areas where that is not happening. However, lessons can be learned from elsewhere. The review of public administration is at a particular stage in Northern Ireland, and reform is under way. Save the Children and NCH colleagues in Wales have told me that they have been working closely with the Welsh Assembly Government and other local authorities to consider what can be done. We have not reached the community planning stage, but that is ahead of us. Joined-up working is required, and we must examine how best to do that.

434. NCH works very much in partnership with the statutory, voluntary and community sectors. We try to work with various levels. For instance, after the reform of the councils and the mechanisms that are involved in their planning and responsibility, there will be a clear role for them in addressing child poverty. In a way, we must all take on that role. Having a clear remit and understanding about how the new councils can contribute to that role is one thing.

435. I know that you are looking for specific proposals. I referred to the fact that the children’s services planning process and the then additional programmes through the children’s fund led to funds for a targeted set of services and initiatives for children and young people. Why on earth did we let those initiatives go? They are working and they are effective. A review or evaluation may need to be carried out to consider their effectiveness, but I am sure that the Committee is well aware that some of the issues are enduring and deep-seated.

436. There are some quick-fix solutions. For instance, money could be released to families who are barely coping when something essential, such as a washing machine, breaks down. How do those families raise the several hundred pounds required to replace the washing machine, which is an essential item? They may resort to catalogues and end up spending more, borrowing money, or getting a loan. Resources could be targeted to help families in such situations, or funds could be made available through other organisations. There may be scope to extend that.

437. Research shows that the additional costs of education are a major issue. That issue can be addressed within limited resources, so that children from poor backgrounds do not go through the education system thinking that there is no point in asking their parents for money for school trips, as they know that they cannot afford it. That issue starts early in life. We can target certain areas. There are organisations that work closely with families who are at risk. There are mechanisms in place to target resources. Let us use what is there, rather than reinvent the wheel.

438. The Chairperson: We hope to hear from children at first hand, which will be important.

439. Mrs D Kelly: Concerning the most vulnerable children, I have a question each for Ms Whelehan and Mr McCrea. Ms Whelehan, you said that it is in the gift of the Department of Education to meet the requirements of children with special needs. Will you expand on that?

440. Mr McCrea, you spoke about children who leave care, and, in your written submission, you commented on timely action. What are the top three priorities in relation to that?

441. Mr R McCrea: I will do my best.

442. Ms Whelehan: One of the main areas that the Children’s Law Centre deals with is the issue of children with special educational needs. Many of the calls to our advice line and the representations that we make are in relation to access to services and provision for children with special educational needs.

443. As I said earlier, a family living with an adult or child with a disability is much more likely to be in poverty than a family without a disabled adult or child. A disabled child costs three times more to raise than a non-disabled child. Families with disabled members are immediately at a huge disadvantage in terms of the likelihood of falling into poverty. In addition, families that have a child with a disability are more likely to have a parent who is unable to work, or, if they do work, they are more likely to be in low-paid employment. Therefore, they are much more likely to be in a situation in which money is tight and it is more difficult to make ends meet.

444. For a long time, we have been campaigning for investment in special educational needs provision and in the assessment process. Children who are living in poverty often wait for up to three years before provision is put in place. That is a huge amount of time in a child’s life and development. Families who live in better-off areas, or who have more access to resources, can buy in such services. Although that is by no stretch of the imagination what we are advocating, it is an option, whereas it is not an option for families in poverty. Increased resources are required for special educational needs provision, and, if those children are to have the same opportunities as children from better-off families, shorter assessment times and quicker service provision are required.

445. In order to address the difficulties faced by other children who are more likely to end up in poverty, the Assembly must adopt a strategy as soon as possible, and build on it by putting in place an action plan with targets that are designed to help children — such as Traveller children and children with disabilities. Traveller children belong to an extremely marginalised section of the community. Examining the UK Government in 2002, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child highlighted the discrimination faced by Traveller children and mentioned the:

“unequal enjoyment of economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights…for…Irish … travellers’ children”.

446. It also focused on the inequalities in access to health services, high rates of infant mortality and access to education services.

447. An anti-poverty strategy must be all-embracing. As Jim Shannon said, such action must be cross-departmental and must happen immediately, because children with special educational needs who have been waiting for three years for provision are falling by the wayside. Nothing is happening or improving for Traveller children. Targeted, cross-departmental action must happen sooner rather than later.

448. The Chairman: I am conscious that time is short. Please be brief.

449. Mr R McCrea: I will be as quick as possible.

450. I have undertaken research in the area, in addition to working with NCH. The priorities for looked-after children and care-leavers are stabilising and creating a supportive environment for them. One issue is linking them in with families where possible and ensuring that such links are there for them. That may not mean that parents are able to cope with having them home.

451. Under the Care Matters proposals — which you will be familiar with, Dolores — there is a range of proposals that need to be funded. It is hard to disagree with any of those proposals. As a priority, I ask that that strategy be fully resourced and funded, because all of it is well-focused and all of it is good.

452. There are issues around the edge of care, for children who come in and out of the care system and how intensive family support can help with that. For those who have become looked-after for very important reasons — for example, to keep them safe — we need to ensure that their experience of the care system is a good one. We must shore up and resource those who need as stable an environment as possible. It is shocking how many children experience movement within the care system. Those are not straightforward or easy issues to deal with. It is an area in which NCH is involved through a fostering service and other agencies.

453. At the point of leaving care, a range of issues arise. Young people make transitions to adult life at the age of 16 and 17. With the disadvantages that they have had, in having to come into care, and quite often — not in all cases — having had disruptive experiences while in the care system, they need as much support as possible. It is important to delay the transition as much as possible. Rather than use the words “leaving care”, one should talk about “transitions to adult life” and how the young people can be supported in that.

454. A full range of different types of accommodation provision is needed. Work on that is ongoing. Much of what Dolores pointed to has been evidenced. The proposals are in place. What we need is a clear commitment to resourcing it. Part of the service for young people who fall into the remit of the leaving care legislation for young people aged 16 and over is to ensure that a service is in place that does not mean further change for them. The Care Matters proposals look to a 16-plus service.

455. Different arrangements are in place across the different former trust areas. The number of trusts has how changed. In fact, every trust area has a slightly different arrangement. We are moving in the right direction, but we need further resources to support that.

456. The Chairperson: I am conscious of the time. We could talk all day, but we have a schedule to keep to.

457. Mr Molloy: One of the areas that was covered in our report is Dungannon, which is one of the areas of the highest child poverty, largely due to housing costs — both before housing costs and after housing costs. Have you any ideas about how the Executive could change legislation or change the way in which actions are carried out to ensure that child poverty can be eradicated? Is there a means of fast-tracking the needs of individuals who have been targeted in that area? What changes in legislation are required?

458. This is a legislative Assembly. Our job is not just to deal with problems; we hope to change legislation to alleviate poverty. How can we improve the targeting of need? Will the proposed bill of rights help? Is there a mechanism in the proposed bill of rights to ensure that children in poverty can be provided for and fast-tracked into systems? You mentioned the health system. A child in poverty might have to wait two or three years for attention, unless there is a means of fast-tracking them. The same goes for their education and housing needs. I am interested in ways in which the Executive can change things for the better.

459. Ms Whelehan: Legislative mechanisms such as the bill of rights, the single equality Bill and changes to section 75 will be absolutely vital in ensuring that socio-economic protections are in place for children in poverty. Children’s living in poverty, suffering from ill health and receiving a poor education cannot be tolerated. There must be a legislative basis for those protections to ensure that those children have a mechanism to challenge the situation when they are faced with discrimination on grounds of their socio-economic status.

460. The situation in Northern Ireland relates to our particular circumstances, and the cost of living is much higher here. Not only is child poverty higher, but the cost of bringing up children is higher, and that takes into account children’s clothes, food and fuel. Monitoring of families by boards or councils — or whatever structures are in place after the review of public administration — must take place to ensure that families who are finding it difficult are easily identified, and to ensure that they can access all the benefits that they are entitled to. The Northern Ireland Assembly has no control over benefit levels; however, mechanisms should be in place for families that are faced with additional costs peculiar to Northern Ireland. These mechanisms could include access to additional grants to help families with the higher costs of children’s clothes, food and fuel bills. Poorer families should be able to access the help that they need and, if the authorities are aware of the situation, that help can then be fast-tracked. Legislative reform is needed to ensure that socio-economic protections are in place for such families.

461. Mr R McCrea: What is meant by fast-tracking? Agencies and organisations are working with children with a range of different needs, and they need access to the services. Some of that may relate to income or supporting forms of income. They need a more responsive service. In most cases, many of those families and children are well known.

462. In NCH’s experience there is an issue with those children who fall into the “in need” category; in other words, they have not reached the point where they would be at risk of entering the care system, but they need to have an assessment carried out. There is a common assessment framework in place called understanding the needs of children in Northern Ireland (UNOCINI), which the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety is rolling out. To some extent, we are finding that there is a risk that some children’s needs are not reaching a point where they will be fully assessed, because of the thresholds that are in place — not that they have all reached the point where they would need to be taken into the care system. A four-tier approach is used: level one is universal services; level two is children in need; and level three is where children are at increasing levels of risk. The families and children who appear at level two are not meeting the thresholds for social services, but neither are their needs being met. Something must be done in a more responsive fashion, and that could involve fast-tracking. There is a range of organisations that could help with that. We need to have a more responsive working relationship with social services, and social services need to be equipped to deal with that.

463. The Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentations and the questions that you have fielded on our behalf. We would welcome any additional information that you wish to provide.

464. Ms Whelehan: Thank you.

465. Mr R McCrea: I have referred to research. Do you want me to send that information?

466. The Chairperson: Yes, that information can be sent to the Committee Clerk.

467. Mr R McCrea: Thank you for your time.

468. The Chairperson: I welcome now Margaret Deevy from PlayBoard.

469. Good afternoon, Margaret, you are very welcome, and thank you for your attendance. We had scheduled you to appear along with Barnardo’s, but unfortunately its representative is not available today. I invite you to make a short presentation, and then members will be invited to ask questions.

470. Ms Margaret Deevy (PlayBoard): I thank the Committee for the opportunity to attend today’s meeting.

471. Child poverty is an important issue, and one about which PlayBoard feels very strongly. Poverty can be described as the state of not having enough money to take care of basic needs, such as food, clothing and housing. Those living in poverty are denied the things that many of us take for granted. Many children live in poverty and experience deprivation on many levels. Child poverty is a complex issue. For children, it is not just about survival and an ability to afford food and shelter; it is also about an ability to participate in social life, play, leisure and recreational activities. It is about being able to participate in the society in which they live.

472. PlayBoard is the lead agency for play in Northern Ireland. Underpinned by article 31 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, we campaign to ensure that every child has access to high-quality, free and inclusive play opportunities. No child should be deprived of play — an essential childhood experience — simply because parents and carers cannot afford to pay for access. Play and social development are global issues in terms of a child’s right to access. Play is one of the most central components in a child’s life — if not the most central component. It is essential for a happy childhood.

473. Play is the culture of childhood. It is well documented that play is important for all aspects of child development: social, emotional, physical, intellectual and creative. Play encourages independence, confidence, creativity, problem-solving and self-esteem. It helps to develop social interaction and life skills. Through play, children develop a repertoire of social behaviours that enable them to handle stress and to manage the positive and negative situations that they encounter in daily social interactions. Overall, play enhances quality of life.

474. So what happens if children are deprived of the play experiences that are regarded as developmentally essential? While data on the impact of not playing is rare, the findings of the studies that do exist give cause for much concern. Results from limited studies have shown that children who are deprived of play are adversely affected both biologically and socially. Children deprived of normal play experiences are more likely to become highly violent and antisocial. They are more likely to manifest symptoms ranging from aggression and repressed emotions and social skills to an increased risk of obesity.

475. One study likens children to battery chickens; it suggests that play-deprived children are battery children and attributes play-deprivation symptoms to the effects of incarceration because of traffic and parental fears of predatory adults. Battery children are often aggressive and whine a lot. By the age of five, they are emotionally and socially repressed, find it difficult to mix, fall behind with schoolwork and are at greater risk of obesity.

476. We can only speculate as to why play deprivation may have such a catastrophic impact on children. However, theorists tell us that, from birth to about the age of seven and eight, children pass through a sensitive period of neurological growth and formation. That sensitive period is greatly assisted by play, although other factors such as diet and the quality of care have an obvious effect. The predominant influence on children’s lives for much of this period is how and where they play.

477. Increasingly, play is being described as the means by which children perceive the world outside themselves and develop the skills to both navigate and understand the world. Because a range of different factors can conspire to create the conditions necessary for play deprivation to occur — including poor diet, repressive or abusive treatment and lack of access to appropriate spaces for play — children are at risk from play deprivation across the board. Ideally, children should be able to play and range in adult-free, physically diverse and challenging spaces. Where those opportunities do not exist, dedicated play provision — in particular, staffed adventure playgrounds — is the most appropriate response in the current climate.

478. PlayBoard would like to see greater understanding and recognition of the importance of play in children’s lives. It would like to ensure that all children have access to play opportunities — that may be in childcare settings, schools, after-school settings, youth and community settings, on their streets or in their communities. PlayBoard would like to see a regional policy that recognises interdepartmental, multi-agency, cross-sectoral support for play. It would like the review of public administration (RPA) to place a statutory duty on local government to plan for play, leisure and recreational activities. It would like to see the establishment of policy child-proofing with play-impact criteria included; and recognition and support for the playwork workforce. That workforce currently works across childcare settings, such as day-care and after-school settings, nurseries, schools and youth and community settings. PlayBoard’s vision is for a society that respects and values the child’s right to play as an intrinsic and essential right of childhood, where play is recognised and embraced as being the most natural way to enhance children’s health and well-being.

479. Mr Shannon: I do not have personal knowledge of your organisation, but I am aware of it and of its relationship with local councils through my work as a councillor. In a way, I think I know what the answer to my question will be, but, nonetheless, it is important that I ask it. The review of public administration is coming up, and there will be a lot of changes in the make-up of councils over the next few years. [Interruption.] That is not my phone.

480. The Chairperson: I respectfully remind members to switch off their mobile phones, as they interfere with the Hansard recording.

481. Mr Shannon: The relationship that PlayBoard has with local councils is very important. You are trying to ensure that the opportunity for children to play is available in all borough council areas, rural or urban. No one would dispute the fact that play is a critical part of a child’s development. Is there one specific way to improve your goals immediately, or very quickly, in tandem with local councils, ever mindful of the changes that will occur in councils? Which single goal would you aim to improve? The provision of playgrounds has to be achieved in partnership with the local body.

482. Ms Deevy: You are right about that. We are here to talk about play in its widest sense, and we have named some of the settings in which play takes place. Play takes place in playgrounds and parks, but it is wider than that. We are waiting for the final draft of the play policy, which will make recommendations on how local councils can ensure that children in their areas have access to play. A mapping exercise was carried out during the development of the draft policy to identify various facilities, measure their age and adequacy, and determine the level of use. Recommendations will come from that policy, although we have not yet seen the final version. Many organisations had input into that draft policy, as they have done again today for the Committee, and they will make recommendations.

483. Mr Shannon: Would it be fair to say that the role of the councils is one part of the equation, if not the whole?

484. Ms Deevy: That is absolutely right.

485. Mr Shannon: They have got to be committed.

486. Ms Deevy: They are. It is tempting to trivialise play, so it is good to hear people recognising its importance. Poverty is an important issue, and when we know that there are children who go without three meals a day, adequate housing or the resources that they need, people are content to place play lower down on the list of priorities. Play cannot be considered in isolation, just as issues such as housing or clothing, for example, cannot be looked at in isolation. Councils will consider play along with all the other issues that exist.

487. PlayBoard would like policy to be child-proofed, or play-proofed. The Welsh example was mentioned. In Wales, when new topics are discussed and new policies introduced, they are examined for their impact on children’s lives, and, in particular, on their play. We would welcome that approach.

488. Ms Anderson: The Children’s Commissioner gave evidence to the Committee two weeks ago, and she spoke about how play contributes to children’s learning and development. You have touched on that today. What is being done to support children’s play in deprived areas? I come from one of those areas in Derry, which itself has been identified as having a rate of child poverty of 36%. The rate across the North is 24%. Are there examples of good practice for areas such as Derry and elsewhere? Before Jim Shannon comes in on that point, I acknowledge that child poverty exists in areas such as Strangford too. Nevertheless, I represent the people of Derry.

489. When I was driving up to Stormont this morning, I was conscious that, in weather such as today’s, some children who are going to school may not have a proper coat. That means that they cannot go out to play. They might not even have the proper shoes to walk in today’s weather, never mind going out to play. It is no wonder that mothers will try to keep their children indoors when they do not have the bare necessities of proper clothing that will keep them warm. You are actually talking about a level of deprivation at which children do not have three meals each day and the nourishment that they need to go out and play. What is being done to support children in those areas? Are there any measures of good practice?

490. Ms Deevy: PlayBoard has a number of projects that examine that issue. We promote the right of every child to have access to free, inclusive and quality play. We have developed a number of programmes, for example, Positive PlayGrounds. We recognise that in many schools, during free time or lunchtime, there may be staff who are not entirely sure how to facilitate a play session. They may not be entirely certain of how to ensure that children, who come into the school and into that setting, have access to play. For example, on a day like today, many schools might not allow pupils to go outside to play and to run around for five minutes, because the weather is bad and they may not have appropriate clothing.

491. That school may also lack the ability to facilitate a play session indoors or to support the children. In reality, they do not need to do a huge amount to support the children indoors. They need a bit of space, but they need to know how to use that space well, and they need to know the role that the staff should play. Currently, we have the Positive PlayGrounds programme, which delivers training in schools across the whole of the North of Ireland. The programme’s aim is to ensure that, whatever and wherever a playground is, children can say what they want to do in their free time in that playground. The staff can then learn how to facilitate that.

492. PlayBoard has another project that is currently being piloted in north Belfast. We recognise that there are some parks and playgrounds, and many children, yet the children do not go to those parks and playgrounds. There are some areas that they are afraid to go into. There are some areas where they simply do not play on the street for lots of reasons, or a lot of parents will not let their children play outside. The play rangers team go out to those areas. They arrive with their arms by their sides and ask the children what they want to do. They ask them whether they have raincoats. If they do not have a raincoat they can use a plastic bag. They try to help the children to take over a space in the park, or in the playground, and to consider how to use that space.

493. If the children are older, swings no longer present a challenge and are no longer interesting. You pass by a park and wonder why the swings have been tied up around the top. It is done to stop the older children sitting on them. They are really not interested in that playground any more, so they have to be brought to a point whereby they can play. What is the environment like? What can you do with it? The play rangers team arrive with little or no resources, except for, perhaps, a milk crate, some rope and some torches — it is dark at 4.00 pm in the winter. They give torches to the children and ask them to go for a walk and they tell a story. They actually use that space so that it is the children’s space in which they can play. People will not look at them and think that they are engaged in antisocial behaviour. The children can be in that park, and they can shout and laugh.

494. That is one of the PlayBoard projects that we would love to roll out across the whole of Northern Ireland and to upskill other staff, community workers and peer educators — whoever is there to facilitate them so that they can do that for their children. We recognise that there are many children who are going without, but we look for areas where can be bring play to where the children actually are.

495. Mr Moutray: In your presentation you outlined the negative aspects with regard to children who do not have the opportunity to play. Can you tell us how play contributes to children’s learning and development? Can you talk about the positive aspects?

496. Ms Deevy: If you go to any childcare setting today, you will see a roomful of adults who are playing with children. They are playing with children because they recognise that that is the way in which children learn. From the moment that they enter one of those settings, information is shared with them about language development, social interaction, and hand-eye co-ordination. All of those messages are shared with children through play.

497. In the school system, the new curriculum is being examined. It is recognised that the early-years curriculum can be developed in a play-led approach, that it is the most appropriate way to ensure that children at the age of four and five learn effectively and that they learn it by doing. Gone are the days when the teacher stood at the top of the class and told the children how to do something. If we buy flat-pack furniture, we do not want to read about how to assemble it. We want to do it. Children learn in the same way. They learn actively.

498. When children are given opportunities to learn through play they will develop negotiating skills, which are developed by reflecting on their role in play and the effects of sharing, as well as language development. All of the skills that we want children to learn come through play

499. The difficulty for adults with this form of learning is that specific goals cannot be set. Therefore, rather than knowing what the learning outcome of a play process will be, the adult must be aware that, for example, a walk through the forest could teach a child spatial awareness; however, that is very difficult to quantify initially. Furthermore, we need to ensure that when we are quantifying the learning outcome of play it is done in the broadest possible terms in order to support all children, because they all learn at different rates.

500. Mr Spratt: I have a simple question: could you, as a professional working in the area of play, tell me what poverty is?

501. Ms Deevy: In preparing for this presentation, I attempted to write something that described what I think poverty is. Poverty is a very complex issue. If I think of it in its barest sense, I see a child who is not adequately dressed for the weather, a child who will not have someone waiting at home when he or she returns from school, a child who lives in poor housing, a child who acts as a carer for another family member, a child who is not going to get a warm meal in the evening, or a child who lacks something positive to look towards. Many people have gone without the occasional meal or have missed other opportunities, but if children do not have the opportunity to play, whether in the home, on the street, in their classroom, in their school, in after-school or youth groups, in some way that allows them to develop and grow as an individual, then that to me is absolute poverty.

502. Mr Spratt: It is quite difficult to define.

503. Ms Deevy: It is hugely difficult to define.

504. Mr Spratt: Obviously, it is quite difficult for the Government or anybody else to clearly define exactly who is in poverty and who is not in poverty.

505. Mr Molloy: Poverty is difficult to define. One of your points was that children who have been deprived of play showed all sorts of symptoms as a result and that it affects the rest of their lives. If the Assembly could bring in one piece of legislation to address that, what would that legislation be? PlayBoard has an excellent record of working with councils and providing play facilities. How could you influence the planning process and developers, in relation to providing play space for children in the future?

506. Ms Deevy: The interdepartmental, multi-agency, cross-sectoral support for play indicates that the issue cannot be looked at it in isolation. When any Department is considering its policies and legislation, we would like it to think about the impact of those on children and children’s play. Therefore, all policies and legislation should be play-proofed, just as the Departments would consider the impact of those on education or on poverty in general. For example, if a new housing development is proposed, we would like it if consideration were given to the positive or negative impact that that may have on children and on children’s play.

507. With town or area planning, emphasis tends to be on the needs of adults, but when housing is being developed, consideration should be given to the numbers of children who will live in those houses and the facilities and the space that they will need. Such consideration should not just be limited to providing a set of swings; it should take into account whether an open space with trees and grass is provided, and whether the road system around that open space will allow them free access of movement in their community. Therefore, we believe that an impact assessment should be carried out on policies and legislation.

508. Mrs D Kelly: As local councillors, we have experience of installing play areas and play facilities only to find that the community wants them removed or the older children in the area use them as drinking dens. Has PlayBoard conducted research or surveys with young people to establish why they do that and how it might be combated?

509. Ms Deevy: PlayBoard has not done any research recently, but the Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and Young People (NICCY), Save the Children and Barnardo’s have done extensive work with children and young people. In our day-to-day experience with after-school clubs, school-age childcare and children and young people, we asked them why they do not go to the park — we asked those questions with regard to the pilot scheme in north Belfast. The children responded that they are sometimes frightened to go to the park because there are older children there, or their parents have told them not to go because of the dangers on the road. They also fear stranger danger — that is not referred to now, but it is a fear of other adults. Some children do not go to the park, because it is not challenging for them. It was challenging when they were younger, but there is a new younger age group now.

510. Some children who go to the park are not challenged by it, so they sit with their friends. However, a lot of adults will tell them that they are not allowed to be there, because it is for children to play in. We see play in a particular way: a child playing on the swing or on the slide. Older children who merely sit in the park are engaging in a different type of play. They are hanging around in the same way as adults might sit and have a cup of coffee; they will sit on a park bench. Some children will have a drink and smoke, for instance, and we have a fear of antisocial behaviour, but that is a separate issue.

511. Those older children are playing, but it looks threatening and frightening, because we are not used to it. To them, hanging around is playing. They do not want to swing on a swing, but they want to sit around and have a chat. They might want to swing on something, but they cannot swing on the swing, so they will swing on a tree or a railing.

512. When we train adults who work with children, we ask them to cast their minds back to when they were about seven or eight, and playing. We ask them to recreate the image or the feeling of what it was like as a child and to imagine where they were. Many people smile and say that they do not want the children to be doing what they were doing. We tell them not to imagine the activity, but the sense of freedom, fun and adventure that it created; that is what we want children to have.

513. Mr McElduff: I apologise for being late for the session. Mr Spratt said that poverty is difficult to define, and I sometimes wonder about the word as well. I know that there is a ministerial-led approach to this issue and that it is about modernising government. If PlayBoard were allowed to ask the Executive to make one difference, what would it be?

514. Ms Deevy: I have said it a few times, but there should be impact assessments carried out on how policy and legislation will affect children. It is important that someone has responsibility for safeguarding children’s rights — particularly their play — in any discussions on policy or legislation.

515. The Chairperson: In our discussions, there has been an emphasis on play in the community. What about play in the home? How can that be encouraged? At Christmas, my 10-year-old daughter received a word game called Boggle. There was some fun in the Kennedy household over Christmas. She did not beat me, but her mother did. How can home play be encouraged?

516. Ms Deevy: I referred to the playwork workforce. It is concerned with building up an awareness of the importance of play and what it looks like — but not in the strictest sense of play as conveyed by a child doing a jigsaw. Play is lots of things, and it looks different to all children. Some children are very energetic and need to be physically active. Other children can sit still for a large amount of time with a cardboard box and create their own world.

517. Play looks different to each child, and parents need information on that, and on how they can support their children’s play. Parents need to understand that it is OK for the child to sit and play with a box; they need to know how to turn off the television and start a conversation or how to go to the local park and spend time with their child. It is difficult for parents who are in poverty to take the time to go the park and have fun when there are so many other things that are bearing down on them. For those parents, play is moved down on the list of things that are important. We encourage parents, people who work with children and anyone who has anything to do with children to recognise the importance of play, and we support them in allowing children to access play.

518. The Chairperson: Margaret, thank you very much for your presentation, and for your clarity of answer. It has been very useful, and if there is any other additional information that you wish to provide, we are happy to receive that.

519. Ms Deevy: Thank you.

520. The Chairperson: Our final presentations in this morning’s session are on behalf of Shelter Northern Ireland and the Voluntary Sector Housing Policy Forum (VSHPF). I welcome Mr Tony McQuillan from Shelter NI and Mr David Carroll from VSHPF to the Committee. As you know, we are considering the issue of child poverty. The format is for you both to make a short presentation, or perhaps a joint presentation, that lasts a few minutes, and then to leave yourselves available for questions. I anticipate that this part of the session will last for approximately half an hour.

521. Mr David Carroll (Voluntary Sector Housing Policy Forum): Thank you for the opportunity to present evidence on child poverty. I work for the Simon Community, and, along with Tony McQuillan, I am representing the Voluntary Sector Housing Policy Forum, which is a group of housing voluntary agencies that wish to pursue policy issues. The views that we will express are representative of VSHPF.

522. We are particularly eager to present evidence on child poverty because we feel that secure and affordable housing is one of the foundational pillars of society. It supports child development, education, family cohesion and employment. Access to affordable housing is one of the fundamental areas that are affected by the level of income and poverty. There is a direct correlation between families on low incomes, poor housing and child poverty issues. With the severe rate of child poverty at 10%, publicly subsidised housing, through capital grants to provide affordable housing, must be sustained, with the rent and rate costs met through state benefit. Access to social housing plays a key role in supporting vulnerable children and their families and is essential to meet the needs of households with children who remain poor.

523. We are glad that the Lifetime Opportunities strategy recognises the role of housing through the commitment that, by 2020, very child, young person and pensioner will live in a decent, safe and warm home. We contend that having a warm, decent home would give a child the best start to life.

524. The Assembly must ensure that that commitment is made in its Programme for Government. We pose the question: if the principal targets for 2012 and 2020 set out in the Programme for Government are to be achieved, what role will housing play?

525. Mr McQuillan will now talk about the families that have a home. I will then talk about homeless families and the impact on child poverty on them.

526. Mr Tony McQuillan (Shelter Northern Ireland): We have just provided the Committee with copies of our presentation. It is divided into two parts: the first refers to people already living in a home and the second refers to those who are not.

527. Most people have a home, and I would suggest to the Committee that the potential pressures of housing costs, which is one of the key determinants of poverty, are being increased by the introduction of water and sewerage charges for tenants of social and private housing. Those charges were met previously, in full or in part, by state subsidy. This will be the first time that most people will be paying a charge for water and sewerage. That will add to housing costs and will, potentially, bring more children into poverty.

528. The number of households in the private-rented sector is growing, and though many of them receive housing benefit, the rate is based on sub-market rent levels. Therefore, there is a gap between what people are receiving and what the landlords charge. In recent times, that gap has been evidenced through the number of people who are becoming homeless. Mr Carroll will talk about people who lose their homes because they cannot afford to meet the gap.

529. In April 2008, which is only a couple of months away, a new method of helping people pay their rent, local housing allowance, will be introduced, and it will be paid directly to the tenant. The method for calculating the allowance is still being worked on at the moment, but, at best, it will be equal to the current reference rent level. In other words, the new housing allowance could well be less, in many instances, for many tenants in the private-rented sector. For many people, the gap that they will have to make up in order to pay their rent will increase. Our concern is that housing costs will increase for those families, and that more children will be pushed into poverty.

530. The recent massive increase in fossil fuel costs means that more families and children are in fuel poverty; and that number will grow. Greater efforts have to be made to ensure that the Warm Homes scheme is fully funded to meet its target to eradicate fuel poverty, and the Executive should commit more funds to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment’s programme, Reconnect, which provides grants for installing alternative fuel systems. That programme is due to finish at the end of March.

531. The number of migrant people in Northern Ireland is unquantifiable because it is difficult to pin down statistics for them. However, in 2006, 3,500 children who did not have English as a first language were registered in primary and post-primary schools — 1,200 up on the previous year. Also in 2006, 3,400 children under the age of 18 were registered with a GP, many of them from A8 accession countries.

532. Mr Carroll: I would like to touch on the impact of homelessness on families and, in particular, on children.

533. Last year, 6,869 families presented as homeless, which translates to at least 9,300 children. Of that number, 4,206 families were regarded as full duty applicants under the legislation: again, if we are considering the impact on children then at least 5,630 were involved. There were 5,495 lone-parent families. If one considers the link between lone parents, child poverty and housing issues, then those figures are stark. In addition, 465 children aged 16 and 17, who are covered under the Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995, presented as homeless also.

534. Looking at how long people actually spend in temporary accommodation; because of the lack of move-on accommodation, people are restricted in their choice and can spend up to a year in hostel accommodation. Research has shown that for children, the experience of homelessness and living in temporary accommodation can impact on friendships. It can also cause family isolation, particularly for families living in hostels or temporary accommodation that are removed from communities. It can also cause disruption in schools and can increase financial outgoings.

535. Research also shows that development in children who are homeless may be delayed when compared to those of a similar age in the general population. Therefore, children who are experiencing homelessness must be targeted for intervention.

536. People’s financial situations can make it very difficult for them to move on from hostel accommodation, and many find it impossible to save for rent deposits, for instance, in the private-rented sector. There are 36,000 people currently on social housing waiting lists. Private-rented housing is ruled out for many people who are in hostel accommodation because of their financial problems.

537. In 2006, the Food Standards Agency produced ‘Research into Food Poverty and Homelessness in Northern Ireland’, which showed that homeless families experience food-poverty related issues such as poor quality diets mainly due to their financial situation. It is obvious that there will be an impact on children whose parents may not have the financial means to provide proper nutrition for their family.

538. We also wish to comment on the social housing capital budget that was agreed yesterday. Although we welcome the injection of funds, which will deliver 1,500 to 1,750 and 2,000 new-builds respectively over the next three years, with 1,500 starts to be made in 2007-08, we still feel that, given the figures that we have put to the Committee, particularly those concerning the social housing waiting lists, those starts are significantly insufficient.

539. In the draft Programme for Government, the Executive’s target is for 10,000 social and affordable houses to be completed over three years. We believe that the target for social housing alone should be a minimum of 10,000 during that period, and it is essential that capital funding is increased to meet the social-housing need for the poorest and the most excluded households. If the targets for removing children from severe poverty are to be met, housing needs must be tackled in parallel. The question of whether the Programme for Government, in attempting to reach those targets will meet the community’s needs must be asked.

540. Mr T McQuillan: I will not go through all of our recommendations because they are contained in our briefing document to the Committee.

541. We want to see the formulation of strategies that will support the targets of the anti-poverty strategy, and those should include housing and homelessness. Targets should include the rolling out of the Executive’s homeless strategy. We would like to see homeless children, in particular, targeted with support and interventions that will specifically tackle the disadvantage that is created by the experience of homelessness.

542. The anti-poverty strategy group might find it helpful to have a representative from the voluntary sector housing policy forum, and we feel that the Executive should stick to their commitment to eradicate fuel poverty and limit the disproportionate impact of water charges, etc. Opportunities should be taken to tackle the local housing allowance problem in a different way, and examine issues that affect migrant children who are in poverty.

543. Mr Shannon: I thank the witnesses for their presentations. Social housing is the biggest issue in my constituency of Strangford, and I suspect that that is the same for everyone here.

544. The Minister of Finance and Personnel’s statement yesterday was very significant: it released a lot of funds that will ensure that a number of new social houses will be built. He also mentioned affordable housing; and the Minister for Social Development, Margaret Ritchie, along with the other Ministers, will be examining affordable housing as a separate issue. Therefore, not only will we have more social housing, more affordable housing will become available due to changes in the planning legislation and when land that is owned by various Government bodies is released, which will be pursued by housing associations and developers. My point is that we have not seen the end of the good times for social housing.

545. I have two questions; because rather than make statements, it is important that the Committee gets feedback about the best ways to deal with poverty. I am aware of a number of young, single teenagers who are presenting themselves as homeless. I presume that you are aware of that problem. What are the reasons for that? What are the solutions?

546. Mr McQuillan made a point that the need for more social housing has risen and that the demand on private rentals has risen accordingly, resulting in astronomical rents. I really do not know how people are managing. However, one thing is certain; the level of housing benefit is nowhere near what it should be in order to keep up with rising rents. Mr McQuillan mentioned the increasing gap between housing benefit and private rents. How can that gap be bridged?

547. Mr Carroll: I will answer the question on the 16- and 17-year-olds. The Simon Community provides temporary accommodation throughout Northern Ireland, and around 21% of the people who are accommodated by us are 16, 17 or 18 years old. It is a major issue. Those young people come from two main groups; those who are leaving care, and those who are encountering difficulties in their communities or families, and the main cause of homelessness is family disruption.

548. There are major issues regarding the types of services that need to be provided: the most essential service needed is adequate provision of accommodation for young people. At the moment, 16- and 17-year-olds are being accommodated in generic hostel accommodation because there is a lack of accommodation that is specifically designed for them.

549. Mr Shannon: Would one-bed accommodations be more suitable? If so, then it is my understanding that the Housing Executive is against that. Its policy is to provide two-bed accommodation. Is a different policy needed?

550. Mr Carroll: A range of accommodation solutions is needed for 16- and 17-year-olds. We would say that it is inappropriate to place them in generic, adult, hostel accommodation. Smaller units comprising five to six young people would be far more suitable. There is a second strand to this issue, and it relates to the support that is being given to families, once young people become homeless, to explore whether reconciliation is possible.

551. Mr McQuillan mentioned the Housing Executive’s strategy on homelessness. A proper prevention strategy is required so that people can work with families who have 13- to 16-year-olds to keep those young people at home as problems emerge. The Simon Community believes that there is a huge prevention remit and that it is not being dealt with at present.

552. Mr T McQuillan: Although I am not a politician, I wish to respond to a point that was raised earlier about affordable housing. Shelter NI believes that the target for social housing should be a minimum of 10,000 homes over the next five years, and that is irrespective of affordable housing. My understanding is that the Executive have a combined target.

553. My second point is that many planning approvals have already been obtained by developers, and that, perhaps in the next five-to-ten years, the land might be frozen by existing planning applications and it might be difficult to persuade developers to provide social-housing units. I wish the Committee and the Executive well in their approach, and I support it.

554. Mr Shannon: Legislation will change that, Tony. That is how it happens.

555. Mr T McQuillan: Fine; that is the way to go. That is your remit.

556. As regards local housing allowance; until now, the Housing Executive established local reference rents for the private sector. It would assess rents in a considerable number of areas in Northern Ireland — I cannot remember how many — and it would exclude those at the top and bottom, for one reason or another, and then calculate the average rent. That average figure would then be the amount that it would pay in housing benefit. For a short time, perhaps up to a year, the NIHE would pay a discretionary allowance on top of that to meet the total rent. However, after that period, a tenant would have to find the rest of the money.

557. The new proposals in the GB legislation will introduce housing allowance, and it will come into effect at the beginning of April 2008. Under that system, local reference rents will be established differently. First, there will be only eight or nine major areas across Northern Ireland. Belfast will be considered as a single area, and it will be the market area in which the rents will be reviewed. Instead of excluding the top and bottom rents and taking the average figure, the median will be used, which is where the majority of rents lie. However, that point could well be beneath the average rent being paid.

558. To give the Committee an example; rent levels in north and east Belfast are generally lower than those in west and south Belfast. Therefore, housing allowance is likely to be lower than the current reference rents.

559. The second point is that the money will be paid directly to the tenant, who will be responsible for paying his or her own charges. That raises several concerns because if people are making choices about how to spend their money, they may choose not to pay rent. There is a period of grace of perhaps up to eight weeks before landlords can ask the Housing Executive to pay them directly, and that provision might put people into considerable debt. I know that the issue is being considered by the Committee for Social Development, and we have made submissions on the matter. I hope that that clarifies the position for the Committee.

560. Mr Shannon: It certainly does. However —

561. The Chairperson: We are short of time, and I must allow other members to ask questions.

562. Mr Spratt: I thank the witnesses for their presentation. Mr McQuillan mentioned water and sewerage. I think that it has been established clearly that there was always a charge for those. If I understood him correctly, Mr McQuillan said that there had been no charge before. Of course, there has always been a charge, and there was a water rates collection office in Belfast.

563. My party’s perspective was that people should not have to pay twice, and that they were already paying for water in their rates bills. The Minister of Finance and Personnel and the Minister for Regional Development have clearly identified the proportion of the rates that went to pay for water — a point that was denied by direct rule Ministers. We have made it very clear that people will not have to pay twice.

564. However, we do have to pay for water; people in every other country must pay for water, so I imagine that the situation is no different here. We will still have to pay an element for water through the rates, or whatever. I am making that point because it was wrong of Mr McQuillan to say that there had been no water or sewerage charges — that was not the case.

565. My question is how the Northern Ireland Assembly can target those most in need, especially as it has no direct control over tax. Where, and how, can it make the greatest difference? The problem that I grapple with most, as all MLAs must do, is homelessness. People come to our offices, but we can do little for them. That major problem must be addressed. The Assembly has started to address it, but how can it best do so? We cannot simply produce 10,000 in 10 years; that would be a massive programme. We must start quickly. Where do you think we should target resources to tackle some of the worst poverty?

566. Mr Carroll: With regard to targeting specific families, there is a captive population in hostel accommodation. Last year, the Housing Executive provided temporary accommodation for approximately 1,800 families.

567. Research and experience show that those who end up in temporary accommodation will, inevitably, re-present themselves as homeless because of difficult situations. Those families are easy to identify, and there are programmes to assist them, such as Sure Start, which tackles the pre-school issue. We would argue that specific funds should be targeted towards working on particular issues with those families who are in hostels and temporary accommodation.

568. Before I came here today, I contacted Conway Court hostel in west Belfast. A member of staff told me about the case of one particular 17-year-old who had one child. She was coping on £93 net a week and had no chance of being moved into social housing in the near future, or of getting together enough money to access the private-rented sector.

569. Housing affordability is a big problem. Financially supporting young lone parents to make the transition from hostels to social or private housing needs to be addressed through welfare reform. It may be a question of making housing benefit support young lone parents during the transition period when they are moving into social housing or the private-rented sector. However, a long-term perspective must be taken on how lone parents are supported.

570. Mr T McQuillan: Thank you for your earlier point, Mr Spratt. Perhaps it was my fault that I was not being clear. I was not saying that people did not previously pay for water. I was making the comparison between physically paying for water and the payments being subsidised by housing benefit.

571. Mr Spratt: It is important to make the point that people paid for water through their rates.

572. Mr T McQuillan: I am making the general point that people will actually have to pay the charges now, whereas previously those payments were subsidised.

573. I am not an economist, so I am hoping that the ladies and gentlemen of the Committee will be coming up with some ingenious ideas on how to raise more funds so that the public sector can meet its targets. There must be ways round the problem. In Scotland, there is local taxation, whereby up to 3% can be waived. I realise that we are not at that stage, but I hope that we can progress to that point, and perhaps introduce a similar system.

574. We would argue that it is the politicians’ role to decide the priorities. In our view, social housing is hugely important — in fact, it is so important that it has almost been forgotten. Indeed, it is not declared sufficiently in many documents because people consider that it is so important that they do not have to mention it. One difficulty is that social housing has lost its place as a priority. Its importance must be restated frequently and with great vigour.

575. Mr Molloy: Why has the number of children who present as homeless increased? There also seems to be an increasing number in the migrant population who are at risk of poverty and associated housing problems. Returning to the gap between the rent levels that the Housing Executive uses and the rents that landlords charge, could particular legislation tackle that problem? Building houses will eradicate the problem in the future, but is there anything else that the Executive can do to address the issue? People who are already on the breadline are being pushed into poverty by having to fork out more money for rent.

576. Mr Carroll: As regards the increasing number of children presenting as homeless, there is a huge waiting list at the moment, and we have to take into consideration, for instance, the significant number of young lone parents. Housing conditions, the impact of overcrowding on families and the ability of extended families to support lone parents must also be taken into consideration.

577. Mr T McQuillan: Although I gave the Committee a couple of examples where we have accurate information about migrant families, it is quite difficult to obtain definitive numbers regarding those who are affected by poverty. A proper piece of research on housing and child poverty for migrant groups is required, but it will be difficult to carry out. However, when future studies on child poverty are completed, the number of migrant families in poverty will be detected because there has been a significant growth in immigration. There were more than 1,200 births last year to mothers who were not from the UK.

578. Immigration is a growing phenomenon and, from the latest information that I have, we can expect 10,000 people a year to come to Northern Ireland. Although some of those people will leave, the majority will stay and will produce a new population, and the chances are that they will be in high risk of living in poverty because they generally work in minimum-wage jobs.

579. Mr Molloy: As regards the increasing gap between the calculated rent and that charged by landlords, are there any specific suggestions regarding legislation?

580. Mr T McQuillan: There is quite a lot of legislation dealing with the private-rented sector in the Republic of Ireland — and there is a lot more regulation. I know that the Minister for Social Development is considering the registration of landlords, which would be the start of the process. There are more rights for private tenants in the Republic of Ireland, which is the example to look at.

581. Ms Anderson: Mr Spratt spoke about the block grant and the constraints under which the Executive are working. There are not many matters that we can deal with outside those constraints, and more engagement with the British is required to get more powers transferred, which would give us greater scope.

582. Although I understand that the witnesses are critical of the Programme for Government, we, as politicians, are looking at how to grow the economy and use prosperity to tackle disadvantage. That is what we need to do in the new political dispensation, and that is reflected in the opportunity and hope that we are offering. We feel that it is not about extending current patterns or doing what has always been done; things need to be changed and measured, which is why we are anxious that equality-impact assessments are being implemented and are being effective. That will mean we can measure outcomes.

583. Mr Carroll referred to the commitment that by 2020 all children, young people and pensioners will be living in safe and warm homes. Yesterday, and today, Mr Spratt has been dealing with the problems of poor housing conditions in south Belfast, such as outside toilets, structural damage and no fire alarms, which he calls a scandal. Private landlords are the cause of much of those problems, and Mr McQuillan touched on the regulations that are needed to force private landlords to provide adequate protection for tenants, and I would like him to develop that point.

584. Are there any local programmes that are helping to minimise the impact of the increase in fuel poverty on low income families; and what more can be done to minimise the high impact of fuel poverty increases on low income families.

585. Mr Carroll: We agree with the principle in the Programme for Government that prosperity will help the economy and will alleviate pressure on families in the long term. However, the proposals to free up Government assets for social housing and the legislation that is required to get private-developer contributions are probably two, or three, years down the line.

586. The Republic of Ireland’s experience regarding developer contribution was that money did not start coming through until three or four years after the legislation was introduced. We welcome the Executive’s commitment, but the interim period must be catered for. Social housing is a pillar that cannot be ignored. If we do not deal with the infrastructure issues — with the ability of housing associations to be able to deliver during the period before legislation is introduced — then we are in danger of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

587. Mr T McQuillan: Prosperity is the way forward. I did some work recently that involved looking at the Republic of Ireland’s situation. During the past 10 years, when it might have been regarded as having quite a significant growth and increase in prosperity, the number of children in severe child poverty has grown. The gap between the haves and the have-nots has increased significantly. While one hopes that the gap will reduce in the long term, 10 years is a long time, and 2020 is 12 years away, and it may not be long enough to make prosperity trickle down to those with the least opportunity and those most in poverty. Nonetheless, we should be moving in that direction.

588. Mr Carroll has already referred to landlords. I am not an expert on the Republic of Ireland’s landlord situation, but I know that landlords there have to pay a Government agency for registration, and they are then inspected and must achieve certain standards. Other legislation enforces tenancy agreements. Since April 2007, tenants in Northern Ireland have a tenancy agreement for the first six months, meaning that a new tenancy with a private landlord is fixed for six months. In the Republic of Ireland, a tenant in accommodation for any length of time can have an extended period under legislation, which secures their rights to the tenancy for longer periods. There are many issues relating to tenancy agreements, and rent is more regulated. I do not have the fine detail on that but it could be supplied to the Committee.

589. Ms Anderson: I note your interest in the system in the Twenty-six Counties and, as republicans, it is something that we would look to before looking for a better system here. I accept that some people in the Twenty-six counties have become extremely poor, while others have become extremely rich, resulting in a widening gap between rich and poor. However, we are seeking to have investment with fairness, so that areas that have never seen investment will see it coming to their areas. The Committee has been anxious to have a proper, full equality-impact assessment on policies so that we can see whether they are working; whether they are delivering, and so that we can monitor the outcomes. The Committee is anxious to be seen to be doing something that will make a difference to people’s lives, and that is the mindset of its members.

590. The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation and the answers to our questions. We will be happy to receive any additional information that you care to provide.

591. Mr T McQuillan: Thank you very much.

592. The Chairperson: I welcome now Frances Dowd from the Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network (NIAPN), and Peter Kenway from the New Policy Institute (NPI). Good afternoon, and thank you very much for your attendance. We have already received copies of the written submissions. I invite you to address the Committee by way of short presentations or a joint presentation, and then members will have the opportunity to ask questions. We anticipate that this session will last no more than 30 minutes.

593. Ms Frances Dowds (Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network): Thank you very much for having us here today. We very much welcome the opportunity to make our presentations, to have some interaction, and to answer any questions that the Committee may have. I will not waste my time, which is valuable, but go into the key points of the submission that I made to the review. I want to paint a picture, in order to put some depth into the understanding of this issue. I know that you have had many presentations from other organisations; I hope that we can give you a more in-depth view.

594. There has been a 60% increase in the level of homelessness over the last number of years. Each year, 3,000 people die prematurely. Two fifths of adults living in Northern Ireland are affected by the Troubles. The reality is that half of the children who are living in poverty are living in working households. Families living in poverty live with food poverty, fuel poverty, low wage and low benefit levels. They have a lower life expectancy. They are socially excluded. They have higher costs of living, especially with regard to debt and credit. They feel excluded, powerless and increasingly angry, and it is important that our political representatives acknowledge that. The disadvantaged communities in which we conduct education workshops on poverty feel left behind.

595. As a result of the long-term impact of poverty, many of the people with whom we are in contact suffer from depression and mental-health issues. Compared to the rest of the UK, Northern Ireland has a higher proportion of people on benefits — 19%; there are more people with disabilities and ill health and without paid work; and a higher proportion of people live in fuel poverty — 24% compared to 9% in England.

596. I will focus on income, because people tell us that they do not have enough money to live on — whether they are on benefits or in work. According to recent data from the Department for Social Development (DSD), after paying housing costs, half of the population in Northern Ireland lives on less than £300 a week; 16% live on less than £200 a week, before taking account of housing costs; after paying for housing, that figure rises to 25%. Before paying housing costs, 2% of the population live on less than £100 a week, which rises to 5% after housing costs are taken away. Imagine paying for housing, food, fuel and your children’s needs on £100 or £200 a week — it would not go very far.

597. I want to make some key recommendations, because that is the most important aspect of today. I understand that this subject can cause a certain amount of unease among politicians; however, you cannot talk about poverty without talking about income, and that is the challenge with which our political leaders must grapple. Our politicians must lobby at Westminster for a decent minimum income, whether people are in work or on benefits. Benefits are now worth, in the hand, £30 less a week than they would have been if they were calculated the way that they used to be before the Thatcher Government changed the method of calculation. That means that people are living on £30 a week less than they would be if benefits were tied to average earnings.

598. My recommendations are broad because they cover the key areas that impact on people’s lives. We must have affordable and regulated social housing; accessible health services; and a supportive and inclusive education system, including proper grants for school uniforms, proper support for children travelling to and from school, and bursaries to enable children to do the things in school that other children take for granted.

599. There must be local action in order to regulate doorstep lenders. Some of the people most at risk pay up to 500% interest on doorstep loans. That means that the poor pay more for credit, which is completely unfair.

600. There must be a joined-up approach to tackling poverty. One simple action would be to extend the winter-fuel payments, which elderly people currently receive, to Northern Ireland households that are identified as being at risk. Finally, there must be better access to information about people’s entitlement to benefits and support.

601. Poverty is still highly stigmatised in Northern Ireland, and people are still ashamed to say that they are poor. The press’s attitude to people in poverty is either that they are scroungers or that they live a life of luxury on benefits, which highlights the media’s ignorance. That negative perception must be challenged, and I call on our political representatives to lead the way.

602. Mr Peter Kenway (New Policy Institute): First, I thank the Committee for the invitation to attend today’s session.

603. The extent of our knowledge about poverty and social exclusion in Northern Ireland is as a result of work that NPI carried out two years ago for the report published by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation entitled ‘Monitoring poverty and social exclusion in Northern Ireland 2006’. We know a lot about the subject from 10 years work in Great Britain. There are many similarities and a number of very important differences.

604. The thrust of our submission addresses the central question that the Committee’s interim report deals with, which is how likely is it that Northern Ireland will get anywhere near to meeting the target of reducing child poverty by a half by 2010, compared with the 1998-9 baseline.

605. NPI’s view is that, at the moment, the chances of reaching that target are low — and I do not mean missing it by a per cent or two; as far as I am concerned, that would fairly count as success. If you had to predict what the level of child poverty would be in 2010, the best bet would be to say that it will be close to where it is at the moment. Nothing in the trends, the employment figures or the current plans for benefits and the minimum wage suggests that there will be any significant change, which means that the target will be missed, not simply by a little, but by a mile. That is the major problem with basing the entire discussion on poverty reduction on something that is, frankly, so unreal.

606. Obviously, that is a forecast, and my remarks are somewhat speculative, but it is important to acknowledge the problems. The deadline for achieving the target is really only three years from now, but, as far as we can see, the only thing that is likely to make a big enough difference to the situation would be a substantial act of redistribution by the London Government. If employment were to grow strongly, that would contribute greatly, but I do not think that anybody seriously believes that it will grow strongly. Who knows what will happen to all our economies as a result of what is happening in the USA? I suspect that if, in two years’ time, employment levels are about where they are now, that would not be too bad an outcome. The main point is that we are in real danger of missing those targets by a long way.

607. NPI believes that it is very important to look, not just at reducing child poverty, but also — and I say “also”, not “instead of” — at ameliorating and alleviating the problems experienced by people living in poverty or near poverty. The central issue is one of cost; in particular, the cost of essential services, such as childcare, transport and, perhaps above all, fuel. Fuel costs impact adversely on everybody, but much more so on those who are already on very low incomes. There should be much more of a focus on those issues and on alleviating child poverty as well as seeking to reduce it.

608. Mr Shannon: Thank you for your presentation and for the correspondence that you have had with the Committee in the past. My questions are for Peter and Frances — you both had some ideas about how the levels of child poverty could be reduced.

609. Peter, you mentioned the economy and how it could kick-start efforts to reduce child poverty. The Minister of Finance and Personnel delivered the draft Budget this week, and we very much feel that it is a strong Budget, which places an emphasis on the economy. Do you feel that that will be enough to provide the necessary kick-start?

610. Frances, in NIAPN’s opinion, is the eradication of child poverty an achievable goal?

611. Ms Dowds: I will have a go at answering both questions, if you do not mind.

612. At this point, the Northern Ireland Assembly has a fantastic economic opportunity available to it in the form of the Strategic Investment Board. Some £10 billion will be invested in Northern Ireland in the years to come. Members now have an opportunity to consider how that money could be used to tackle poverty and really make a difference. This is an opportunity to consider how can we ensure that the people who are employed are the most excluded, and that the wages that they are paid are enough to live on and provide them with a minimum income. Therefore, through its economic development work, the Northern Ireland Assembly has a real opportunity to carry out some very concrete anti-poverty work across the board.

613. I do not believe that the priority of the existing Budget will address poverty in Northern Ireland. For that to happen, economic development and social agendas must be in partnership. The Budget has to say that economic development will go hand in hand with social protection and alleviation of poverty. My reading of the draft Budget is that it does not address issues relating to poverty. We welcome the additional resources for health and housing. We hope that those resources will go towards affordable, regulated social housing, and not towards low-cost home-ownership opportunities. We speak to the most disadvantaged people, and they simply cannot access social housing. Therefore, there is a real need in that area.

614. If you really want to make a difference to the lives of children living in poverty in Northern Ireland, you have to think of that as a long-term goal. It will not happen overnight, and it must be done holistically. You have to think about health, education and housing. You have to think about getting the Departments to work together so that the policies that they implement are poverty-proofed.

615. Northern Ireland has an anti-poverty strategy, but it is still in draft form, and it has not been ratified or prioritised. If the strategy could be amended to encourage more joined-up government and more cross-cutting targets, it could, potentially, make a real difference. In order to address child poverty, you have to be in it for the long haul. There will not be a quick return.

616. Mr Kenway: I am afraid that I am not familiar with the draft Budget that was presented this week, so I cannot answer the question specifically. However, the overall economic climate at the minute is very dangerous, and, in some sense, that is what we were focusing on. Northern Ireland needs more jobs, especially compared to Scotland, Wales or England. Nevertheless, we must not assume that jobs are a panacea, because almost half of the children who are in poverty in Northern Ireland live in households where one person is in paid employment. There are various issues there. The person may work part time, or one adult in the household may work full time and the other may not work at all. Therefore, the overall number of jobs must increase, but attention must be paid to the type of jobs and rates of pay for low-paid workers. That is what you have said, but I have put it slightly differently. That is a long-term goal.

617. Although pay cannot be set at any level — that is completely unrealistic — there is some scope. The structure of pay and the amount of low pay in the public sector should be examined closely.

618. It does not matter whether you live in Northern Ireland or in Great Britain, in European terms we are three quarters of the way down the league of child-poverty levels. If we halve child poverty in the next few years, that might take us a little bit above average. In principle, there is no reason why we cannot reduce child poverty. If it were reduced by 5%, we would be the best in Europe. That is not inherently unrealistic — it is a long-term goal, but it is realistic. However, we have a long way to go.

619. Mr Molloy: What is your interpretation of child poverty and its impact? It is a loosely worded term, which is difficult to define. What changes would you make in housing, health or social services, or what legislative programme would you recommend to the Executive that would bring us close to reaching the target?

620. Mr Kenway: By convention, which I think has held for 10 years in the UK and longer across Europe, the principal measure of poverty has been an income measure, based on a low level of income relative to the median. The median is used to prevent Richard Branson’s income, for example, from entering into the calculation of the average. It is in relation to the household halfway up the income distribution.

621. There are a number of reasons why it is right to keep that as the principal measure that one looks at, although it is not the only measure. The Committee has discussed deep poverty or severe poverty, which is another income measure with a different threshold. It is reasonable to look at that. If one has good information, it is reasonable to look at measures that involve material deprivation.

622. The basic story, however, is that those things are, more or less, moving in line. One could have a discussion about what the right way to measure it is, but one would not reach a definitive answer. The important thing is that they are moving together — or, in this case, not moving together. The Committee is quite right to want to look at people who are below that poverty line, but the way to do that is to look at people’s costs.

623. There is a problem with the idea of poverty: what exactly does it mean? If you talk about the costs of transport or fuel, people know that you are speaking in concrete terms. I am wary of getting too far into debates about how you measure poverty.

624. Ms Dowds: The measurement of poverty is difficult; it is as long as a piece of string. It could be measured by deprivation, income, or by using relative definitions, such as whether people have the same lifestyle as those around them are enjoying. I have brought along a fact sheet that we produced this year, entitled ‘What is Poverty?’ It talks about different measurements of poverty. I have copies of it for members.

625. From the Northern Ireland Anti-Poverty Network’s perspective, we prefer a relative definition of poverty. We want people to live a decent quality of life. We have also looked at the 60% median income, and we have provided figures, based on the Northern Ireland data produced by the Households Below Average Income (HBAI) survey. It is good to look at what Government say that people need to live by. The figures are contained in the fact sheet. From our perspective, however, you have also to think of those figures in relation to what you need to live. You need to be able to cover housing costs, to pay for food and household bills, to buy clothing, and so on.

626. I want to highlight the 60% measurement: that is the common measure used by the Government when they talk about poverty statistics. However, last year, we did some research with Save the Children, which is on the NIAPN website. Please look at it. There is a resource called “the poverty tour”. It takes the 60% median income measurement and then subtracts the cost of living for a basic household — housing, travel, utilities, and so on. By the time you get to the end, you are £2,000 in debt and you have not covered all the things you need to pay for, such as lunches, travel to school, childcare, emergency breakdowns of household equipment. All the things that happen to people regularly cannot be covered within the 60% median income measurement.

627. Therefore, there are problems with how poverty is measured and defined. The Committee could consider research carried out recently in England that looks at minimum income required. Peter has been involved in that. You have to consider what people need.

628. The UK benefit system is supposedly based on supporting people over times of need, but our benefits have diminished in value while our cost of living has continued to rise. The natural outcome of that is that poverty has become much worse, and people feel further and further disadvantaged.

629. On the issue of the legislative programmes required, I would say that people perceived as coming from disadvantaged backgrounds should be fast-tracked through health systems. We need greater commitment from Government to provide affordable, regulated social housing. With respect to education, we have already made a number of practical suggestions which were made to us by families and by children experiencing poverty. For example, schools should have bursaries to provide disadvantaged children with money to travel on school trips, so that those kids can take part in the activities that their peers are able to enjoy. Schools in disadvantaged areas should have more bursary money available.

630. We have other research findings with key recommendations, which I would be happy to forward to the Committee. There is not enough time to go through them all.

631. The Chairperson: We would be happy to have those provided to us.

632. I acknowledge the presence of the junior Minister, Mr Ian Paisley Jnr, who has joined us again this afternoon. He is very welcome.

633. Mr McElduff: I have two questions, the first of which is about the characteristics of rural poverty. The definition of poverty that we have heard refers to after-housing costs, after-food costs and after-fuel costs. There is very little mention of after-transportation costs, which should be built into any presentation about poverty.

634. Ms Dowds: It is contained in our definition, which can be found on our website.

635. Mr McElduff: I need to hear it here as well, Frances. I also wish to discuss the particular characteristics of child poverty in rural areas. Secondly, what are Denmark and Finland doing right?

636. Mr Kenway: I avoided answering the previous question: this might give me an opportunity to complete the answer. What can the Assembly do? The answer, very often, is quite prosaic things that are not very fashionable. Nothing is more unfashionable or more looked down upon than public transport — and I say that as someone who, a long time ago, worked for London Transport, and not in a useful job — yet it seems to us that of all the areas that are neglected, public transport is the one that makes a huge difference, certainly in rural areas, to a group who deserve a lot more attention, and who lose out because of our focus on children — in other words, those people who to all intents and purposes are children but have now turned 16 or 17 years of age. Are they children or are they not? They do not have cars, and they are very dependent on public transport to take them to work, to college or to visit their friends.

637. Public transport has been a Cinderella subject in England for at least 25 years, and it should not be. As I understand it, drawing on what we know from Scotland, the issue in rural areas has more to do with availability, while in urban areas the issue is price. Although price is important in rural areas, availability is just as important. I do not think that that is part of anybody’s grand strategy, but it should be, and it would make a tangible difference.

638. Ms Dowds: We work with groups in rural areas across Northern Ireland. Transport has a massive impact on children who live in disadvantaged communities. It also has an impact on disadvantaged households in communities that are not necessarily seen as being disadvantaged. Many people are unable to access a bus because the service stops at 9.00 pm, or because it costs £14 to go somewhere and come back. That is the return fare from Armagh to Belfast for a child, which is ridiculous. There is a real need for public transport to be subsidised so that people on low incomes can use it where it is available. There must be greater investment in public transport. I would like to see more investment in trains as well as bus routes.

639. I also recommend that the Committee examine the policy introduced in London for school-age children. Ken Livingstone introduced a scheme in which children travel free during school hours and up to 9.00 pm or 10.00 pm. Children from disadvantaged backgrounds are able to move around, meet friends and be socially interactive; they are not socially excluded. Something like that would make a real difference. We hear from families that, once children turn 16 years of age, they are charged adult prices by Translink. It costs a disadvantaged household £600 a year to take one child to school and back. That is out of order. It costs £1,200 a year to get two children to school and back, never mind school lunches. Those things are having a massive impact on low income households and on the school attendance of children from low income households.

640. Mr Moutray: In your submission, Frances, you refer to severe poverty. Can you define what you mean by severe poverty? What measures should the Executive take to alleviate it?

641. Ms Dowds: Severe poverty refers to households in which adults and children have to do without basic necessities such as three meals a day, a warm home and two pairs of adequate shoes. Therefore, it refers to the basic necessities that other people take for granted. It also relates to living on low income, therefore, it is about a combination of factors, which when associated with low income, mean that people do not have the money to make decisions about anything.

642. For some people, paying a weekly household bill can be massively stressful. People often live in severe deprivation because their income does not cover their cost of living. Furthermore, they have to manage their debts and often have to live with high debts. Sometimes they will borrow money from social fund, max out their limit, and be unable to go back and borrow again. They will then turn to doorstep lenders, which will involve paying 500% interest rates. Severe poverty creates a cycle of further disadvantage.

643. One way to break severe poverty would be to stop giving social fund loans and reintroduce grants for people who are in receipt of benefits. We should not be lending money to people who do not have enough to pay their weekly costs. That is obscene and encourages a culture of debt.

644. I want to take a bit more time to think about severe poverty so that I can provide the Committee with concrete recommendations. Income is a key factor. Benefit levels are inadequate, and for low income families who are in work, providing enough money to enable them to make healthy choices would make a big difference to their quality of life. There are many factors involved, including whether people live in rural or urban areas; how big their family is, and what sort of support, if any, is available. I need more time than I have today to give an adequate response.

645. Mr Spratt: I thank the witnesses for their presentation. I am concerned about how poverty is measured; it is extremely difficult to measure. People talk about areas of disadvantage, and all Committee members could give examples of that from their own constituencies. There are areas in my constituency that are not classified as disadvantaged because millionaire’s row in south Belfast is a few hundred yards away.

646. Cross-cutting issues such as mental health have been touched on. As I said, the present methods for measuring poverty are not the best. How can we measure poverty at the greatest point of need?

647. Ms Dowds: You certainly do not ask easy questions.

648. Mr Spratt: The question is not easy, but this is an evidence-based inquiry.

649. Mr Kenway: Areas of disadvantage and income poverty do not overlap perfectly. Ultimately, one has to consider both subjects. Mr Spratt is right; plenty of people on low incomes do not live in areas of disadvantage. In fact, most people on low incomes do not live in what would be deemed to be disadvantaged areas. That is obviously true in rural areas, but there is also a great deal of income poverty in the suburbs.

650. Mr Spratt: There are also people who live in poverty who are asset rich but cash poor.

651. Mr Kenway: Yes. For example, owner-occupier pensioners are often in that category. The methods used for measuring poverty are not perfect. However, it is right to focus on people with low incomes and on areas of disadvantage. Paddy Hillyard and his colleagues compiled a particularly good report in 2003 called ‘Bare Necessities: Poverty and Social Exclusion in Northern Ireland’. We examined that report closely, and although it showed that there are children who lack the physical necessities, we drew the conclusion that the big difficulties that people have is in paying for essentials and in paying their bills, whether they are for water, heat or tax.

652. In one sense, that chimes with what one is aware of, anecdotally. Yet it also underlines, once again, the centrality of money. These days, it is as much about being able to pay for essentials as it is about having material possessions. Despite all the difficulties, it is right to keep income at the centre of attention, while recognising that there are other issues.

653. Mr Spratt: Is that the best method for measuring poverty?

654. Mr Kenway: If am only allowed to choose one, then yes. However, there need not be only one. Clearly, area-based approaches to regeneration and redevelopment must also be considered. If I must choose one method, however, I will stick to the one that I have and will try to avoid too many debates about it. I am more worried about where those debates are going. If they were going in different directions, it would be much more important to argue the issue. They are not, however.

655. Ms Dowds: We have come back to, “how long is a piece of string?” — which is a bit of a philosophical question on some levels. As to which definition is best, it depends on the intention. If the intention is to deal with poverty in a historically disadvantaged area then an area-based approach is useful because it gives the ability to compare disadvantaged areas against one another and enables decisions to be made on the allocation of resources.

656. If the intention is to improve the circumstances of a particular group of people, for example older people, an income measurement can be useful. However, if income is the focus, it must be compared with cost of living. Income data does not necessarily tie in with that. Cost of living here has risen significantly and income data does not reflect real costs. Therefore, if an income-based approach is taken, it must be tied in with costs of living.

657. Mr Spratt: Our problem is that we must measure the piece of string.

658. Ms Dowds: I realise that.

659. Mr Kenway: The official survey is available. In a sense, as long as the family resources survey is carried out in Northern Ireland on the same basis as that in GB — which is always an important issue — then some data is available. Even though it is clearly not perfect, it bounds our discussion to some degree.

660. Ms Anderson: The figure of 24% in fuel poverty was stated. I am sure that that figure is higher in areas such as Strangford, south Belfast, the north-west and my area, Derry. If that were compared with the average figure for child poverty, then in parts of Derry it could be 36%.

661. Free travel in London was also mentioned. I am trying to think outside the box, because of a regional experience that I have just had. Not only do children get free travel in London, families on low income and pensioners also get it because of an international trade agreement between London and Venezuela. Given the context here, and given that the Executive are taking a pride in making a difference, I believe that what is coming out of OFMDFM as regards the Programme for Government will deal with the point that has been made about economic development going in partnership with social development. The language being used is: building prosperity in order to tackle disadvantage. What must be done next in the context of anti-poverty-proofing? On the one hand, there is an anti-poverty unit in OFMDFM and there is an anti-poverty strategy. However, there is no action plan attached to that policy. There are two junior Ministers, and I acknowledge that one of them has been present to listen to the evidence that has been presented.

662. What next step is needed to firm up the required action plan? We are constrained by the block grant, and innovative initiatives must be introduced that will allow the Executive to stand out and show that they are committed to making a difference to people’s lives. Although there is an anti-poverty strategy, it has no real substance — no action plan for delivery. Yet there are two junior Ministers, an anti-poverty unit, and a number of people working in the area. What next step do you recommend?

663. Ms Dowds: We facilitated consultation on the anti-poverty strategy, and provided a range of recommendations from the people who attended our events about what it should contain. Very few of those recommendations were incorporated in the strategy. I recommend that the Committee goes back to those submissions, which were made by organisations across Northern Ireland, where it may find some good, concrete recommendations.

664. Although the anti-poverty strategy is not ideal as it stands, I would like to see it being ratified and an action plan agreed to. A regional action plan is needed that enables people to be involved, whether they are from Dungannon, Derry, Strabane, Portglenone, Portaferry or wherever. People need to be given an opportunity to engage and to say what their key issues are and what they want to see being done. Obviously, everything that people want cannot be done: there have to be priorities, and that is where the existing research available in Northern Ireland will be invaluable. Some fantastic research has been carried out by OFMDFM and outside Government.

665. It is very difficult to know where to begin to make the best impact. Putting water charges on hold was the most positive message to come out of the newly-formed Assembly. My recommendation would be for the Assembly to eradicate water charging and to ensure that poor people who do not have enough money to pay for food and fuel and look after their children are not expected to pay anything towards a charge that is already included in their rates bill.

666. Mr Kenway: I will pick up on two related points. The first is the figure of 24%, which relates to 2004-05: fuel prices are substantially higher now than they were two or three years ago. Secondly, we always see the problem as being static. Fuel poverty and fuel costs are worsening sharply, and anything that can be done to make them worsen more slowly would be a real, worthwhile contribution. In the end, it almost seems to be a big political fight between elected representatives here and elsewhere in the UK and the energy companies and energy regulators.

667. The energy regulator in London is under real pressure for the first time, and people are asking why something is not being done about prices. There may not be a problem with policy, in the sense that something should be written into a document. However, there is a real need to put pressure on fuel companies to tell us what is happening and why prices are increasing so much. The problem is really hurting people and, if it could be eased, it would not reduce income poverty as it is defined in the statistics, but it would make a real difference to people. We should not overlook that fact.

668. Mrs Long: I apologise for arriving late and not hearing the beginning of the presentation. However, I took a great interest in what was said about public transport, which is one of my hobby horses. Public transport is not a popular method of alleviating poverty, but I am convinced that it has real merit. My party surveyed my constituency and asked people about their experiences, and the biggest complaint — particularly in the larger housing estates — was the exclusion that results in not being able to access good public transport, and those housing estates are only a few miles from the heart of Belfast. That problem will be multiplied when one looks at rural constituencies, such as those represented by Barry McElduff.

669. Public transport compounds the social exclusion issue. It denies people the right to education. I know of examples where children do not attend school on certain days because their parents cannot afford the bus fare. Access to employment, childcare and health services are all dictated by the availability of good, frequent, affordable public transport. Even small things, such as access to a different range of shops and being able to purchase food in the cheapest place, are often restricted by access to public transport. There are huge issues that are not being addressed.

670. Transport for London was mentioned, but the difference between London and here is that a huge amount of investment has gone into what is basically a re-nationalised bus service. Transport for London is not run with a view to covering its own costs, which is what happens here. Our transport system has to finance itself, meaning that non-profitable routes are simply dropped. There are huge choices to be made about levels of investment.

671. There are a couple of other matters that I wish to discuss.

672. The Chairperson: We are almost at the end of our time, Mrs Long. Please ask your question.

673. Mrs Long: I understand that, Chairperson. I want to explore the issue of child poverty in comparison to general poverty, which was raised in the submission. We are focusing on reducing child poverty, but clearly, in order to achieve that aim, families must be lifted out of poverty. What impact will specific actions to address child poverty have on families? Mr McElduff asked what Denmark and Finland were doing that we are not. Those countries have very high tax economies with very high social welfare standards. We are more focused on social mobility than social equality. What is your view of that issue? It seems to me that most Scandinavian countries are more focused on social equality than social mobility. That has two impacts: it changes the way we invest, but it also removes the stigma of poverty.

674. Ms Dowds: I agree completely. We look with great admiration to our Nordic partners, who have bitten the bullet. They have agreed to accept high taxes in order to fund policies that will make a difference to the wider population. They pay up to 40% tax on their incomes, but that is used to supplement the sort of social policies that make a difference to people. They have high benefit levels and high employment figures. However, they also have good re-education facilities for people who want to move from one employment sector to another. We look on them with envy, and hope that at some point there will be a wider public debate in which people can be encouraged to realise that in order for a country to benefit, the lives of all of its citizens have to improve, not just some. The idea of private companies versus public companies is an example of that. If we accept that there is a need for essential services such as health, education or transport, we should also be prepared to accept that the cost of those services must be covered.

675. We are also concerned about the lack of investment in public transport. We are hearing more and more about food deserts in Northern Ireland — areas in which people do not have access to public transport or local shops. People in those areas are dependent on taxis, which has a major impact on the food that they can buy and how much they have left with which to pay their household bills. In turn, their health is affected, which results in higher costs to society in general. Support for people in one area will result in benefits in another, but it will take a long-term investment for that to be seen to bear fruit.

676. The difference between policies that deal with child poverty and family hardship can be found by examining children between 16 and 18 years old. When a child becomes a semi-adult, a grey area is created. A 16-year-old who is not in training or employment will receive nothing to live on. The parents of such children do not receive child benefit, nor are those children entitled to any other income. They immediately become a burden on their families.

677. Our legislators must go back to Westminster and say that the situation is unacceptable and that the Government must make a difference. Some provision must be made for 16-year-olds; they are entitled to an income or some type of support. The only way to access support is to leave home and become independent.

678. There may be some 16-year-olds who are mature enough to do that, but the majority are still children. However, to all intents and purposes they are defined as adults and are charged adult prices. If they want to use public transport; they are charged the adult fare. Children in that age group are extremely vulnerable. However, they are often seen as being troublesome. If they live in areas of disadvantage, there is nothing for them to do. They hang around on street corners because they want to be with their friends, but there is nowhere else for them to go. That group must be focused on and prioritised. Something must be done to make a difference to their lifestyles and to ease the pressure on their families. Benefits might be one way in which we could ensure that parents do not suffer when children reach the age of 16.

679. Mr Kenway: I would make one point about buses; the Committee will be pleased to hear that the history of nationalisation, or otherwise, of buses by Ken Livingstone is not confined to one point. It was said that buses are always treated as a cost. When that view is taken, another benefit of buses is often missed, which is that — and I am being a bit of an anorak in this — most of the cost of running a bus is in labour.

680. Like cars, buses are fairly cheap to run. Putting money into a bus service provides employment. One is also quite often providing a desirable form of employment, because it is flexible, and can involve part-time or shift work. One should not think of buses as being of benefit simply to the people who use them. It is not being unrealistic to say that they provide local employment as well. Although one could not say that one could revive an economy on the back of public transport — that would be ridiculous — its positive benefits are much greater than is normally perceived. One should consider the employment impact as well as the cost.

681. The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentations and thoughtful answering of questions. If you wish to provide the Committee with any additional information, we will be happy to receive it. Thank you and good afternoon.

682. The Committee will now receive evidence from Disability Action. We have already received a written submission, and Mr Kevin Doherty will make a presentation. I understand that Ms Monica Wilson will be here also.

683. Good afternoon, Kevin. Thank you for coming, you are very welcome to this public session of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, which is taking evidence on child poverty. Are you representing Disability Action on your own today?

684. Mr Kevin Doherty (Disability Action): Yes: our chief executive, Monica Wilson, sends her apologies, as she has another engagement.

685. The Chairperson: We look forward to your presentation. Would you make a brief opening statement and then I will offer members the opportunity to ask questions. We anticipate that the session will last no more than half an hour.

686. Mr K Doherty: Thank you for asking me to present evidence today. As I said, Monica Wilson, our chief executive, sends her apologies. Some members will have met her on previous occasions.

687. I will give some background information on Disability Action. We are a pan-disability organisation that is working for, and with, people with disabilities.

688. We offer a range of services throughout Northern Ireland. We have regional offices in Newry, Carrickfergus, Dungannon, Belfast and Derry. Our services include: the provision of transport to people with disabilities; driving lessons; access audits of buildings; and training and employment support to people with disabilities. Together with Children in Northern Ireland we jointly initiated the Children with Disability Strategic Alliance. We sit on the all-party working group on disability and the all-party working group on children.

689. Disability Action welcomes the opportunity to submit evidence to the Committee’s inquiry into child poverty in Northern Ireland. First, there are a number of key statistics that we would like to state and that must be considered. The most recent Government statistics, released in August 2007, showed that 124,000 children are living in poverty. That figure represents 29% of all children. An initial draft of a recent NISRA survey highlighted the fact that, in Northern Ireland, 21% of adults and 6% of children have a disability of some sort. There are a number of statistics on disabilities that show, for example, that a disabled person finds it three times more difficult to get employment than a non-disabled person.

690. A number of child poverty targets were set up by Department for Work and Pensions, which included a 25% reduction in child poverty across the UK in 2005 — that figure is to increase to 50% by 2010 — and child poverty to be eradicated across the UK by 2020. If those figures are mirrored in Northern Ireland, then significant resources must be allocated in the Programme for Government.

691. Disability Action responded to the draft Programme for Government and, having reviewed yesterday’s Budget statement, it is evident that significant, appropriate resources have not been allocated. A number of issues must be highlighted. An estimated 55% of families with a disabled child are living in, or on, the margins of poverty. The annual costs of bringing up a disabled child are three times greater than those for a non-disabled child.

692. Parents and carers of disabled children often have to fight the system to get that to which they are legally entitled. There should be a more co-ordinated approach on the matter. The link between child poverty levels and the absence of accessible — and I emphasise the word “accessible” — quality, affordable and age-appropriate childcare must be addressed. Services for disabled children and young adults must, in general, be increased.

693. I read the Committee’s interim report on child poverty. Disability Action wishes to emphasise to the Committee that the reduction of child poverty in Northern Ireland cannot be the sole responsibility of one Department. There must be an inter-departmental approach that includes healthcare provision, education, transition to employment, and better recognition that issues relating to children with disabilities cross all areas of Government.

694. It is unfair and inappropriate that, in the twenty-first century, children with disabilities cannot access the same opportunities and benefits as those of non-disabled children. While recognising that child poverty crosses all sectarian boundaries, Disability Action strongly believes that there is an urgent need for Government to find more effective ways to support disabled children and their families.

695. The Committee must use its influence — and I emphasise the word “influence” — to secure adequate resources across all sectors of Government. It must ensure that there is a strategic approach to the matter — rather than one that is haphazard, piecemeal and patchworked — in co-operation with professional children’s services organisations across Northern Ireland. That approach must be fully adopted in order to reduce, and to ultimately eradicate, child poverty in Northern Ireland.

696. The Chairperson: I thank Mr Doherty for his presentation and invite questions from Committee members.

697. Mr Shannon: I, also, thank Mr Doherty for his presentation. Even before the presentation, Committee members were aware that children with disabilities are more vulnerable to poverty. That is a fact and it is something that worries us all. The Committee is undertaking the inquiry on child poverty to see if it can improve matters. With regard to Northern Ireland, are there any examples of programmes, promotions, working schemes or projects that have tried to address, specifically, children’s disabilities and the needs of their families?

698. Can you give some examples of where those schemes have taken place, what they have tried to do, and what success they have had? That would give the Committee an idea about what we should try to put in place to try to improve the situation.

699. Mr K Doherty: Would you like me to provide examples of specific services?

700. Mr Shannon: Yes, I would like examples of schemes that have specifically reduced child poverty.

701. Mr K Doherty: I could highlight examples, but it is more important that the Committee considers the new services that are being developed within the new framework that is place in the Assembly. Services must not be carried out by the Government and Departments in isolation. They must be carried out in association with the people. Any good examples of services are done in consultation with parents and carers who are responsible for disabled children, and disabled children themselves.

702. I emphasise that Disability Action does not provide front-line services for children. However, what we encourage you to do is to ensure that any front-line services that are offered are in association with children and their families, because they know best what their needs are. For example, a service that is offered to disabled children from 9.00 am to 11.00 am might not be suitable because it might take the family two or three hours to get a child to that service. Rather than giving examples of services, the important point is that services must be developed in association, and in consultation, with children and their families and carers.

703. Mr Shannon: I presume that transport is a key issue for Disability Action. Everyone who has given evidence to today’s meeting has mentioned that issue, but, when made by an organisation such as Disability Action, the point carries more weight. What measures would you like to see with regard to transportation? Barry always talks about the rural community, as he should. I represent a constituency that is urban and rural so I am keen for a scheme to be introduced that would benefit all areas.

704. Mr K Doherty: You are quite right to say that transport is a key issue. The provision of transport is not consistent across Northern Ireland. In Derry and Belfast, a rural door-to-door transport service is available for members of the Advice Services Alliance (ASA). That service picks people up at their door and takes them to wherever they are going. Along with the door-to-door service, taxi services and public transport, including trains, must be considered. All areas of transport must be fully accessible for all members of the public, including children. It is not appropriate that a disabled child in County Fermanagh, for instance, does not have the same right to accessible transport as someone who is situated here in east Belfast.

705. Mr Shannon: One of the concerns that I have is that you need not go to Fermanagh to find an example of that. A door-to-door disabled service is available in Ards, but beyond Loughries, such a service is not available in the Ards Peninsula. Something is wrong there because the service is not offered in area that is only five miles away.

706. Mr K Doherty: It is crucial that it is written in the Programme for Government and in the party manifestos that a fully integrated transport system must be set up for the whole of Northern Ireland. That must include every aspect of transport.

707. Mr Spratt: I am interested in disabled issues, and, as a member of the board, I have fought on behalf of special needs children for many years to ensure that there would not be any cuts in funding. You said that the annual costs of bringing up a disabled child are three times greater than those of bringing up a non-disabled child. Given that people with disabled children receive allowances for cars, and receive other allowances, can you quantify that figure? I suspect that I know the answer, but it is important that it is recorded.

708. Mr K Doherty: Although you emphasised that certain allowances are available, those allowances are minimal. Parents or carers of disabled children often find that they do not have the opportunity to go into full-time employment. They have to work in lower-level employment because they have the responsibility of caring for a disabled child. Significantly more caring is required for a disabled child than for a non-disabled child. That is the broad basis for the figure. Furthermore, when a disabled child reaches early adulthood, he or she does not have the same opportunity to enter employment. An interdepartmental report into transitions into employment from education found that there was not adequate support. It must be given between the ages of 14 and 18, when they are still children.

709. Mr Spratt: It is important to put those facts on record, why is why I asked you that question.

710. Ms Anderson: You mentioned your involvement with the all-party working group on disability. One of that group’s meetings had to be scheduled for this week because not all of the parties committed to attending a meeting at an earlier time — that might have been because of the Christmas period. However, I think that everyone around this table is committed to addressing this issue, and we must put it into our consciousness and take action on it.

711. Mr Spratt: There are so many Committees as well.

712. Ms Anderson: Yes, but I am sure that parties can find a delegate to send to meetings.

713. Kevin, you talked about the need for a joined-up approach — a horizontal approach across Government, as well as a vertical one. How would such an approach work in practice?

714. I am conscious that people in hard-to-reach groups, particularly those who have special needs, may not always be included in the consultation process. Sometimes it is the representatives of the sector who are involved in consultations, as opposed to the individuals themselves. The Committee has been focusing on equality impact assessments. How do you think that we can reach those people during the consultation process so that they can be involved in the shaping and developing of policies before they are implemented?

715. Mr K Doherty: That is a very good point.

716. I welcome your comments on the all-party working group on disability. Disability Action provides the secretariat support, and all the political parties have given a commitment that they will be involved in the group, but very few political representatives actually attend the meetings. It is important to emphasise that point.

717. People with disabilities often feel isolated, vulnerable and discriminated against, so they will not put their views forward in consultations. I encourage any Department that is carrying out EQIAs to work with disability organisations such as ours, Mencap, the Cedar Foundation, and so on. Our organisations have the confidence and respect of disabled children and people, and the expertise to encourage those people to express their views. The organisations can, in turn, put those views forward on behalf of those individuals. Government have an important opportunity to engage with those groups, and we should encourage more best practice — and examples of best practice do already exist. Many Departments have worked with us in the past, and that is a very good way of getting across the views of the sector.

718. The development of front-line services was mentioned. If services and policies are developed in consultation with families, carers and the individuals themselves, they often become much better, and much more sustainable and inclusive. That is what I mean when I say that we must work with Government on a cross-departmental basis. It should not be the case that Government simply develop a service, present it to us and say “There you are, live with it”. Often, such a service is not appropriate. There should be a bottom-up approach, whereby Government work with individuals through organisations such as ours, and, for example, the equality forum in the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. That provides an opportunity to get the policies and services right from the beginning.

719. Mrs Long: Many of my questions have already been answered. However, I want to raise two issues that were raised with me by a number of parents in my constituency whose children have severe physical disabilities. One of their big concerns was the lack of access to affordable and reliable childcare, while another was their children’s lack of opportunity to experience play and social activity in the same way as other children do. Often, the facilities that are offered — whether through councils or other bodies — are restricted by the number of staff available. Other parents can get respite for a couple of hours a week while their children play in such facilities, but parents of disabled children — who perhaps are more in need of respite — have to accompany the child throughout the entire activity in order to allow them to take part.

720. Is there anything that you feel could be done with regard to policy that would allow some of those issues to be addressed? They add to the stress, but they also add, quite significantly, to the financial burden of the families involved.

721. Mr K Doherty: What you are describing is an example of services and policies being developed with the needs of disabled people being considered only towards the end of the process — it is an add-on. If that continues, disabled people will become completely isolated and vulnerable, and you expressed clearly how parents of disabled children have to stay with them full time. That suggests that the parents do not get access to employment and to opportunities that others do.

722. Disability must be at the forefront of all the policy-making and policy decisions in this Assembly. The provision of day care is a fundamental right of every individual. A disabled child cannot be discriminated against; it cannot be the case that a child with a disability is denied that right. It should not be the case that if a child, because of a disability, has to have a full-time carer, then that carer has to be a parent of that child. That means that that parent earns no money, as they will not be able to enter employment. Then we are faced with what is being talked about here today — child poverty.

723. Instead of being an add-on, as you have adequately described, disability, as an issue for consideration, should be at the forefront of policy decision-making — whether it is the provision of day care or anything else. That should be made clear to all Departments. It should be there from the beginning; not as an add-on towards the end of the process. What you have described is what is happening today. It is not suitable, and it is not appropriate any more.

724. The Chairperson: Are you aware of any examples of good practice?

725. Mr K Doherty: One example of good practice can currently be found in the Department for Employment and Learning, with the roll-out of its Workable NI programme. That is certainly an example of what perhaps could work, because the Department is working directly with people with disabilities. Forums for people with disabilities have been set up, so the Department is getting the perspective from the users. It is a new programme, and it is starting to work because the uptake is faster than was predicted.

726. The Chairperson: We may ask for details of that — it would be very helpful.

727. Mr K Doherty: That could be forwarded through the Committee, and I could forward other examples of good practice as well.

728. The Chairperson: We would be very pleased to receive all of that. Kevin, many thanks for your presentation, for the opportunity that you have given members to ask questions, and for the answers that you have provided. Good afternoon.

6 February 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mrs Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Ms Martina Anderson
Mr Tom Elliott
Mrs Dolores Kelly
Mr Barry McElduff
Mr Stephen Moutray
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jimmy Spratt
Mr Jim Wells

Witnesses:

Dr Helen McAvoy
Dr Jane Wilde

Institute of Public Health in Ireland

Mr John Duffy

Eastern Health and Social Services Board

Ms Fionnuala McAndrew
Mr Sean McKeever

Southern Health and Social Services Board

Mr Raymond Craig
Ms Karin Eyben

Rural Community Network

Ms Fiona MacMillan
Ms Mary Anne Webb

Barnardo’s

729. The Deputy Chairperson (Mrs Long): I welcome Dr McAvoy and Dr Wilde to this afternoon’s Committee meeting. I remind you that the meeting is in public session, and it is being reported by Hansard. Please switch off mobile phones, because they interfere with the recording equipment.

730. Dr Jane Wilde (Institute of Public Health in Ireland): We are pleased to be here; thank you for inviting us. The Institute of Public Health in Ireland (IPHI) responded to the consultation and much appreciates the Committee’s decision to set up an inquiry into child poverty. The IPHI was set up to promote co-operation between North and South in the area of public health. Our particular interests are in co-operation in information and policy advice and in building a voice for public health. Our work is focused on addressing health inequalities, because it is such an important issue.

731. Dr Helen McAvoy (Institute of Public Health in Ireland): I have tried to distil our submission down to four main points that we would like the Committee to consider as it moves forward to develop a better approach to addressing child poverty in Northern Ireland. The first point relates to where we are at the moment and the current policy context, which we understand to be Lifetime Opportunities, the Government’s strategy against poverty and social exclusion, and Our Children and Young People, the children’s strategy.

732. Those are some good, commendable and potentially successful strategies, but there is no clear blueprint for action. We would like to see the development of an integrated action plan between Lifetime Opportunities and Our Children and Young People, with a specific focus on tackling child poverty and meeting the target for 2010 and 2020. The central anti-poverty unit and the children and young people’s unit could take the lead in consolidating the existing strategy commitments to focus on child poverty and give it the priority that it deserves.

733. Our second point relates to developing an appropriate and potentially successful approach to tackling child poverty. The European Anti Poverty Network has made the clear statement that there are no rich children in poor families. Child poverty must be considered within the wider poverty debate. Achieving the solutions will involve making some changes in macroeconomic social and fiscal policy, rather than merely fiddling with some of the more peripheral issues at local level or in service delivery.

734. There are two important elements to that approach. First, a stronger family focus must be developed in programmes that encourage welfare to work, particularly for lone parents. That should involve the assessment of childcare needs for lone parents who are seeking to return to employment, for instance. Secondly, the position of the working poor must be improved. The majority of children living in poverty are in households where one or more adults is in employment. It is not solely an issue for lone parents; it is also an issue for the working poor.

735. The numbers of working poor are increasing across Europe. Our concern is that children whose parents work long hours in low-paid employment and have little prospect of promotion are not in a good situation. That should be taken into consideration. In addition, we want a commitment to ensuring that public services and infrastructure, such as housing and transport, deliver for disadvantaged families and their children. For example, we invite the Committee to consider the approach recently taken in England, where an independent review of their strategies sought to maximise the contribution of each strategy to eradicating child poverty.

736. Thirdly, from a public health perspective, we seek opportunities to optimise and protect the health of disadvantaged children. Health inequality is both a cause and a consequence of child poverty. It is expensive to raise sick or disabled children. It costs ten times more to raise a disabled child than a non-disabled child. Sick and disabled children create barriers for parents who want to return to employment and, therefore, there is a two-way relationship.

737. We want resources to be invested in the reduction of inequalities in child health, particularly in the early years, and a commitment to the belief that babies born to disadvantaged women should have the same birth outcomes as those born to professional mothers. That is a particular interest of ours; the institute has conducted research on the issue. Equality at birth should extend to breastfeeding, early development and school-readiness.

738. Fourthly, in our submission we have set out our vision of an information system to help us understand child poverty and its effects. We encourage the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) to take a lead in developing that system and in communicating those issues to the whole range of Departments and sectors. The outcome that we want to see coming from that process is a sense of ownership, engagement and a spur to action across the broad range of organisations, sectors and Departments that have a role to play.

739. Mr Shannon: Given that the issues span all Departments, is there any one body, apart from this Committee, that should lead the process of communication on child poverty? From where should that thrust come?

740. Dr Wilde: OFMDFM is the most obvious choice, because there will be a responsibility to ensure that the information that is sent out is comprehensible and accessible and that it is supported by a strong campaign of action. We want other Departments to play their parts, but it would be good if OFMDFM took the lead.

741. Mr Shannon: Should other Departments, such as Education, Health, Employment and Learning, or Culture, Arts and Leisure fail to prioritise child poverty, could that create a problem?

742. Dr Wilde: It could, because one of the problems with cross-cutting themes is that an issue that is considered to be everybody’s business can become nobody’s business. We have seen that happen in other areas, and it is a key issue in Northern Ireland. These are things about which everyone feels strongly — there is no one who does not want to address child poverty — but if all the other Departments perceived it to be the responsibility of OFMDFM and did nothing, that would be hopeless.

743. Looking at what has happened elsewhere, we were taken with the English idea of an assessor examining all the different Government strategies. Naturally, we are most familiar with health strategies: what can something like Investing for Health really do to tackle child poverty? We need it to be a central issue and a departmental issue. If we could crack that, we could achieve something important at that level.

744. Ms Anderson: You talked about improving the conditions of the working poor. What strategies would you put in place to address that issue, and what support will be needed to aid debt management among the disadvantaged? Are there specific projects that might address those issues?

745. Dr McAvoy: Many of the working poor are women, so one strategy would be the implementation of gender-equality mechanisms in the workplace and improving the job prospects in low-grade employment. It is not a matter of frantically trying to get everybody a job, but of ensuring that those jobs are quality jobs with prospects for promotion for lone parents or working-poor parents. Those jobs could be obtained through the skills and science funding package.

746. The working poor are concerned about minimum-wage levels and about keeping a check on those levels to ensure that they are realistic as the cost of living increases; for example, the cost of housing is increasingly rapidly.

747. What was the other question?

748. Ms Anderson: What support do you envisage being needed to aid debt management among the disadvantaged?

749. Dr McAvoy: I am not sure what services are available in Northern Ireland. However, in Ireland we have the Money Advice and Budgeting Service (MABS), which is a localised citizen’s advice service, free at the point of access, that assists people to manage their budgets and debts. It also directs people to where they can assess all the benefits that they need and puts them in touch with the relevant organisations. For example, in a fuel-poverty issue where someone has been threatened with disconnection, there are certain steps that can be taken once a person is in contact with MABS that will help to sort out the problem. It could involve the delaying of payments; that sort of thing.

750. The Deputy Chairperson: We have some information coming from the Consumer Council following a meeting on budgeting and money issues. However, additional information on MABS would be helpful.

751. Mrs D Kelly: You have raised several concerns in your written submission about evaluation and monitoring, and the duplication of services, and you point to the ‘State of the Nation’s Children’ report in the Republic of Ireland as a good example of highlighting and monitoring progress. Can you expand on that? That might would be a good example for the Committee to have.

752. Dr McAvoy: Ireland’s Office of the Minister for Children is unique, in that it is a cross-departmental office set up as part of the national children’s strategy. That office spent considerable time and effort developing the ‘State of the Nation’s Children’ report, which is an accessible, simple document that looks at key domains of children’s well-being — health, money, social exclusion, bullying, and a whole range of other issues, including lifestyle issues such as smoking. The report looks at 26 indicators and shows how they compare at European and global level. It gives a good picture of where we are doing well and where we are doing less well. For example, our figures for physical activity were OK, but the figures for smoking were pretty poor. It is useful for directing action. I can get copies for the Committee.

753. Dr Wilde: Dr McAvoy is working on a report on child health inequalities across the island. We hope to have that report with the Committee in late spring, and we think that it will be helpful.

754. The Deputy Chairperson: That would be appreciated.

755. Mrs D Kelly: Given that the junior Ministers are re-establishing the ministerial subcommittee on children and young people, it might be helpful to see how that report is compiled. However, one would then like to see that is not just a report; one would like to see how it directs things, what influence it has across Departments, and what measures or protocols have been established across Departments in order to ensure that those priorities are actioned.

756. Dr McAvoy: Yes.

757. Dr Wilde: Yes.

758. Mr Spratt: Dr McAvoy, you mentioned that parents with disabled children found it ten times more expensive to keep them. What action needs to be taken to provide more effective support for children and families living with a disability who are in poverty?

759. Dr Wilde: I welcome your interest in that area. Children with disabilities have been left out of several strategies that we have seen. I am pleased that you have raised it. We are not currently involved in providing services; we have no more information on this than the Committee has. We will think about that, get back to you and give you a sensible answer.

760. Mr Spratt: Additional benefits are available for people with disabilities. You specifically mentioned that it was 10 times more expensive. Therefore, I thought you might have been able to give me some sort of answer.

761. Dr Wilde: Your point is linked to the more general one about the environment in which all children in Northern Ireland grow up, particularly those who are poor or suffer other disadvantages that make it difficult to access services.

762. What is transport like for children with disabilities? What is housing like for them? Do they have places to play or access to other children? What is it like for their mothers and fathers? Can they go shopping? In some ways, it seems like a very specific issue, but in many others it takes us to the heart of how public provision should be improved for all children, especially those who are poor or who have a disability.

763. That is a rather general answer; however that has to be the approach to providing for such children. If that approach is taken, one can imagine how much more raising a child with disabilities costs. Such children have to travel by taxi, rather than easier modes of transport. One has to ensure that such children can get to where they want to go. You can expand that across the whole range of children’s activities. I do not know the data that went into that particular report. However, it is something that we should be au fait with.

764. Dr McAvoy: There was a study called ‘Sick Children, Money Worries’ which looked at the cost of having a child in hospital. It found that, for children who tended to have repeated, lengthy admissions to hospital, costs were very high. Many of those children also had disabilities. There was no financial means of supporting their parents, who had to travel in and out of hospitals, pay for car parks, and, on some occasions, pay for services that were not provided locally, for transport or special dietary needs. Although it seems that services for disabled children have increased, we may still underestimate the costs that are paid out of pocket.

765. The Deputy Chairperson: The cost of raising a child with a disability, and the impact that that has on the family’s financial circumstances, was raised a few weeks ago by Children in Northern Ireland. We have requested additional information on the evidence for the Northern Ireland-based calculation.

766. The Committee would like to see ‘Sick Children, Money Worries’. A separate issue arises where specific health concerns, rather than disabilities, add to the costs of raising a child. These are other issues that we need to explore to get some more statistics.

767. Mr Spratt: I was trying to tease out of Dr McAvoy whether additional measures were in place in the South that could be put in place here. She mentioned it; I did not get an answer.

768. Dr McAvoy: I would not put the services for children with disabilities in Ireland forward as being a great example that can be learned from.

769. The Deputy Chairperson: That is a fairly clear answer.

770. Mr Spratt: It is, but that was specifically mentioned, and I have a particular interest in disability. That is why I was trying to tease out an answer, and I would be interested in any further information.

771. Dr McAvoy: I would be very interested in seeing other data.

772. Ms Anderson: We should have information on any models of best practice that exist, wherever they are.

773. Mr Elliott: Do you see the development of stronger family focus, which can have different meanings for different people — a family with two parents and three children will have a different focus than a lone parent with only one child — as being broad-based or tailored to specific needs?

774. In suggesting that the Committee could be the centre of an information system to explain child poverty to other groups and agencies, are you asking us to be a lobby group?

775. Dr McAvoy: I am not asking the Committee to be a lobby group, but no one wants the child poverty figures to get any worse than they are. We need to increase ownership and equip people so that they can engage with the problem and start writing actions into their plans at local and regional level to address it. Information and communication are tools that will create that kind of action. It is not a lobbying thing, it is a communication thing. Obviously, that could be a fine line to walk.

776. Dr Wilde: You talked about the kind of information that should be made accessible. The issues that you have raised this afternoon show the extent of what needs to be taken into consideration when talking about child poverty. We must put out information on the various aspects of child poverty and inequality that is as strong, straightforward and simple as that in the well-being report on children in the Republic of Ireland. Inequality is slightly different from poverty, but it is associated. All of that is crucial.

777. There is a fine line between a lobby group, a political party and a departmental strategy, because they are all trying to feed each other. It is fantastic that there will be so many people from the community and statutory sector behind you when you make your report.

778. Dr McAvoy: In answer to your first question about family focus and supporting people to get back to employment, I can give you a few examples of some of the ways that that has been explored.

779. When someone is on a back-to-employment or education scheme they can have their childcare needs assessed, and they can then be offered childcare tasters locally to support them through that very difficult transition from being dependent on welfare to starting employment. People may be afraid, or misinformed, about losing some of their other allowances if they move from welfare to work, and a transition period needs to be provided to look at how support can be increased rather than taken away, and how allowances can be phased out over a period of time. That is one area of family focus. There is also a broader family focus around maternity and paternity leave and similar issues. Those are the examples that I am aware of.

780. The Deputy Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation and written submission, both of which have been very helpful. We appreciate your taking the time to attend. It may be helpful to follow up on certain issues about which additional information has been requested. The Committee Clerk will follow that up with you.

781. Dr Wilde: We have also submitted three reports that might be of use to the Committee: one on inequalities in birth outcomes across the island; one on fuel poverty across the island; and one on poverty in Northern Ireland.

782. The Deputy Chairperson: The next presentation will be made jointly by the Eastern and Southern Health and Social Services Boards. I welcome Mr John Duffy from the Eastern Health and Social Services Board, and Mr Sean McKeever and Ms Fionnuala McAndrew from the Southern Health and Social Services Board. Thank you for coming to the Committee this afternoon.

783. Mr John Duffy (Eastern Health and Social Services Board): Good afternoon. In our submission we have concentrated on those areas in which we felt that we could make a greater contribution to addressing child poverty. Others are better placed to comment on such matters as economic regeneration and education.

784. The central point of our submission is the idea of poverty of opportunity — poor outcomes for a group of particularly vulnerable young children. Research outlined in the submission highlights the fact that children who live in particularly adverse circumstances are likely, as adults, to experience a range of serious physical, psychological and social problems, such as obesity, heart disease, drug use, criminality and self-harm. Those poor outcomes are negative for the individuals concerned, but, more importantly, they create adverse living environments and poverty of opportunity for another generation of children.

785. We feel that the approach of tackling poverty by targeting resources and services at areas of deprivation will not, in itself, necessarily improve the outcomes for such children. Children living in those types of adverse circumstances are less able to benefit from improved universal services. For example, even the best extended school will not benefit a child who does not attend, attends erratically, or attends but does not have the capacity to engage with the school programme. If a child is too under-confident, too tired or unable to concentrate, he or she will not benefit.

786. We propose an approach to the development of services that involves several key concepts, including integrated planning — both integrating services to provide an easily accessible range of support to a community or locality, and integrating services to meet the complex needs of an individual. It is important to make a distinction between those two areas.

787. Early intervention is another key concept. Traditionally, services intervene when problems become apparent, such as when the child displays negative behaviour or indulges in risk-taking behaviour. We argue that support must occur much earlier in the child’s life — from birth onwards — in a much more positive and proactive way. That is linked to the concept of resilience, which is the capacity shown by some children to resist or overcome adversity. We must set in place services that build and support resilience; it is not enough simply to do what we have traditionally done, which is minimise risk. We cannot take into care all children who live in adverse circumstances. We must develop services that can build on resilience, so that children not only are able to survive the environment in which they live, but have the opportunity to improve their outcomes.

788. We propose to link those concepts through an all-systems approach centred on the development of locality plans, which use the children’s strategy high-level outcomes as a common language for identifying localities where children are achieving poor outcomes. We will work with universal and local community services to produce a managed network of services to support all children but also, crucially, to support vulnerable children. In our submission we have identified what we mean by “vulnerable children”. We seek to identify those children and provide additional support to build their resilience. Crucially, services to adults, such as drug and alcohol, psychiatric and learning-disability, GP, and prison services must be linked into that network, and they must also see their patients/clients as parents.

789. The second aspect of the model deals with children who have complex needs or who require safeguarding services, such as child protection, self-harm or camp services, or who may have serious school-related issues. There should be a single, integrated care plan outlining the way in which the relevant agencies will work together to meet those needs.

790. Ms Fionnuala McAndrew (Southern Health and Social Services Board): Thank you for giving us the opportunity to make this presentation. We have taken the opportunity to provide a further paper for the Committee, which draws on some of our original submission and provides some statistical information in relation to the Southern Board area in particular.

791. We recognise that the Committee will have received expert evidence in relation to child poverty and the outcomes. Therefore, our written submission focused on specific groups of children, particularly children with disabilities. We would like to extend that focus to include children from black and minority ethnic (BME) groups, the children of migrant workers and Traveller children.

792. In that context, we want to reinforce the evidence of the demographic changes that are being experienced across Northern Ireland and, particular, in the Southern Board area. We have submitted figures which show that the birth rate in the Southern Board area has been increasing since 1996 and is above the Northern Ireland average. As you can imagine, that has consequences for the board’s spend.

793. The Southern Health and Social Services Board has not been offered a fair share of the resources that are available for health and personal social services. We are in continuing dialogue with the Department in relation to capitation funding. The Committee will also see that the board’s area has 45% of Northern Ireland’s Traveller population and has experienced a significant shift in population due to migrant communities.

794. With regard to children with disabilities, there has been a lot of research on the effect of poverty on children’s outcomes, and that effect is well known. However, there is a need for a greater understanding of the impact of childhood illness on poverty and the consequences of childhood illness and disability on families’ abilities to retain employment. Many parents have to reduce their employment to take up extended caring responsibilities for those children.

795. The board believes that its model of wrap-around services for children with disabilities should be taken forward because it mitigates against multiple appointments, lack of information and lack of support. I am happy to answer questions on that if necessary.

796. The Southern Health and Social Services Board has carried out a lot of research and consultation with BME communities and with children and young people from ethnic minorities. We suggest that child poverty in those communities results in a lack of support and access to basic services, lack of English and appropriate information, and poor access to childcare provision. There is evidence that the migrant population is being excluded from the preschool year in 2008 because of a lack of places.

797. The potential for homelessness and the inability to access health and social care services are particular concerns with regard to the status of some members of the migrant population. There is confusion about current eligibility criteria, for health services, in particular.

798. I want to reinforce the needs of the Travelling community, which has a relatively young population. Health and well-being outcomes for Travellers are well documented: life expectancy is equivalent to that of members of the general population in the 1940s and 1950s. Few members of that community live beyond 60 years of age. In order to deal with the needs of those communities, the board has suggested to OFMDFM that consistent arrangements for regional ethnic monitoring to assist in the planning, design and resourcing of services are urgently needed.

799. I want to explain the Southern Health and Social Services Board’s recommendations for dealing with child poverty. The ministerial subcommittee for children and young people should be reinstated to drive forward the 10-year strategy for children and young people. The board believes that integrated planning is essential across all Departments in order to provide a co-ordinated approach at regional and local level. The board encourages OFMDFM to utilise and build on the current children’s services planning processes in order to take forward a strategy that delivers to children. The board believes that that should be underpinned by a statutory responsibility for joint planning that is internationally recognised as a necessary measure for progress.

800. There should be a specific focus on children with disabilities in the implementation of the children and young people’s plans. Although the board welcomes the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety’s strategy for support for families, that must be augmented with continued and ring-fenced funding. I have already mentioned the model of service, which is a wrap-around service that brings agencies and service providers together in order to provide a holistic model of service to children with disabilities and their families. That model has worked in the Southern Board area. The board believes that it has significant potential to be rolled out across the region.

801. The board believes that there should be a common format for ethnic monitoring and that the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety should review the current policy on healthcare services to BME children in the light of changing demographics. The high levels of disadvantage that are experienced by Travellers must be dealt with urgently. That must include: provision of appropriate housing; Travellers’ sites with basic amenities such as electricity and running water; and assistance to existing support groups that attempt to tackle inequalities at a local level.

802. The board also believes that further research must be carried out in order to understand the extent of child poverty in rural communities. There has been some modest research on the subject; however, the impact of poverty on children’s health and well-being outcomes must be examined further.

803. Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee.

804. The Deputy Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. There is quite a long list of questions. We will try to get through them as quickly as possible. The Executive have agreed that the ministerial subcommittee on children and young people will reconvene. An announcement to that effect was made in the Assembly on Monday 4 February 2008. That is a positive step forward.

805. Mr McElduff: The Committee has heard a lot about identifying needs. What policies or programmes do boards currently have in place to deal with the health inequalities that are experienced by children of migrant workers and those who have ethnic minority backgrounds? Are translation facilities, and so on, available? What specific measures have been implemented at board level?

806. Ms McAndrew: There is a specific children’s services planning working group in the Southern Board area that is focused entirely on the BME population. There is also an action committee that considers how we can work on an inter-agency basis to address issues that affect the Travelling community.

807. We have a number of arrangements for translation and interpreting services, and there is an HPSS regional interpreting service. The board utilises 56% of the uptake of that regional interpreting service.

808. Funding has been granted to Traveller-support projects in our key localities, which has led to access to day-care places for Traveller children and the provision of lay health workers.

809. The trust has established specialist BME health teams that deal with issues such as health visiting and receive input from social workers and midwives. The aim of such teams is to address the issue of health outcomes in BME communities.

810. The confusion about the eligibility criteria is making it difficult to address the issues that affect some of those children, particularly those from the accession countries because strict criteria govern their access to health and social care.

811. The Deputy Chairperson: Will you clarify what specifically it is about the eligibility criteria that create difficulty?

812. Ms McAndrew: In order for children from the accession countries to access primary healthcare services, one of the parents — usually the father — must have a work permit. Such countries include Bulgaria and Romania, and there is a Romanian population in the Southern Board area.

813. Many migrants are gaining employment, largely in the private sector. However, any problems with employment, or even a family breakdown, can create specific issues about their eligibility for primary healthcare services. Therefore, the eligibility criteria are disadvantageous in such circumstances. The Southern Board recently had to make a one-off investment in an immunisation programme for some of the children affected.

814. Mr Shannon: The Southern Board’s written submission refers to disabled children, and specifically mentions “significant under-applications” for disability living allowance. How can that issue be addressed?

815. The Eastern Board’s written submission refers to the unfortunate trend of suicides among young people; the Committee is interested in that issue. The submission outlines a number of adverse childhood experiences and states that an individual who has been affected by four of those experiences is much more likely to be depressed and has a 1,220% greater chance of attempting suicide, which is a phenomenal statistic.

816. Have you any ideas about how such problems can be identified at an early stage? How can we address that issue?

817. Ms McAndrew: In relation to under-applications for disability living allowance, the feedback that we receive from families of children with disabilities is that they feel isolated because of their caring responsibilities. People get information from networking with other parents and organisations; however, they do not have many opportunities to so do. Therefore, the promotion of networking opportunities and support programmes for families is one way in which that issue can be addressed.

818. We also need to ensure that we target families that have children with disabilities in order to make the necessary forms readily available from HPSS workers, rather than people having to get them from a Social Security Agency office.

819. Bringing all that together through the wrap-around model means that families have the opportunity to meet a range of professionals and use a range of services that are tailored to meet their needs, as opposed to making multiple appointments that might lose out on information sharing. The model is about written information and networking, and about health and personal social services taking responsibility to pass on information as it comes into contact with the families.

820. The Deputy Chairperson: I am conscious that we do not want to stray into wider health issues; we are specifically considering child poverty. It would be helpful to focus on the link between child poverty and the mental-health issues that affect young people.

821. Mr Duffy: The research mentioned in the board’s submission comes from an American study, which showed that children who lived in certain adverse circumstances — particularly those children whose parents suffered from mental-health problems and drug and alcohol problems or where one parent was a prisoner — had poorer overall outcomes. If a child faced more than one of those issues — for example, a child of a single parent who had a depression — their outcomes became even poorer.

822. Traditionally, agencies intervened when problems became apparent with children. Through the use of research, we should actively target the adult services that work with the parents. We are not suggesting that all those parental problems lead to child protection issues, but children currently tend to be invisible until problems start to arise. Some children will not have problems as a result of those issues, but a significant number will. Therefore, the Eastern Health and Social Services Board has developed a protocol with its drug and alcohol adult service workers to try to bring them into the frame. It is one thing to get the adult service workers to identify the children and support the parents to gain support services, but accessibility of the services to the children must be made a priority. There must be a local network of services that adult services can link into.

823. Ms Anderson: The representatives from the Southern Board said that joint departmental priority was required through integrated planning. They said that that includes needs-assessment information, and that that process must involve the participation of children who are in section 75 groups. That is similar to the point that John Duffy from the Eastern Board made about the need for a co-ordinated approach to services. As part of the consultation process on the Programme for Government, the investment strategy and the Budget, a seminar on the draft equality impact assessment will take place on 6 March 2008 in Newry and on 19 February 2008 in Belfast. The First Minister gave a commitment that resources would be allocated after taking the outcome of the consultation process into account, and the dates of the five consultation meetings are listed on the Programme for Government website. Given that future monitoring rounds will allocate £1 billion or £2 billion annually, will you engage in those consultation processes to ensure that your views are taken into account in future allocations in the monitoring rounds? Is that one way in which money could be allocated where it is most needed? You will want to ensure that the programme or project to which money was being delivered will change outcomes. I am concerned that, in the past, many groups and organisations were exhausted by responding to consultations and were disappointed when their response was not taken into account. There now seems to be a commitment to at least take account of those consultations when the allocations of resources — for instance, monitoring round allocations — are considered.

824. Mr McKeever: The Southern Board would always attend any public consultations on the Budget, and we would give fairly strong views on all health and personal social services. We did that on the current Budget. We respond to all consultations that are relevant to health and personal social services.

825. I do not think that that process will change during the next year. The local commissioning groups will probably take over that role, as a result of the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety’s statement on Monday 4 February. One can be quite certain that HPSS will always take part in consultations and will always give positive feedback about the way in which we can use any additional resources that are made available to us.

826. Mr Spratt: In the Southern Health and Social Services Board area, it is a common occurrence for parents to experience difficulties in making claims, and so forth. Those statistics refer to the people with whom you deal. Has the board spoken to the Departments or agencies to attempt to alleviate that problem? If you know about the problem, what have you done about it?

827. Ms McAndrew: One way to address the matter is through the consultation processes — in which we would flag the matter up — and through the children’s services planning process, which is multi-agency.

828. As such, partners would sit at the table to discuss specific areas that impact on families and children with disabilities. I am not aware of any recent dialogue with the Social Security Agency on that issue. Most of our submissions are in writing, through consultation exercises.

829. Mr Spratt: A short time ago, the Committee was told that it is 10 times more expensive to keep a disabled child. If those meetings were taking place, there is bound to be some sort of follow-up procedure. Do you not follow up on something like that? It is a crucial issue that makes the poverty or the problems worse. One would have imagined that if one were able to point that out, and if the statistics are there to prove it, one would follow that up and keep pushing that point.

830. Mr McKeever: Parents’ forums — where parents come together regularly and exchange information — are, perhaps, one aspect of the wrap-around schemes that encourages uptake and helps the flow of information. We are also fairly aggressive in pushing direct payments and an organisation called Vela Microboards NI Ltd, whereby parents and the extended family can take on responsibility for looking after the care of the child. At that point in the process, they still have access to as much information as is out there. The networking opportunity that is provided by the parents’ forum helps to spread that information throughout the group. If someone is not in that group, he or she would not have access to the same information. We find that our parents’ forums are a strong method of communication between parents of disabled children.

831. Mr Spratt: If you were to put it in a nutshell, are you telling me that there is too much silo management, in that the board is doing one thing, the Department is doing something else and that there is really no joined-up thinking? Is that what you are saying?

832. The Deputy Chairperson: Perhaps we could focus on the children’s services planning meetings to which you referred? Do Social Security Agency staff attend those meetings?

833. Ms McAndrew: I do not think that there is a member of Social Security Agency staff on the overall children and young persons’ committee. I would need to check to see if there has been recent attendance at any of the subcommittees — there is one for children with disabilities and one for the BME community, as I explained earlier. We have a range of subcommittees that work on child-specific issues. I am sorry to say that I cannot answer your question at present. I am not saying that there is no inter-agency thinking and working; there is a seat at the table for them. To date, we have done that through consultations and through responses to written consultations. We have not had direct meetings with the Social Security Agency.

834. Mr Spratt: There has been no follow-up; if you made recommendations in the consultations, you are not receiving feedback.

835. Ms McAndrew: Things are changing very slowly. In individual cases, our provider trust would provide support and lobby the Social Security Agency.

836. The Deputy Chairperson: Perhaps you could return to the Committee to tell us if the Social Security Agency sits on those panels, because it is a very important issue that has been raised in a number of evidence sessions. However, I do not want the Committee to become bogged down by the issue because members have other questions. If the Committee received feedback, the issue could be clarified.

837. Mr Spratt: That does not help the people at the coalface.

838. The Deputy Chairperson: It would be helpful to follow the matter up at a future meeting, perhaps with Social Services Agency personnel rather than the health and social services boards.

839. Mr Moutray: Will you outline the strategies that the Southern Health and Social Services Board has developed among the Traveller population? Craigavon is in my constituency — and in Dolores’s — I am aware of the ever-increasing numbers of Travellers that are sited in the area. How co-operative has the Traveller population in Craigavon been? If you have had success in your work with the Traveller population, how is it measured?

840. Ms McAndrew: We have a multi-agency action plan for the Southern Health and Social Services Board area and have put resources into the trust and into Traveller-support projects, which are community-based. We have set objectives for Traveller-support projects to meet and have recording arrangements, which are outbound based. As a result, I am pleased to report that there has been an improvement in some of the issues on which we monitor the Traveller population in the Southern Board area; there has been an increase in GP and dental registrations, immunisations and attendance at primary school. There are also issues about attendance in post-primary education and access to employment.

841. Generally, the Traveller population has been reasonably co-operative. In the past, Traveller-support projects have worked on specific issues with the Traveller community; for example, there was an issue over the way in which Travellers in the Craigavon area looked after their horses, which may have been in Mr Moutray’s mind when he asked his question. The relationship between the Traveller population and the support workers in the Traveller-support projects is very positive. Travellers have occasionally attended our action planning group, which is a multi-agency group. Although we have not been successful in getting members of the Travelling community to attend consistently, we have found them very reasonable when they have done so.

842. Mr Elliott: My question is direct and brief. I am very concerned about the length of time that some children have to spend in care and the link that that has to child poverty. I am particularly concerned about those children whom the health and social services boards know about from an early age who have to spend a number of years in care because adoption is such a slow process. John, I noticed that that is one of the issues pressing the Eastern Health and Social Services Board.

843. Mr Duffy: We share the concern about the number of children who have remained in care for a prolonged period of time. A historical number of children have been in the care system for a long time because adoption used not to be seen as a main option for parents; in comparison with the rest of the UK, Northern Ireland has had a particularly low adoption rate. That situation is changing, and there is now much more emphasis on adoption. However, many children are still in long-term care who would have been adopted earlier under our current approach. An ongoing issue that most of the trusts raise is the interpretation of human rights legislation by the courts — the right to family life. There is an issue over denying children their original birthright. Rather than perceiving adoption as being the only avenue for a permanent relationship, there is a range of ongoing efforts to improve outcomes for children who are looked after in foster homes or residential care.

844. Mr Elliott: Are people actually considering keeping such children in long-term care?

845. Mr Duffy: No; the first priority is to avoid circumstances in which children come into care, and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety’s Care Matters strategy is about reducing the number of children in long-term care and giving them better support in the community. The Eastern Health and Social Services Board’s submission is about attempting to do that at a much earlier age in order that children do not end up in care.

846. There are several options that might improve outcomes for children who do not have permanence, one of which would be to speed up the adoption process. In addition to continuing to offer long-term care, another option would be to promote positive links with a child’s extended birth family — not necessarily the parents — in order to develop permanence with the child’s community of origin. It is not simply the case that adoption achieves permanence, and long-term care results in poor outcomes.

847. Mrs D Kelly: The Eastern Health and Social Services Board’s submission mentions abused children. The Ad Hoc Committee on the Draft Sexual Offences (Northern Ireland) Order 2007 heard recommendations relating to multi-agency sex-offender risk assessment and management (MASRAM), and it was suggested that children who abuse had themselves often been abused and that attempts should be made to break that cycle. In your submission, you refer to the fact that children and young people who do not fall within MASRAM generally receive a patchier and less cohesive response. Is that what you are referring to now?

848. It is hard not to stray into areas linked to poverty and outcomes such as health and education, which are the responsibility of other Committees, and, in England, there are examples in which the practice of statementing and producing recommendations has been done away with and replaced with a different mechanism. Do you consider integrated children’s services planning to be a better model that might produce better outcomes for many children who come to your attention?

849. You commented here and elsewhere about preschool migrant children. Craigavon, which is in my constituency, is the responsibility of the Southern Health and Social Services Board, which, in its submission to the Committee, makes recommendations about bringing strategic inter-agency planning onto a statutory footing. Which of the best-practice models to which you referred would be suitable for that purpose and worthy of our further consideration?

850. Mr Duffy: The Eastern Health and Social Services Board’s submission refers to the traditional inter-agency planning mechanism by means of child protection procedures, which would have resulted in a child protection plan being drawn up. A children’s strategy high-level outcomes approach differs from traditional child protection measures, which were concerned with the abuse and injury of children by adults. However, for children who self-harm, whose offending behaviour puts them at risk or who, as a result of such issues, have a poor school attendance record, the outcomes are the same. Therefore, we need not broaden child protection procedures but must develop a new child-specific, inter-agency planning mechanism. We will not be adopting the English approach, by which children’s trusts bring all the services together. We must develop an alternative mechanism that will allow us to do that for individual children, and we have submitted our proposal.

851. Ms McAndrew: I will respond to your comments about integrated planning and statementing. The Southern Health and Social Services Board fully supports the principle of integrated planning, which is the only way to achieve positive outcomes for children. The current statementing process leads to the provision of services for children in schools. However, from a parent’s perspective, there are problems and issues concerning that process. If good local and regional integrated planning models were in place alongside good integrated service provision — and I have already referred to the wrap-around model, in which service providers come together and, using person-centred planning tools, decide what is best for children — we might be in a less bureaucratic situation with fewer hurdles for families to jump over in order to access services.

852. In relation to the model of statutory responsibility and integrated planning, all the boards, including the Southern Health and Social Services Board, have pursued the model that is available in Vermont in America. That model has an outcomes-based approach that sets out performance indicators, so that, longitudinally, we can assess how well we are doing in our efforts to improve outcomes for children. It incorporates a statutory duty for all agencies to work together on the outcomes and to establish performance indicators to demonstrate how they are contributing to those outcomes. That model is strongly advocated by the four boards in the children’s services planning process. We have made presentations to OFMDFM and various other Departments on that model, and we certainly commend it to the Committee.

853. Mrs D Kelly: I understand that the individual behind the Vermont model was over here at one stage. Are there any plans for him to return?

854. Ms McAndrew: Con Hogan has been here a number of times. The board is planning a conference in April, and some people from Vermont have been invited to attend so that we can further explore how the model could be applied here. Certainly, if the Committee felt that it would be appropriate, we could notify it of when the conference is to take place.

855. The Deputy Chairperson: You mentioned that a statutory responsibility for joint planning would be helpful. Such a statutory responsibility does not currently exist?

856. Ms McAndrew: There is no statutory requirement for joint planning. The statutory requirement is for a children’s services planning process, and the health boards are the lead agencies in that regard. However, there is a currently no legislative requirement for integrated planning. The board believes that that should be introduced.

857. Ms Anderson: Can the Committee get some information on that Vermont model, to develop our own understanding of it?

858. Ms McAndrew: I can provide more evidence on the model, if the Committee feels that that would be appropriate.

859. The Deputy Chairperson: That would be helpful.

860. Thank you for your written submissions and for your presentation today. Some issues have arisen from the presentation, and members have already requested some additional information. The Committee Clerk will be in touch with you about that. On behalf of the Committee, I thank you for your time and interest. It has been helpful and much appreciated.

861. Two more sets of witnesses are scheduled to give evidence. I do not want to over-emphasise this point, but I remind members that it would be helpful if they kept their questions brief.

862. I now welcome the representatives from the Rural Community Network, Ms Karin Eyben and Mr Raymond Craig. Thank you both for your attendance.

863. Ms Karin Eyben (Rural Community Network): Thank you for inviting us. Please stop us if we go beyond five minutes, as we would like to answer your questions. We want to address the specific issues related to child poverty in rural areas; the “triggers and trampolines”. The reasons why child poverty exists in rural areas are different from those in urban areas, and the trampolines — the ways out of child poverty — are also different. The one thing that we would be interested in hearing from the Committee would be a commitment to rural proofing. Whatever policy package this Committee recommends as part of this inquiry should have a strong rural-proofing dimension, because the issues are different in rural areas.

864. I know that the Committee has been inundated with statistics, but I would like to mention the research carried out by Save The Children, which showed that child poverty rates are greater in small-to-medium-sized towns, and, particularly, in the west. Any anti-poverty strategy, and any child poverty dimension, should show an understanding of rural poverty by highlighting, for example, limited access to key services, higher transport costs, high levels of unfit housing, and fuel poverty. Total rural fuel poverty stands at 33·4%, compared with 20% in urban areas. Average weekly gross earnings in rural areas are below those in urban areas — that fact was quoted in the draft Budget and draft Programme for Government — and there is a lack of affordable childcare in rural areas. Those elements must be a part of any anti-poverty and anti-child poverty dimension.

865. In our view, the solutions can be found in three core areas: the financial dimension; access to services; and participation of children and young people in rural community groups. An EU-wide study of child poverty concluded that those three objectives lie at the heart of tackling child poverty. Children should grow up in families with sufficient income, they should have access to services, and community participation should be promoted.

866. The financial dimension revolves around benefit uptake and the working tax credit. There is research and anecdotal evidence to show that benefit uptake in rural areas is lower, because of a lack of access to information points and services. The Department for Social Development is considering a pilot study to examine the uptake of benefits; however, we must move beyond pilots.

867. Evidence suggests that poverty among self-employed people is more common in rural areas. It is probable that many self-employed people on lower incomes are eligible for benefits, but again, the awareness is not there. There are some interesting issues about women in self-employment — child poverty is directly linked to women. The definition of someone in business is usually someone in full-time employment, but a woman who makes and sells cards two days a week is not seen as a businesswoman, and is therefore often not eligible to receive the advice and support that is afforded to full-time businesspeople.

868. The key points about access are around childcare, transport and education.

869. Mr Raymond Craig (Rural Community Network): We recently carried out a focused study in Magherafelt, in which we closely examined voluntary and nursery childcare provision. Some of our findings were interesting, in that the parents of special-needs children face particular challenges in meeting those needs. Delays in early intervention were an issue, as was the need for follow-up action. Delays have a significant impact on children’s education, and may impair a child’s progress from 8 years of age onwards. It is probably guaranteed that a child’s learning will be impaired from then on. There was a lot of discussion about how to deal with that, and exploration of the notion of joined-up thinking among statutory bodies in education and health, working hand-in-glove and examining more sensible ways to co-operate under the community planning umbrella. We have assisted the Northern Board in looking at how it manages to provide services in that area. In cases of early intervention, there should be a quicker follow-through to ensure that the learning curve of the child is not impaired.

870. Children who attend voluntary playgroups do not receive as much funding as those who attend nurseries. Why do we not have uniform funding? Why is there a difference? I do not know the answer, but it is a crucial question that must be asked.

871. Ms Eyben mentioned rural proofing. Recently, I attended a conference in Derry at which the Department of Education was exploring the impact of the cuts. I raised the issue of the Western Education and Library Board’s looking more closely at its youth service — the impact of any cuts would have been the loss of eight outreach workers. Why should people who live in rural areas carry the burden of those cuts? I suggested that we take a closer look at rural proofing. Subsequently, a civil servant asked what rural proofing is. I am concerned that the term is not so well known. How can it be enacted when there is such a void of information on it? I appeal for some work to be done on filling that information gap.

872. The issue of how legislation impacts on rural communities is crucial, because 37% of the population live in rural areas. If nothing is done, by 2030 there will be an economic corridor between Dublin and Belfast; we will have one large city with over one million people, and the rest of the population will be living in rural areas. I know that I am playing devil’s advocate, but that will be the situation. These questions must be asked.

873. Ms Eyben: Transport is an important issue in rural communities. A lady told me a great story the other day about the difficulty of getting her child transported to an after-schools club. She told me that she looked out of her window one day to see a yellow school bus pass her house, followed two hours later by a half-empty Ulsterbus. Following that, a white bus from the local health and social services trust drove by, and, finally, the community transport bus went by. Not one of those buses was able to pick up her daughter and take her to the after-schools club.

874. Resources should be used differently. Why does the issue of transport come up again and again in rural areas? Partly, it is because people expect the level of flexibility that exists in urban areas. However, that is not possible. Can the problems be solved with taxi vouchers or carpools? Why do we always return to transport? It contributes to child poverty, whether in terms of 16- to 18-year-olds having access to education, employment, or assisting parents who want to obtain new skills and get better jobs. We keep revolving around this issue, and that is a critical element.

875. The rural development programme is kicking in with other strategies and policies. Approximately £100 million will be managed by the local council clusters and delivered by the local action groups, which will be important structures. It is important to consider how young people and children will participate in those local action groups and how they will be a critical part of the plans and the investment. That is an important issue and a key possibility.

876. You have heard from the boards about the children and young people’s strategy. The Department of Agriculture and Rural Development’s anti-poverty action plan has £10 million to invest in an anti-poverty strategy. The Department is moving ahead with that. That is great, because we still do not know when the central poverty strategy will be implemented. We are concerned that Departments might move independently before the regional strategy is agreed; if they do, the situation will not be any different to what it has been in the past.

877. The Department of Agriculture is developing a rural childcare programme; it is not adding another strategy. The Department has used good processes to look at the issues regarding rural childcare and has put some money behind it. However, that will only work if it is seen to be also the responsibility of other Departments, which brings us back to the issue of rural proofing.

878. If we can leave you with one thing, it is the importance of rural proofing. It is the role of this Committee, the anti-poverty unit in OFMDFM and all the units in that office to take rural issues seriously. It is not just the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture.

879. Mr McElduff: Is the witness familiar with an 80:20 rule in Government? For example, rural roads are not salted or gritted because 80% of the traffic can be accommodated by reaching 20% of the roads network.

880. Mr R Craig: They still forget about Glenshane Pass, though.

881. Mr McElduff: The 80:20 rule always operates to the detriment of rural areas. What is the level of childcare provision in rural areas? How can access to high-quality, accessible childcare be improved? In Fintona and Eskragh, a cap has been placed on both voluntary playgroup and nursery-school places. In that area, there is a crisis. How can the situation be improved?

882. Mr R Craig: In rural areas, childcare needs are largely met by voluntary groups. Communities try to respond to the needs for childcare provision. The support that they get is weaker than that given to other groups. The question is crucial. It has a knock-on effect on women’s access to employment, training and education. The lack of good-quality childcare provision impacts on family life and income. Why is there not a uniform funding band, irrespective of the status of the childcare, voluntary or statutory? Why is there discriminatory funding?

883. Ms Eyben: The Rural Childcare Stakeholders’ Group, which has been developing the rural childcare programme, visited Eskragh and found a great example of joined-up thinking. The Eskragh centre had children from a Sure Start area, although Eskragh itself is not in a Sure Start area. It should have had funding for those children, but no one knew that. The stakeholders’ forum included experts in Sure Start, and they rang up the Sure Start area and explained that those children were there and needed funding. It was sorted out the next day. That did not take extra resources: it does not always take big things to make a difference. The solutions can be simple.

884. The other thing about Eskragh is that it does not have broadband. Inability to access broadband has implications for training packages for childcare workers and a whole pile of issues relating to the development of the children’s centre.

885. Mr Shannon: I was intrigued by your story about the four buses that passed. In parts of the area that I represent, if one bus passes, people all come out to see what it is. That is a facetious comment, I admit.

886. Mr McElduff: Do you represent a rural area, Jim?

887. Mr Shannon: I have an important point. In my constituency, Peninsula Community Transport has been a godsend. It ties in with rural transport, Home-Start, Lifestart and all those organisations. It ensures that people have access to services. How important do you think rural transport is? Can it be improved and enhanced?

888. Ms Eyben: I completely concur: the rural-transport schemes have been vital in that they enable groups to book rural transport, such as community buses and so on. However, an individual living in a rural area may need a bus service that passes by their house to get into town. In a lot of areas, it has not been possible to provide such a service. Therefore, although the bus services provided by the rural-transport schemes are very important, there are gaps in the delivery of other rural transport needs.

889. Take, for example, the fact that school buses lie unused for the majority of the day. The Rural Childcare Stakeholders’ Group asked the Department of Education to consider using school buses for different purposes. The anecdotal response was that the buses are very busy for the entire day, yet, when I pass the parking bay in Cookstown, I see lots of yellow buses parked there. Again, it is a matter of considering how those buses could be used in different ways.

890. My understanding was that, as part of the comprehensive spending review bids, a proposal was put to the Department for Regional Development that people aged over 60 could be offered free transport across a range of different transport options in rural areas, not just public transport — that is only a tiny bit of the picture. It would be interesting to find out whether there has been any follow-up on that. Those options could include a pass on a community transport bus or a system of taxi vouchers. Consideration could be given to introducing carpools, which exist in other places. Cars are left at different places along the road and people just pick up a car, use it and leave it back. Those kinds of schemes have not been tried here, but they exist in towns.

891. The Deputy Chairperson: Often on an informal and rather illegal basis. [Laughter.]

892. Mr Wells: They are called runarounds now. [Laughter.]

893. Ms Eyben: Let us just make it legitimate.

894. Mr R Craig: I will give an example of how crucial transport is. When I worked for the Western Board, an after-schools programme was set up. There was only 20% uptake, despite the fact that in a survey prior to the introduction of the activities, the level of interest was 100%. Only when a bus was made available at 5.00 pm was there 100% uptake. Without that, the children would have had to go home at 3.30 pm. That illustrates how important transport is in rural areas.

895. Mr Shannon: That would be a simple solution.

896. Mr R Craig: It really is that simple. It is crucial for quality of life that the transport issues get sorted. One can provide all the services one likes, but if people cannot access those services, what is the point?

897. Ms Anderson: The Committee should have been surprised to hear of the civil servant’s remark about rural proofing, but, having seen the public-sector capacity report that outlined the level of skills and expertise among senior civil servants — and how they were not able to deliver on programmes and projects — it is not surprised. However, I was at a press conference yesterday with the Minister of Agriculture, and the good news is that she has sent senior civil servants to be trained in equality impact assessment (EQIA), so do not give up hope.

898. Are there specific policies and programmes that should be prioritised within the £10 million package that the Agriculture Minister has secured to combat rural social exclusion and poverty? Is the Rural Community Network making representations on the prioritisation of those programmes and projects that should be considered? Does it intend to mobilise around the EQIA consultation meeting to be held on 11 March at the Clinton Centre in Enniskillen, given that the First Minister has informed the House that resources will be allocated after account has been taken of the outcome of those consultations?

899. Mr R Craig: Thank you for that information. There is a lot of talk about the Department of Agriculture being a rural champion, which is interesting. I am concerned that other Departments abdicate responsibility for rural issues. If they come across a rural issue, they automatically send it over to the Department of Agriculture. Some 37% of the population live in rural areas, and they are entitled to health, learning and all the other things that are part of life. I would have thought that rural proofing must rest in all Departments.

900. Ms Anderson: I agree.

901. Mr R Craig: I am confirming what you have said. We have been involved heavily with the Minister for Agriculture and Rural Development, and she has taken a particular interest in our model. We have 12 rural networks; I am involved in Oakleaf Rural Community Network and Ms Eyben is from another rural community network (RCN), which, by the way, is not a nursing organisation. We have been involved in serious conversations as to how we operate and develop a new, dynamic model that will cater to our 800 member groups who are scattered throughout the rural areas of Northern Ireland. We are looking closely at modernising the whole arrangement to make it more effective.

902. Ms Eyben: One response is around community development, which is a challenge for community groups in rural areas and something that we have been trying to generate discussion on. Many community groups do not see children and young people as a critical agenda item. It is difficult working with children and young people, particularly excluded children and young people. It involves all the chaos of child protection issues. These young people are mobile; they keep moving on. There is a real challenge for community groups and community development organisations in rural areas to start seeing children and young people as a core issue for the future of those communities. If young people continue to leave rural areas, the population will become older and older and the rural community will become less sustainable. That is already happening in England and other places.

903. A critical part of the £10 million should be community development. The ethos of community development is about people having a voice and participating in issues that impact on their lives. Children and young people are core actors in that. Community groups will also have to take on challenges, because unless they see the issue as important, it will always be an added extra.

904. Mr Elliott: It is good to hear people championing rural issues. Child poverty is often seen as an urban issue, but that is not the case, and you have highlighted that. I agree totally about co-operation and joined-up government. From my own experience, it is the simple things that can make a difference. For example, the school bus drives past the door but it cannot lift a child, which is nonsense. You may live two miles from the school and you have to drive there.

905. I am interested in rural proofing. It is all right to say that the matter should not rest with the Department of Agriculture alone; that each Department has a responsibility. However, unless we get the issue on to the statute book, it can be ignored by other — or all — Departments. I am interested in your plans for the way forward and to hear your suggestions about how best to benefit.

906. Ms Eyben: We are concerned, because the rural-proofing responsibility seems to have been integrated into what have been called “impact assessment processes” that include everything. The rural issues have been packaged into that as part of one overall impact assessment process. There are a couple of issues to rural proofing. First, when rural proofing happens, it happens at the beginning of the policy. It does not happen at the end when it can be seen whether those policies have been successful: it is a continuous process. Secondly, very little data is available on rural communities. There is very little statistical evidence to start a real conversation about where resources should be targeted and where change could happen, and to monitor that change. Much of the information is anecdotal, and that is partly the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture and of other Departments to look at rural proofing seriously.

907. For example, there should be a breakdown into rural and urban areas when looking at child poverty and monitoring change over the next 10 years — that should be the core issue of moving forward. Unless we can start to build up the picture of the issues involved and have hard data, supplemented by the stories that add richness, then rural areas will always be treated less seriously.

908. Mr Spratt: I want to ask a simple question. As this is an inquiry into child poverty, can you give us a definition of child poverty from a rural perspective?

909. Ms Eyben: I would say that poverty is not defined by income alone. It includes issues such as lack of transport. For example, yesterday, I spoke to a group of young people from Portaferry, one of whom was a young woman who goes to college in Belfast but who works in Portaferry. She had to leave her class an hour early to catch the bus to Portaferry so that she would be on time for work. That indicates poverty, because she is sacrificing her possible educational development by having to leave early for work because of the lack of regular transport. Lack of access to services is another indicator of poverty in rural areas.

910. Mr R Craig: Poverty definitely depends on more than income. Poverty is not about the amount of money that a person has in his or her pocket, or the lack of the rattle of coins. It has more to do with the availability of life opportunities and whether people are being equipped for life in order to become independent and able to enhance their well-being through education and healthcare. Those issues have an impact on poverty.

911. Before the evidence session ends, I have one request to make of the Committee. The Education and Training Inspectorate’s ‘Chief Inspector’s Report for 2002-2004’ examines the disparity between the statutory and voluntary sectors with regard to childcare, especially care for children with special needs. If I may be so bold, I recommend that members read that report.

912. The Deputy Chairperson: Thank you very much. The issue of childcare has been raised repeatedly, because it allows parents to take up employment, and so on. It is critical in a rural setting, where affordable childcare is rare. The Committee will want to take up that matter.

913. Thank you for your presentation, for your written submission and for answering questions today; you have been very helpful. Thank you for giving the Committee of your time. I hope that it has been worthwhile from your perspective; it has certainly been worthwhile for us.

914. I invite Ms Fiona MacMillan and Ms Mary Anne Webb, who represent Barnardo’s, to join the Committee. Thank you for attending the meeting; we appreciate that. Thank you also for your written submission.

915. Ms Fiona MacMillan (Barnardo’s): Thank you for giving us the opportunity to speak to the Committee. We are heartened by the fact that the Committee’s first inquiry is into child poverty, because that issue is very important to Barnardo’s, and it is currently the subject of one of our main campaigns.

916. Today, I want to consider some of the things that a devolved Administration can do. When people talk about child poverty, there seems to be an emphasis on what can be done through taxation and benefits. There could be a feeling, locally, that we can do very little about that. I wish to talk about some of the work that Barnardo’s does in Northern Ireland in order to illustrate how local initiatives can be very effective in tackling child poverty.

917. We are heartened that the Executive have signed up to the 2010 and 2020 targets for the reduction in, and eradication of, child poverty. We would like to concentrate on three areas — disability, employment and learning, and early-years provision.

918. In considering disability, we are concerned about families who are consistently in what we call “persistent” poverty. That is compounded in lone-parent families and those living in rural communities where there is less access to preventative and supportive services. The issue is important in Northern Ireland, because we have some of the highest numbers of disabled people in the UK, and we have a large rural community.

919. A typical example, in our experience, is that the incomes in households with disabled children are low because those families face considerable additional costs for equipment such as car seats, wheelchairs, adapted cars, extra bedding, and washing and drying facilities. Those families face barriers to employment because of the lack of affordable and specialised childcare. They have problems in gaining access to preventative and supportive services, and face complex procedures when applying for disability benefits. We would like a greater emphasis on supportive and preventative services and more childcare support for full-time carers who wish to go back to work. Employers should have more scope to help parents who have a child with a disability to stay in long-term employment.

920. Barnardo’s runs a number of services for looked-after children, and we have concerns about their ability to access employment and training after leaving long-term care. We know from research that, because of their weakened links with families and communities, care leavers often have poor educational performance and face loneliness, isolation, unemployment and poverty as well as early parenthood and, perhaps, homelessness. It is difficult for an individual to enter training or employment if he or she does not have a secure place to live. We recommend that effective strategies should be put in place to deal with access to employment and learning for those young people. They should be helped with the transition from residential or foster care to independent living.

921. Early-years provision is important in dealing with poverty. It is essential that, from birth, children receive the best possible start in life. In partnership with many other statutory, voluntary and community agencies, we offer help to parents who avail of early-years provision. It is important to support early-years and parenting provision. We run a number of services in places such as Lisburn and Tullycarnet in east Belfast. It is vital that the entire community is involved in accessing education services and getting the most from them, so that children are prepared for school and ready to learn.

922. Our services draw on evidence-based practice. We use the High/Scope model in our early-years services for working with children. The High/Scope Perry Preschool research, which spans more than 40 years, shows that effective early-years childcare pays dividends in adulthood. Forty-year-old adults who participated in those programmes were shown to have higher earnings, were more able to stay in employment, had higher economic achievement and committed fewer crimes.

923. In our experience, the positive outcomes of early-years support pay dividends for families who need access to health, education and social services. It allows greater protection and support for vulnerable children and families that are at risk, improves pupil attendance, aptitudes and behaviour in school, and results in increased participation in school life.

924. In conclusion, we welcome the recent announcement by the junior Ministers about the joint ministerial committee on children’s issues, which will have an important role in implementing anti-poverty strategies or child poverty initiatives. We are not quite sure about the time frame for the ambitious targets of 2010 and 2020 for the eradication of poverty, and we will be interested, bearing in mind the details of the recent Budget, to hear how Departments will tackle those targets.

925. Child poverty is an issue for every Department. We are interested in how other devolved Administrations, such as Scotland and Wales, have managed to address the issue. On Monday 4 February, the Scottish Affairs Committee published its report, ‘Child Poverty in Scotland’; it contained some interesting ideas. The British-Irish Council has a remit to examine child poverty. We would like to find out how we could contribute to that in Northern Ireland, as it is a worthwhile issue with which to be involved, and it has come at an appropriate time. The UK Government have made a commitment to addressing child poverty, and a devolved Administration can also make an important contribution.

926. The Deputy Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. We would like to explore further some of the issues that have been raised, so there will now be some questions from members.

927. Mr Shannon: Thank you for your presentation. Mention was made of the importance of a child’s physical and emotional growth from the ages of one to five. What could be done at that early age to ensure that children receive the correct nutrition? How can that issue be addressed?

928. Ms MacMillan: A teacher from a school in Tullycarnet asked us to work with her to help children who did not seem to be ready for school. It was felt that many children from that area had poor language skills, and they could not even hold a book properly because their parents had never read to them. There are many practical ways to address such issues, but early-years development is vital. Organisations such as Sure Start have played an important role in getting projects up and running. However, there may be a need to go into the community and work with children in the early years to prepare them for school.

929. Mr Shannon: Is nutrition an issue? I get the impression that the children in that area were not eating well or developing well, so their skills were not going to improve. Is that correct?

930. Ms MacMillan: Yes, it is. We have found that if babies are not given the correct nutrition early on, and the family does not eat healthily, it can lead to low weight. Concentration abilities can differ a great deal if children are not being given the proper nutrition.

931. Ms Anderson: The submission states that, without the necessary preventative and support services, disabled children face barriers to education, training and employment. What measures should be taken by the Executive to try to alleviate child poverty?

932. Ms MacMillan: We made a representation on transition to Sir Reg Empey. We feel strongly that many children get good educational opportunities in the school system, but they often fall through two stools when they leave school, because sometimes they cannot access — and by that I do not mean only physical access — further learning, because that has changed. Often there is no support for them to access further education and learning. Sometimes they are offered inappropriate placements — for example, in day centres that are essentially for adults, not children and young people. Those young people miss out because they cannot get placements. They have to fight hard to get them, but they are unable to compensate for that lost time. It is a worrying time when young people finish their education, because they suddenly do not know what they will do next. Our concern is that transition plans are not put in place for every young person.

933. Mr Spratt: I have two quick questions. First, what is your definition of child poverty? Secondly, we have heard that it is difficult to access benefits, particularly for people with disabilities, which is a cross-cutting departmental problem. How best can the Executive alleviate that situation so that the improvements reach the coalface quickly?

934. Ms MacMillan: It is difficult to give a definition of poverty. I am sure that you have had many definitions, facts and figures put before you.

935. Barnardo’s accepts the Government definition of poverty being people with an income below 60% of the median income, but we argue that there are sometimes other aspects, especially in child poverty, such as poverty of expectation and achievement for children. For example, we accept that not everyone has a right to something, but it helps children enormously if they have proper clothing, a chance to go on school trips and attend birthday parties. We could argue all day about the figures, but that causes frustration, because Northern Ireland has not been included in some statistics until recently, so it is difficult to judge how we are doing against figures in other places. We accept the recently published figures of 109,000 children in Northern Ireland living in poverty.

936. Mr Spratt: Do you think that people are falling outside the loop? For instance, is there not enough communication about the disability living allowance to inform people about their entitlements? Is that a problem?

937. Ms MacMillan: It is difficult — especially for families with more than one child with complex disabilities — for people to work out when they should apply for a benefit and when they should not. In some families, it is a full-time job simply to keep up with what can be applied for, what they are not entitled to, what changes when a child reaches a certain age and where they can get help. Benefit uptake can always be improved, and we are concerned with the way in which some families end up having to pay money back because of the way in which tax credits work. That is not a satisfactory situation.

938. The Deputy Chairperson: We have all had to deal with the problem of a family being in dire circumstances through no fault of its own being overpaid money and then having to pay it back, which causes further hardship. We should all be concerned about that.

939. Mrs D Kelly: In your submission, you use the term “NEET” to describe 16- to 24-year-olds who are not in education, employment or training. Do you recommend that the Committee propose certain actions and strategies for certain age bands of children? I am struck by the fact that investment at that age can prevent problems across a range of social and public policy interventions later. That is relevant to teenage pregnancy in England, for example, where so many fall into the poverty trap, even though many of those young girls do not necessarily come from poor backgrounds. I am interested in your thoughts on that.

940. Your submission also refers to the implementation mechanisms and resources in the absence of an agreed children and young people’s fund, and the fact that it will be mainstreamed. What are your expectations on delivery action plans for each Department that ring-fences, because they have been told by the First Minister and deputy First Minister that there is no longer a children’s fund, but we need to see an agreement on ring-fencing.

941. Ms MacMillan: Barnardo’s thinks it is vital that money is ring-fenced, and we have been around the block long enough to have seen budgets that are supposed to be for children and young people’s issues disappear elsewhere after being allocated to a Department. Ring-fencing is vital

942. Groups of young adults who are currently living in poverty are the parents of tomorrow. Therefore, we are simply creating another problem for ourselves. Given that poverty tends to be trans-generational, it is important to take that age group into account. Some young adults are slightly outwith much of our work, but it is important to consider those who leave care up to the age of 21.

943. I agree that it would be interesting if the Committee were to include strategies for particular age groups in its reports, because many young adults are ignored. There is a common perception that there are vast differences between a 16-year-old and a 24-year-old. However, those 24-year-olds who have not had any opportunities for education and learning face serious difficulties, and they are the parents of tomorrow.

944. The Deputy Chairperson: Several presentations to the Committee have referred to the Lifetime Opportunities strategy, which has a slightly ambiguous status at the moment. Witnesses have told us that it has been accepted at the high level, but that its detail is not as satisfactory. Must specific issues be addressed, or are you content that it be adopted as it stands, simply to have a strategy in place? I am interested to know where, or whether, you consider that improvements are necessary.

945. Ms MacMillan: Barnardo’s feels that improvements are necessary, and it seemed that the strategy was being batted around a lot. In the light of many of the issues that we have discussed today, we are concerned that the child poverty elements of the strategy should be examined. We have been so disappointed by the amount of time that has passed since the strategy was launched that we almost got to the stage of feeling that it would be better to try to implement the strategy as it stands — as opposed to it not coming to fruition at all. Many of its child poverty policies require further consideration.

946. The Deputy Chairperson: Do any specific issues need to be addressed?

947. Ms MacMillan: Some of the issues that I have raised today, such as disability and the learning and employment of young people, must be addressed. Many people have probably already told the Committee that benchmarking is required. There must be constant monitoring to ensure that Departments implement their stated intentions.

948. The Deputy Chairperson: Thank you for your time this afternoon and for providing a written submission. Both have been extremely helpful to the Committee.

949. Before you leave, I want you to know that the Committee, through the Committee Clerk, has spoken to OFMDFM specifically about the possibility of a briefing on the British-Irish Council’s work on poverty and social inclusion, to which you referred. The Committee is aware that child poverty is part of its remit, and I hope for a positive outcome in the next few months.

13 February 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mrs Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Tom Elliott
Mrs Dolores Kelly
Mr Barry McElduff
Mr Francie Molloy
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jimmy Spratt

Witnesses:

Ms Claire Linney
Mr Barry Monteith

Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council

Ms Davina McCartney

Craigavon Borough Council

Mr Brendan Bonner

Western Investing for Health Partnership

Ms Siobhan Sweeney

Western Health Action Zone

Mr Gerry McDonald
Ms Mia Murray

Southern Area Childcare Partnership

Ms Maura Mason

Western Area Childcare Partnership

950. The Chairperson of the Committee for the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister (Mr Kennedy): Before we begin the evidence session, I ask members to declare any relevant interests. I am a member of Newry and Mourne District Council.

951. Mr Molloy: I am a member of Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council.

952. Mrs D Kelly: I am a member of Craigavon Borough Council.

953. Mr Shannon: I am a member of Ards Borough Council — the premier council.

954. Mrs Long: I am a member of Belfast City Council.

955. Mr McElduff: I am a member of Omagh District Council.

956. Mr Elliott: I am a member of Fermanagh District Council.

957. The Chairperson: I remind members that all mobile phones must be switched off, as the session is being recorded for the Hansard report

958. I welcome now the representatives from Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council, Barry Monteith and Claire Linney. You are very welcome. Thank you for taking the time not only to host this meeting of the Committee but to make a presentation on the issue of child poverty. I welcome the opportunity for the exchange. Following your presentation, members will have the opportunity to ask questions.

959. Mr Barry Monteith (Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council): Rather than get bogged down with statistics and evidence that the Committee may already have, we decided to focus on what is unique in the Dungannon situation and the potential solutions as we see them from talking to stakeholders on the ground.

960. I will set out the strategic issues as we see them. Children in Dungannon are most at risk of low income. The key issue is housing. There are more than 800 people on the waiting list for social housing, and the number continues to rise. Over 400 of those are in priority need. Two weeks ago, I had a meeting with the district manager of the Housing Executive, and he told me that they had two vacant properties across the whole council area. The housing associations have no vacant properties at the moment.

961. One section of Dungannon alone has 300 people on the waiting list, with almost 200 in priority need. The rental values and house prices in the area are extremely high. In the urban setting the rental value is anywhere between £150 and £170, and in a rural setting it is just slightly lower. There are extreme situations where families are paying more than £200 a week in rent for family homes.

962. Channel 4 came over to make a documentary about the effect that the arrival of migrant workers has had and how the issue is being dealt with. The film-makers could not believe the situation in the rental sector. They told us that the private-rented sector in Dungannon is equal to large parts of Greater London. Couple that with an economy based primarily on minimum-wage jobs, primarily in the food industry — chicken, beef and lamb processing — and you can see that the figures do not add up. That is why we are starting to appear at the top of the poverty table.

963. The reverse side of that is that Dungannon has almost full employment. The unemployment level is between 1·1% and 1·3%, but I must stress that the vast majority of employment is of a low income nature

964. There is also a massive problem with childcare. Sure Start has 50 children of pre-school age in its catchment area who do not have provision at this stage and that will rise in September — and Sure Start does not even cover the whole of the council area. What is unique about Dungannon is that, because it has benefited most from migration, one of the major issues is the provision of childcare is different languages. One of the problems for many migrant-worker families, particularly if both parents work, is that they face a revolving-door situation. One parent works from 8·00 am to 5·00 pm, and the other works from 5·00 pm to 12.00 midnight. They do not particularly desire to work evening or night shift, but they cannot find childcare in their native language, or childcare in English that can deal with their native language. Obviously, that has long-term implications for the development of that family.

965. The public sector has been a major issue in Dungannon. Over the last 20 to 30 years, and even more recently, the vast majority of public-sector employment has been sucked to Omagh, Craigavon and Armagh. Omagh and Armagh have 23% and 30% of the jobs respectively, while Dungannon has 17%. The majority of those employed in the public-sector in Dungannon are council employees, and there is speculation that the number employed by the local Housing Executive office is going to drop

966. There is the potential in the public sector for better terms and conditions and more family-friendly working environments, which obviously has implications for children. At the moment there are other implications because there is less disposable income. A survey of traders in Dungannon town centre found that they have had their worst Christmas in about 20 years, and they put that down to people just not having the money. Dungannon is not unique in that, but I have given you some of the reasons why Dungannon is so high on the poverty list.

967. The council takes its role of lobbying on behalf of citizens extremely seriously. The Department for Social Development (DSD) is committed to social housing and has targeted an additional £205 million there. However, the council wants to know how many of the new social units, whether they are new build or bought from the private sector, will there be in Dungannon. We cannot get clear answers.

968. It required hard lobbying from all the political parties in Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council to get the Department for Social Development to recognise that there is a social housing need in the area. About three or four years ago, some officials from the Department for Social Development gave a presentation to the council in which they said that there was no need for any more social housing. In fact, they said that more social housing and land would be sold off.

969. We have met the Minister for Social Development and consistently said that there must be a more robust and flexible rental intervention. The housing benefit system is not working, and it is failing the people who receive it. Increasingly, a section of people are simply missing out on entitlement. There have been recent improvements to that situation. However, it is still by no means a perfect solution. We think that an independent body should be set up, under legislation, to cap rents.

970. For instance, landlords — quite legitimately — receive grants to install new heating systems or new windows. However, we find that, when those improvements have been made —for which the Housing Executive has fully paid —landlords go to tenants in the following weeks and ask for an extra £20 a week in rent. Those tenants have no recourse on that. The Housing Executive is examining that matter and is trying to change it. There should be an independent body that has the power to set and regulate rents, because it is a problem, particularly for families.

971. In the past, where families have rented a house privately — for, perhaps, £100 or £120 a week — many landlords have decided that they are not making enough money and have arbitrarily increased the rent by £50 or £60. If families pay that amount, that is all well and good. However, if they do not, the landlords’ ultimate intention is to change their property from a family home to a house in multiple occupation (HMO), where four, five, six — or in some cases, seven or more — people live under one roof and each pay £70 or £80 a week in rent.

972. There is a massive number of HMOs in Dungannon. Well in excess of 30% to 40% of the houses in most private estates in the Dungannon and Coalisland areas are in multiple occupation. We did a case study on a new housing estate in Dungannon in which there are three families living in a new development that has 30 apartments and 50 houses. The rest of the accommodation is HMO provision. We have three-storey town houses in which garages have been turned into bedrooms. The system is simply not coping. The Housing Executive has declared the Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council area and the Cookstown District Council area to be HMO registration areas. One officer, who is based in Coleraine, is responsible for those areas as well as the university areas around Portstewart, Portrush and Derry. That is wholly inadequate.

973. Tensions are raised because families are being priced out of the market. The majority of people who use HMO-registered accommodation are migrant workers, which leads to racial tension and a crisis in housing. Housing is a massive issue. The council called for a local task force of stakeholders. As yet, the Department for Social Development and the Housing Executive have refused to become involved in that. We were hoping for an arrangement similar to that of Lisburn, where the stakeholders try to work together to improve all aspects of housing. The Department for Social Development and the Housing Executive have not agreed to that.

974. I have spoken about the rental gap, housing benefits and rents. The Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment has refused to become involved on the basis that it defines its interventions on the basis of unemployment figures. Dungannon has little — or no — unemployment, so the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment says that it has no remit or involvement as regards investment. Dungannon has a successful entrepreneurial spirit because of the lack of public-sector employment. Employment centres around the engineering sector. Most of those small-to-medium engineering firms feed into the larger factories such as Powerscreen. When they expand and need new premises, the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment will not facilitate them locally because they do not have an export market, even though they are feeding into the big exporters in the area. Dungannon has many small-to-medium engineering companies that tell the council that they are being advised by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment to set up in Enniskillen or Newry, for example. Therefore, that is a further drain on the skilled labour in the area.

975. I have touched on the issue of commitment to childcare and preschool provision, which is completely failing in the area. The inflexibility of the area plan is also an issue. For example, Dungannon’s area plan — which runs from 2000 to 2010 — does not mention migrant workers or the increased population. We have advised the Planning Service that the whole issue needs to be reconsidered, but it has said that the plan is fixed.

976. In Dungannon, initiatives to deal with poverty are not working. For example, neighbourhood renewal has been an unmitigated disaster. There are neighbourhood renewal schemes in Dungannon West and Coalisland, which have been going on for almost five years, and two to three years, respectively.

977. The community has no faith in the process and is not particularly involved in it. The populations of both areas are too small to be taken in isolation, but it was the Department for Social Development that drew up the parameters to be used to set the boundaries. Basically, the statutory agencies — including the Department for Social Development, the education authorities and the health authorities — refused point-blank to divert resources into those areas. That affected 700 people in the Dungannon area alone.

978. Neighbourhood renewal schemes were supposed to attract funding and encourage into the area those schemes that address deprivation. However, it is more beneficial for some communities not to have neighbourhood renewal schemes because they can attract extra funding. Some organisations have said that they cannot fund certain areas, because those areas already benefit from neighbourhood renewal schemes. We have raised that issue with the Minister for Social Development and senior officials. However, we have had no response.

979. It is important that any solutions or ideas that this inquiry identifies are flexible; one size will not fit all. I have used the example of neighbourhood renewal. That scheme started in England, where whole cities are designated as neighbourhood renewal areas. It is debatable whether it is working there. The same idea has been used for an area in Dungannon in which 700 people live. It is not working; flexibility is required. In order to tackle the problem effectively, it has to be recognised that every area has unique situations and solutions.

980. Committee members met representatives from the local anti-poverty network. We worked in conjunction with Frances Dowd from that group with the aim of making people aware of the hidden poverty that exists, which last night’s ‘Spotlight’ helped to highlight. We also want a system that enables local people who are working on the ground to make the statutory authorities aware of problems as they arise rather than having to wait for two or three years for those problems to be addressed.

981. The issues that I have talked about are what we have identified as the differentials in the Dungannon experience. The potential key solutions include having higher-paid public-sector jobs in the area. Instant work on housing is also required, including affordable housing for first-time buyers. I cannot stress enough the current crisis across the council area in the private-rented sector. Again, greater flexibility is required; there should no longer be the shackles of past strategies that expected to meet the needs of every population size and address all situations.

982. The Chairperson: Thank you for that comprehensive presentation. Have any studies taken place on measuring child poverty or the levels of poverty in the migrant population?

983. Mr Monteith: There have been no studies of that population in isolation. We work with the migrant workers’ networks, and the key issues that are raised are often the same as those that affect the indigenous population. One problem that is unique to migrant workers is being unable to get childcare because of language barriers.

984. The Chairperson: It is probably fair to say that some of the migrant population may not be registered in the official system. Do you know whether anyone is considering that issue or trying to identify how many people are in that situation?

985. Mr Monteith: Various Departments have produced initiatives. Over the past 18 months, the council has been urging those Departments to stop counting and start doing something. Every statutory agency in the Administration that has been lobbied has carried out its own mini-census. However, the people are here. School censuses and national insurance numbers can be used for those purposes. They must start to do something about the problem. I accept what you are saying, but the council’s latest figures, which have been gathered from all the agencies, would suggest that there are about 5,500 unregistered migrant workers outside the system.

986. Mr Elliott: It is remarkable that an area that has one of the highest rates of child poverty in Northern Ireland has probably the lowest unemployment rate. We have been told in the past that if all families that were on benefits claimed their full entitlement, they would not be in poverty, or at least would not be in severe poverty. Is it the case that people on low incomes are not claiming their full benefit entitlement, or do they fall outside the threshold for those benefits? Is there a gap? You also said that there should be an enhanced, higher-paid public sector. There are plenty of jobs here in the private sector — are those jobs too badly paid?

987. Mr Monteith: That is undoubtedly a problem. Our economy is based on minimum-wage employment. I do not think that there is an issue about people not claiming their entitlements to benefits such as tax credits. The problem may be that there is a lack of understanding of the tax credit system, perhaps specifically in the migrant worker community. Most people who have grown up here have difficulty with it.

988. There are about 1,000 people from Timor who live in Dungannon and who comprise the largest Timorese community in western Europe after a small town in Wales. The tax credit helplines do not have a Tetum option — the native language of Timor — because it is spoken by so few people and is therefore not cost-effective. Those people are unable to report changes of circumstances or understand anything that it sent out to them, and they are unable to make contact. That is a unique situation in Dungannon. People are also finding themselves in tax credit overpayment situations. The means to break even is being removed from them.

989. The other issue is the cost of housing. A person on the minimum wage claiming the full tax credit entitlement still cannot afford to pay between £120 and £170 a week in rent. That cannot be sustained in the long term.

990. Mr Elliott: I just want to make it clear that those people are not from Teemore in County Fermanagh.

991. Mr Monteith: What language do they speak there?

992. The Chairperson: They speak a language that the clergy do not know.

993. Mrs Long: Thank you for your presentation. It was very useful. Some of the issues that you have raised, particularly in relation to the cost of housing compared with income, have been discussed before, because we have examined the difference in situations before housing costs and after housing costs.

994. You mentioned the issue of greater control over private rented property and the introduction of rent capping. Have you lobbied the Department for Social Development directly on that issue, and what sort of feedback have you received? You also referred to the gap between the level of rent required and housing benefit. We have had a similar debate in Belfast. Part of the fear seems to be that if housing benefit were increased, rentals would also be raised, so that the gap would widen.

995. You have talked about some outside interventions such as neighbourhood renewal, and you expressed the opinion that that does not work. What is Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council doing that could be used as a model to address issues of poverty? How could similar models be applied to other communities?

996. Mr Monteith: Neither rent capping nor housing benefit can be taken in isolation; they must be considered simultaneously. There is no point raising levels of housing benefit if landlords subsequently increase rents. Under direct rule and the new Assembly, the Department for Social Development, at ministerial and senior official levels, has consistently told us that rental intervention is impossible and unworkable. Until someone grasps the nettle and declares that he or she will make it a possibility, those problems will continue.

997. We do not have all the solutions about what is, or is not, working with neighbourhood renewal. However, some things do work. The Community Foundation for Northern Ireland’s communities in transition programme is a better example of how to help communities on the ground than the neighbourhood renewal strategy, because there is no pressure from deadlines to spend money. An allocation is made, and there is support over three to five to six years. Some communities might consider the programme to be failing, but, given my experience of both, the communities in transition concept is far better for communities.

998. The difference is that there is no statutory buy-in to the communities in transition programme; which depends more on community capacity. Our problem with statutory buy-in is in getting beyond the point at which the various bodies’ chief executives or decision-makers agree to do things differently in different areas. In our local neighbourhood renewal area, the chief executive of the Western Education and Library Board will not do anything differently from what people do elsewhere; likewise with the Southern Health and Social Care Trust and various agencies, which is why the neighbourhood renewal strategy is failing.

999. In addition, despite Ministers’ best intentions, there is no ministerial buy-in. In the beginning, the idea was that if an agency was not pulling its weight, the matter would be referred to ministerial level to be sorted out in liaison with other Ministers. That is where the system is falling down.

1000. We must also bear in mind that this matter cannot be resolved without key strategic decisions being made at departmental level. Decisions about issues such as rent and the low income economy must be generic; they will not be solved by considering Dungannon alone.

1001. Ms Claire Linney (Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council): When we considered neighbourhood renewal schemes elsewhere, we identified population size as a key factor in mainstreaming or skewing the allocation of resources. For example, Departments say that it is not feasible to resource a population of 700 people. We are also told regularly by Departments that if it does something for us, it must do it for everybody. We reply that if everybody can make an equally strong case based on need and deprivation, that should be OK. However, the problem is getting Departments to commit to resource prioritisation.

1002. Economic development figures were mentioned, and they cause misrepresentations. We have just received figures from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment that indicate that Dungannon is among the highest median income levels. The highest median is different from the highest average, and that skews people’s perceptions. Although our average income levels are among the lowest, people assume that we are in a good enough position.

1003. Mr Elliott: When child poverty figures are calculated, is there an issue about average and median? Although research is under way, I want to get to the bottom of that subject.

1004. The Committee Clerk: The Committee is due to hear the results from that research next week, although it is more concerned with measurement. However, to discover whether that is an issue, I will talk to the researchers about how poverty statistics are arrived at compared with income figures.

1005. Mrs Long: You said that the Department for Social Development would not favour direct interventions such as rent capping. Would the creation of more social housing not have the same affect, because, if more social housing were available, the demand would be lower and therefore sustainable rent increases would be dampened? If the Department will not commit to direct intervention, that might be an alternative approach.

1006. Mr Monteith: That is undoubtedly so. We had reasonable hopes that the housing review would trigger some movement. However, let me give you an example: Dungannon has not seen a new start, social-build family house since the early 1990s. That is the cold, hard reality. A few small apartment complexes have been built for singles. That is what we are dealing with. It has been 14 to 15 years since any social housing stock has been added. Everything has been left in the realms of the private sector, and our citizens have suffered.

1007. Mr Shannon: Thank you for your presentation. I am intrigued that you say that there is no unemployment. I read your written submission before this meeting. Certain factors contribute to the situation, and I would like to hear your opinion.

1008. With respect to migrant workers and ethnic minorities, you cite the Northern Ireland census, which reveals that 46% of Dungannon households include a disability or a long-term illness. You also refer to low wages as contributing to that situation. Normally, where there is high unemployment, there would also be severe child poverty. Here, the opposite is the case, but the factors contributing to child poverty are the same. I wonder how we can address that issue. You mention some of the issues that have been tackled in the local action plan. Is there anything in particular that the Committee should note about how you have tried to address the situation? You have painted rather a black picture of the situation across the whole area. You complain of high rents: rents should have been pushed down, because people cannot afford them. If the tenant cannot pay the rent, the landlord cannot get the money. Is that not happening? If it is not, how do landlords get their money?

1009. Mr Monteith: Over the past few months, the process has necessarily stabilised, but, as in most places, contractors and developers have stopped building. There are not many empty houses; however, landlords get their rent by reverting to an HMO situation. Rent from the property is accumulated by collecting £60, £70 or £80 a week from each tenant living in a house. A vast number of properties are rented in that way. Were the Housing Executive to compile a survey, I do not know where it would begin. That is how it is done: rent is set at a certain level and, as people cannot afford to pay it, the property is converted into an HMO.

1010. In Dungannon, families live in HMOs; families with two kids rent single rooms. I know of several situations where a couple with a young baby live in the box room of an old Housing Executive house. When a child is born, the couple is charged an extra £20 for the child to live in the room.

1011. Mr Shannon: That is ridiculous.

1012. Mr Monteith: The exploitation that occurs here is remarkable. Those are the worst examples; there are others that do not necessarily come to light. When people try to enforce their rights, it is not uncommon for them to return home one evening to find all their possessions lying in the street. People live from one crisis to another. Families move in together to try to pay the rent. It is a vicious circle.

1013. Ms Linney: As part of our stakeholder group, we brought in local charities that focus on poverty. They have told us that they are busier now than ever. In low income households, the priority is rent; the key thing is to keep a roof over one’s head. Charities visit households here and report to us what they find: cupboards with limited food, and food of poor nutritional value. People are reluctant to use energy for light, let alone heat. Even investors have told us that they have had to change heating systems because oil runs out regularly. Having paid such a high rent, people cannot afford the basics of life.

1014. Mr Shannon: Members have copies of the local action plan. If the situation is as bleak as that, have you been able to address any of those local issues? I know that you cannot act on your own; I understand that you intend to liaise with Ministers on policy and action on different issues. I wonder whether we can learn something specifically.

1015. Mr Monteith: We are at the early stages. Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council took the initiative when child poverty figures were released in August 2007. We came up with the idea of a local anti-poverty network. However, we are not fixed on it: we have told stakeholders that we will continue with it only if there are benefits for local people and for the council. If, in six or 12 months’ time, it turns out that a local anti-poverty network has not shown benefits, we must go back to the drawing board. We consider the network’s role to be to pool information on what works and what does not and get it to the decision-makers as soon as possible.

1016. People depend on local charities to keep them above the breadline. I cannot pay enough tribute to the work that those charities do. They have told the council that people must cut out food and other necessities, as Claire mentioned. People also get themselves into crazy debt through taking out one so-called minor loan after another. For example, they might borrow £5,000 to try to keep their heads above water. They start to struggle with the repayments and are attracted by the consolidation loans that are constantly advertised on TV. More and more people are getting into that type of debt.

1017. Store cards are another massive problem in the area. People can buy food, clothes, and so forth, on a store card and do not have to pay for the items at the time. They make decisions on that basis. That is how they get into massive credit. That is how people survive. People should be encouraged to join a credit union, because it is a worthwhile way to save and borrow for people who are on low incomes. Its membership is increasing because people are finding it harder to get credit elsewhere and to survive.

1018. Mrs D Kelly: I thank Barry and Claire for their comments on a subject that they, obviously, care about passionately. They gave a useful presentation. I apologise if the matter has already been covered, but I was struck that the average cost of a house in an area of such poverty is £178,000. I assume that that is partly due to the landlord dilemma.

1019. Given that area planning and land zoning are matters with which we must all contend, is there not enough land in public ownership in the council area, or is the area plan for housing zoning insufficient and, therefore, bumps up land value?

1020. Mr Monteith: There is little land in public ownership in the area. The council called for a review of the area plan mid-term in 2005. When the council met the folks who were involved in carrying out the review, we stressed that the issue was not necessarily the amount of land that is zoned but their insistence that they would not release any phase 2 land until phase 1 is complete. The situation is the same anywhere. It exists right across the council area, despite there being large areas of unused land. Local people could tell you categorically that certain land is either highly unlikely to, or will never, be developed, but that there is phase 2 land that could be developed relatively quickly. That would probably affect house prices.

1021. However, your point about house prices is exactly right: in 2000-01, over 80% of houses that were bought in Dungannon were bought by first-time buyers; by 2005, that figure had dropped to below 15%. First-time buyers were being completely frozen out. Houses were being bought by speculators. Estate agents had no work to do because landlords told them that would buy the next 10 houses that were available. Estate agents had an easy time: they did not have to try to sell anything. They did not have to encourage a first-time buyer to come along.

1022. Although the situation is somewhat better now, for a long time, developers and speculators bought houses and kept them empty. They bought them on the basis that they would make a quick killing in six or 12 months. Therefore, why would they take on the hassle of getting a tenant into the house, just to put them out after a few months? Fortunately, that is not as attractive a possibility now as it was a year ago. However, that was the situation. The people who bought houses were not first-time buyers or even people who were moving from one family home to another; they were speculators and landlords.

1023. Mr Molloy: Thank you for your presentation. It covered some local issues with which I am familiar. It was mentioned that the area has high employment yet has a high level of child poverty. Is it possible for people to work their way out of poverty? Is it possible that the council could follow the need for social housing better than it is doing? It looks as though private enterprise, particularly in the Dungannon area, has been allowed to build all the housing, but little or no affordable or social housing.

1024. Mr Monteith: Over the past 15 to 20 years, the social sector has failed abjectly in the Dungannon area. It has failed to maintain any level of renewal of its stock and has been wholly reliant on the crumbs from the private developers’ table. The council would have reacted far more quickly and better in the scenario of dealing with the social housing issue. That is symptomatic of the fact that the Housing Executive come to the council chamber once a year to tell us that there is no problem, that it did not need social houses and had no plans to build any. It took extremely vociferous meetings with the area manager from Craigavon, at which councillors said that people whom they met on the ground and in the streets could not get a house. That took a while; it was not until 2004 that the Housing Executive said that houses needed to be built and said that they would be built in 2009 or 2010.

1025. I can categorically say that the council would have reacted far more quickly, because it heard the issues faster. There was also an issue of democratic accountability. Local people were able to tell the local representatives that they could not get a house or that their daughter or son could not get a house. On one occasion, the Housing Executive castigated the council, but the council was right when it said that a sign should be put up on the door of the local Housing Executive saying: “Need not apply.” People in priority need have been on waiting lists for 12, 18, 24 and 36 months. People make do and move on to different situations, putting themselves into debt because they cannot wait for a house in order to raise their family.

1026. Ms Linney: The Government sector, including local councils, has bought into the private-sector ethos that, because of past issues, any private-sector development is good. The council has challenged that by saying that Planning Policy Statement 8 (PPS 8) has a remit to consider social housing without getting into wider budgetary issues. It puts the onus back on developers, but that HS2 policy has never been used. There is an issue about how to use it and a fear factor about how to challenge private-sector development. Sometimes, current legislation must be considered to enable us to move forward.

1027. Mr Monteith: When we get our teeth into those issues, we often find that the legislation is there and that Departments have the power to make decisions. When the council raised the issue of zoning land for social housing, it was told that it could not be done because it is only done with the development of an area plan. Therefore, the zoning of land for social housing could not be done in Dungannon.

1028. A local council can react better to what happens on the ground. Decision-makers on planning and housing in Dungannon are based in Craigavon and Omagh. Those towns are 60 miles apart geographically and light years apart in how they work together. Senior personnel from the Planning Service and the Housing Executive met in this council building on the issue of zoning, and they blamed each other. The Planning Service people said that it was up to the Housing Executive to come to them, and the Housing Executive people said that it was up to the Planning Service to come to them. As a council, we said that we had brought the agencies together and asked whether they were going to do anything, but they kept their silo mentality.

1029. Mr Molloy: If there were one key change that the Executive could make to eradicate child poverty, what would it be?

1030. Mr Monteith: It would be to build houses.

1031. The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. If there is any additional information that you wish to provide to us, we are happy to receive it.

1032. Mr Monteith: I thank you and the Committee for giving us the opportunity to meet you today. I wish you all the best.

1033. The Chairperson: The Committee will now hear evidence from Craigavon Borough Council as part of the inquiry into child poverty. It has already provided a written submission. I welcome Ms Davina McCartney from the council. The Committee looks forward to your presentation and the opportunity to ask questions. We expect the session to last approximately 30 minutes.

1034. Ms Davina McCartney (Craigavon Borough Council): Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our response to the Committee’s inquiry into child poverty. I am the rural development officer with Craigavon Borough Council, based in the community development section. I will give the Committee some background information on the Craigavon area and what has been going on there. I will also highlight instances of good practice from other areas and draw a few conclusions.

1035. The borough of Craigavon has a population of 84,679 people, according to the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) statistics of 2005. Craigavon is made up of the main urban areas of Portadown, Lurgan and Brownlow, with rural areas making up approximately 30% of the population of the borough. Twenty-three per cent of the population live in the most deprived super output areas in Northern Ireland. The borough has a relatively young population; 24·7% of the population are under 16, compared with 23·6% for the rest of Northern Ireland.

1036. Three neighbourhood partnerships operate in the borough at Brownlow, Lurgan and North West Portadown. Work carried out by the Craigavon District Policing Partnership and Craigavon Community Safety Partnership has shown that there is a problem with underage drinking in the borough, and more research must be undertaken to determine whether that is linked to child poverty.

1037. More research is also needed to determine future provision for the Craigavon area due to the increase in the number of ethnic-minority families and the impact that that has on health and education. Craigavon’s population is growing at a consistently higher rate than that in the rest of Northern Ireland — it is approximately 1% higher.

1038. What is currently happening in the Craigavon area? Sure Start schemes operate in six wards in Brownlow and Lurgan, offering various services, including family-support workers, health professionals, childminding network, a mobile crèche, play development and a programme for two-year-olds. As I said, three neighbourhood renewal partnerships have been established to work in the most deprived neighbourhoods, with the aim of improving the quality of life of people there. The Southern Area Children and Young People’s Committee looks at the needs of all children in the Southern Health and Social Care Trust area, including those of children from black and minority ethnic communities.

1039. The council’s research, like that of other organisations, has identified that children who live in workless households, households that are headed by a member of an ethnic minority, large families and households that include a disabled person are more at risk of poverty. Lifetime Opportunities, the anti-poverty and social inclusion strategy for Northern Ireland, recognises that education, health and housing are all key factors in tackling poverty in general.

1040. Areas that display low rates of child poverty and good practice include Scandinavia, where there are systems of comprehensive family support, which compensate families for the cost of children, and where family-friendly labour markets make it easy for parents to combine paid work with motherhood or fatherhood. In Austria and Germany, systems of paid apprenticeships play an effective role in keeping poverty rates among young adults extremely low. In Denmark, Finland and Sweden, day care is universal, and, in theory, every child is entitled to a place.

1041. It is important to introduce free-at-the-point-of-delivery, good quality, universal childcare, with a view to extending the Sure Start programme. Childcare is a major barrier to employment in rural areas particularly, and we welcome the establishment of the rural childcare strategy groups that have been established by the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD). An approach that increases employment rates and the rewards from paid work is required, along with family-friendly working policies. There is a need for joined-up thinking among policymakers to poverty-proof policies in much the same way as they are rural-proofed. Policies should be focused on all areas, urban and rural, and it must be recognised that there are pockets of deprivation in more affluent wards. We welcome the £10 million package in the Programme for Government aimed at combating social exclusion and poverty in rural areas.

1042. What can Craigavon Borough Council and other councils do to reduce child poverty? In general terms, they can continue to deliver neighbourhood renewal action plans, and any other funding packages that are aimed at reducing poverty; provide support, particularly through the community development section, for local communities to develop projects aimed at reducing child poverty; and work with other stakeholders, including the health trusts and the education and library boards, to develop projects for the local area.

1043. The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. Craigavon has a fairly high immigrant population — as do other areas such as Dungannon. Has Craigavon Borough Council, or any associated body, conducted research into levels of poverty affecting immigrants?

1044. Ms D McCartney: I do not think that Craigavon Borough Council has conducted any research, although we have a good relations officer in place who could look at such things. The Action Now to Integrate Minority Access to Equality (ANIMATE) programme, which is a partnership between Dungannon, Craigavon and Cookstown, might have done some research on that issue.

1045. The Chairperson: The last part of your submission suggests that you are heavily dependent on what others can do to alleviate child poverty and what they can help you to do. Have you any firmer ideas or recommendations?

1046. Ms D McCartney: Councils do not have an overall remit for young people; other areas do. It is important that groups work in partnership.

1047. Mr McElduff: Is there an issue in the Craigavon district with high private-rental costs, relatively low incomes, and associated problems?

1048. Ms D McCartney: It is an issue. There are many migrant workers living in Portadown, and some areas have pockets in which there is a lot of private-rented accommodation. That has been highlighted to Craigavon Intercultural Programme — a recently established group that is working with Portuguese, Polish, Lithuanian and other ethnic minorities.

1049. Mr Shannon: You said that the Austrian and German systems of paid apprenticeships play an effective role in keeping poverty rates among young adults low. Have you any idea of the figure required to ensure that apprenticeships become more effective? I am aware, for instance, that apprentices who are working and attending college can receive up to £30. That is not a lot of money. Have you any figures for Austria and Germany?

1050. Ms D McCartney: I do not have that information to hand. It was researched, but I do not have the exact figures.

1051. The Chairperson: Perhaps the Committee can commission its own research on that.

1052. Mr Shannon: I would appreciate that. Ms McCartney has highlighted an area that the Committee can look at, and I think that we should. Any ideas in relation to that would be helpful.

1053. Mrs D Kelly: Perhaps someone should have come along from the elected representatives to help Davina. The research can be forwarded to the Committee. Many people define Craigavon as the bit in the middle, whereas the statistics define it, geographically, as Lurgan, Portadown and Brownlow. There would have been the impression that, because there were many void properties in the central area, there was a lot of housing. In fact, partly as a result of the influx of the migrant population, in the last six months or more there have, on occasions, been no void properties anywhere in Craigavon, with the exception of one housing development that tends to be allocated primarily to people with long-term chronic alcohol problems. That is most unfortunate, but that is the reality of the situation.

1054. Is there any up-to-date information on the state of the Sure Start projects in Craigavon or any information on how healthy their future is?

1055. Ms D McCartney: The Sure Start projects have only been running since February 2007, and they are only working in six wards in Craigavon. It would be beneficial if they were extended further.

1056. Mr Molloy: How big an issue is child poverty in the Craigavon area and is it a big issue for the council? Has the council taken action on child poverty or put any structures in place to deal with the situation?

1057. Ms D McCartney: I do not think that there is anything —

1058. Mrs D Kelly: I can help to answer some of those questions. There is not enough that council has to do; it is sporadic and not necessarily cross-party, and there are gaps. In relation to the Brownlow sector, the council has refocused whatever community grants it has at those most in need, and it takes a firm lead on neighbourhood renewal in that sector, which involves community consultation. The development department primarily takes the lead on neighbourhood renewal, which is a very focused piece of work in some of the most deprived areas.

1059. The council has, through economic and rural regeneration moneys, for example, targeted the wards. Although it is not under the child poverty banner, the council does target social need. It sets aside money to avail of all opportunities under the EU or central Government to draw down funding to combat those issues.

1060. The migrant population is increasing, with around 3,000 people from Poland, 1,000 Lithuanians and people from Brazil and Romania. That is proving problematic for schools, and I am sure that other members have that problem also. Although the Catholic maintained sector does not have a statutory obligation to take children from those families, it has a Christian ethos and therefore does take them.

1061. People have been brought here through back doors from countries that are not fully integrated into Europe, such as the accession states. When those people are out of work or their work permits elapse, the children and young people — and their families — do not have statutory access to GP services. That is an evolving picture in Craigavon and something that my constituency office has to deal with. Migrant workers from the new accession states and those who are not yet integrated in Europe do not have the same rights. There is not enough forward planning.

1062. Craigavon has the same difficulties as Dungannon, because of the phase one and phase two area plan. In areas of housing demand, there may be 300 people on a housing list in a district electoral area, but that may be in phase two and the land is not being released. Artificial land values are being created because of the inflexibility of Planning Service. Barry McElduff was right to highlight the fact that some farming lands will never be sold on for housing — and all members know that.

1063. Mr Molloy: The issue of childcare must be tackled. Do the childcare issues of migrant workers differ to those of the local people?

1064. Ms D McCartney: Migrant workers have different issues, especially with regard to the hours that childminders are available. One problem that has been identified is that many migrant workers do shift work, whereas childminders work from 9.00 am to 5.00 pm or from 8.00 am to 6.00 pm.

1065. Mrs D Kelly: In Lurgan, we are fortunate to have the St Vincent de Paul’s Ozanam Centre and Mount Zion House, which was part of a council initiative, and they provide childcare. However, we have one of the youngest populations of all the district councils in the North, and that causes problems with regard to poverty and Lifetime Opportunities. In the past, the workforce in Craigavon was made up mainly of skilled workers in the manufacturing and textile industry. However, many of those industries have now gone, and there has been an increase in low-paid jobs.

1066. Mr Molloy: One of the problems that we found in Dungannon was that migrant workers were not registered with GPs, which meant that health, education and other services in the area were not getting the subsidy or support from central Government to which they were entitled. We also found that there was a differential of 3,000 between the registered population of Dungannon and the actual population. The key point is that all workers should be registered with a GP. That is not the custom in other countries.

1067. The Chairperson: At the outset of the meeting, we asked members to declare their interests and most declared an interest in local government.

1068. Mr Spratt: I am a member of Castlereagh Borough Council.

1069. Underage drinking is a problem in all council areas. You mentioned specifically the district policing partnership — I assume that the community safety partnership is also involved. You said that you were going to carry out more research into that. What is the council’s view on how that problem relates to child poverty? More research will not help to solve it. There have been some innovative schemes across the Province. For instance, the PSNI is working in partnership with the district policing partnership and community safety partnerships, visiting off-licences and proactively campaigning to try to snuff out the problem. Money could be better spent in other ways, rather than on research.

1070. Ms D McCartney: I said that research could identify whether there is a link between the underage drinking and poverty. Research has been carried out by the district policing partnership and the community safety partnership into the problem of underage drinking. There have also been many high-profile campaigns in the borough, including the “Where is your child tonight” campaign, which recently won a national award and is now Province-wide. In Craigavon, the Housing Executive, the PSNI and the community safety partnership work together to promote it. I am interested to know whether there is a link between underage drinking and poverty.

1071. Mr Spratt: But it has not been established at this point?

1072. Ms D McCartney: The link has not been established, but it is something that we are interested in looking at.

1073. Mrs Long: Thank you for the presentation. It has been very helpful. We have heard about its experience of neighbourhood renewal from Dungannon and South Tyrone Borough Council. How effective have you found neighbourhood renewal to be in tackling poverty?

1074. Some people have highlighted the fact that there are limitations to what councils can do to address child poverty, specifically because they do not have a remit for children and have limited levers when it comes to delivering the services that would impact on poverty. Under the review of public administration (RPA), are there specific things that, if they were to be devolved to local councils, would be better used there than at central Government level to tackle child poverty at a local level?

1075. Ms D McCartney: I am not directly involved with neighbourhood renewal. There are other community development officers who work on neighbourhood renewal, and it has been a long, slow process. It has been difficult to get things off the ground, but things are moving now. Many good projects based on health, education and young people are being developed and will be funded this year and next. Neighbourhood renewal has been useful in targeting the most deprived areas of the borough. Lurgan has one of the larger neighbourhood renewal partnerships in Northern Ireland, and a lot of work has been done there, as well as in Brownlow and the North West Portadown area. In the context of the RPA, the main benefits of local government are local knowledge and the ability to deliver to people on the ground.

1076. Mrs D Kelly: Neighbourhood renewal aims to draw all the plans together for a project, after which a satisfactory business case must be provided. A lesson to be learned is that people want neighbourhood renewal to deliver some quick wins. People want to see a difference in their environment and in their situation.

1077. Many of the neighbourhood renewal projects in Lurgan are aimed at youth, such as building recreational facilities for activities such as midnight football, which is a diversionary project used in several areas to try to take young people off the streets at night. Thus, neighbourhood renewal is strongly focused on youth in Craigavon. In some cases, it works with the Housing Executive on the regeneration of shops and premises that have become dilapidated.

1078. The second part of Mrs Long’s question was about extra powers for councils to allow better and more direct delivery of services, and that is done through community planning. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. A priority in one area may no longer be a priority in other areas. For example, many people regard the Shankill housing estate as a Housing Executive estate, which it was, but only 14 houses remain in public ownership. Therefore, people must consider what the priorities are at a given time. Some estates are populated by primarily older people, some by young families and others are mixed.

1079. Local government and the Planning Service must be acutely aware of how speculators buy one house to turn it into a three-story block of 10 flats. That is happening in my village, and the planners told me that the developers submit hare-brained schemes so that they can negotiate to achieve what they originally wanted — without such a big difference from their initial submissions, they would have no chance of being successful. Therefore, planning, the availability of land, infrastructure and access to motorways, trains and buses are major issues — public transport is critical.

1080. The Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation, Dolores.

1081. Mrs D Kelly: Mr Moutray is the chairman of the council’s development committee, and I no longer serve on it.

1082. The Chairperson: I thank Ms McCartney for her presentation. If you have any further information for the Committee, we will be glad to receive it.

1083. The Chairperson: The Committee has received a joint written submission from the Western Health Action Zone and the Western Investing for Health Partnership, and additional speaking notes have also been provided.

1084. I welcome Siobhan Sweeney and Brendan Bonner. Good afternoon. We are here today to discuss child poverty. Thank you for your written submission, and I look forward to your short presentation, after which members will put questions to you. I anticipate that this session will last for approximately half an hour.

1085. Mr Brendan Bonner (Western Investing for Health Partnership): On behalf of the Western Investing for Health Partnership, I thank the Committee for the opportunity to make an oral presentation on child poverty today.

1086. Addressing poverty is one of the underlying objectives of the Investing for Health strategy for Northern Ireland, but the issue underpins all the objectives, not just objective 1, which is about reducing poverty for families with children. Addressing poverty involves looking at the attitudes and skills that people require in life. It is about emotional well-being and mental health and giving people an opportunity to live and work in a decent and affordable home. It is about improving our neighbourhoods, reducing accidents and enabling people to make healthier choices in life.

1087. In the Western Health and Social Services Board area, over 77,000 children are affected by poverty. Those are the children who are most likely to be found among the 20% of pupils who have no GCSEs at all, which therefore limits their opportunities. They are the ones who tend to experience behavioural problems. Our child and adolescent mental health service (CAMHS) unit is experiencing a huge increase in demand from young people, and over 62% of those who have contacted it in the past year come from disadvantaged areas. Over 50% of children aged under five who are admitted to A&E come from urban neighbourhood renewal areas.

1088. There is poor oral health in the west, particularly in disadvantaged areas, where only 19% of children under the age of three are registered with a dentist. Diet and nutrition are major problems for families in poverty. One in four girls and one in five boys are obese. Children from disadvantaged areas are more likely to be obese than those from non-disadvantaged areas. Those children are more likely to experience long-term unemployment when they get older.

1089. If 20% of children are to be lifted out of poverty by 2010, a number of actions must be taken. There must be strategic co-ordination, which links the various strategies such as the Lifetime Opportunities strategy, the neighbourhood renewal strategy and the Investing for Health strategy. Structures are already in place, and they should be supported.

1090. There must be genuine partnership working, not passive partnership working. We need a community development approach that involves working with those who experience poverty. We must employ evidence-based practice, and, at the same time, be innovative and adopt a more holistic approach to dealing with the problem. My colleague Siobhan Sweeney will outline three initiatives that have been undertaken.

1091. Ms Siobhan Sweeney (Western Health Action Zone): A number of initiatives in the west have produced good outcomes by adopting the approach that Brendan mentioned. They have involved a needs assessment, good partnership and inter-agency working, and a community development approach. I will concentrate on three initiatives, giving examples of the outcomes that they have delivered.

1092. The first project focused on debt and consumerism. The Western Health Action Zone (WHAZ) has been instrumental in developing work to tackle debt and consumerism, which is a contributory factor to poverty and disadvantage. The debt and consumerism project is based on research that we carried out in the Derry area, ‘Paying the Price’. I will detail some of the outcomes. The project has helped to deal with £3·2 million of debt in a small urban housing estate, which is a phenomenal amount of debt in a small urban area. It has helped us to maximise benefits and incomes for people in the area. It has reduced levels of stress and depression that are related to financial concerns, improved budgeting skills and prioritised essential outgoings. We have managed to replicate the project successfully in a number of other areas; for example, with Fermanagh New Horizons, which is a mental-health project, and with Women’s Aid.

1093. The second project is for young fathers. When we consider the number of teenage mothers, we must also consider that, for each of them, there is also a young father. That project has examined the importance of the father in a child’s life, and of breaking the cycle of disadvantage. That is based on research, ‘In Whose Best Interest?’, which in on our website. The project focuses on parenting and life skills to enable young men to remain as a positive force in their child’s life. It aims to increase self-esteem and confidence, improve parenting and family relationships, and improve young families’ access to help and support. It also aims to reduce antagonism, court cases and isolation of families. Again, this is co-ordination and partnership working at its best to deliver the project.

1094. The third project is Health Promoting Homes, which we developed after being asked to respond to a priorities for action (PFA) target to reduce obesity in children. That initiative was designed to prevent obesity in disadvantaged children. It is a 26-week training programme for parents on personal development, diet, nutrition — including oral health — and physical activity. Parents of children living in poverty tend to have fewer skills and knowledge on healthy lifestyles, are more likely to have a high-fat low-nutritional diet, are less likely to be physically active and have lower breast-feeding rates. Over 360 families have completed the programme, and we have evidence of positive changes in lifestyle and sustained social inclusion because of it.

1095. Mr Bonner: There are many other initiatives that we could have spoken about, but the three that we mentioned used an integrated and holistic approach to deal with the wider problems that affect people living in poverty.

1096. In the Committee’s deliberations, it is important that initiatives have an outcome focus to see real benefits. There must be joined-up government, strategically and locally. An inter-agency approach is also required because no single agency can resolve the problem of poverty. Monitoring and evaluation are required to identify what works and good practice. It is important that issues such as debt, family support, food poverty, fuel poverty, social exclusion, emotional well-being and mental health, disability and education are given due consideration.

1097. The Chairperson: Thank you, Brendan and Siobhan. I have a question that might provoke you: is there any duplication in the work of the Western Health Action Zone and the Western Investing for Health Partnership?

1098. Mr Bonner: No, there is not. Rather than having two separate partnerships, in 2002 we decided to just have one. The Western Investing for Health Partnership provides strategic direction to Investing for Health and the Western Health Action Zone. In the deliberation of our work, we use four themes: early years, teenage transition, adulthood and later years. The Health Action Zone takes the lead responsibility for early years and later years, which has been endorsed by the evaluations and public consultations that we have conducted.

1099. The Chairperson: There has always been a concern that there is a multiplicity of groups and agencies that reinvent each other’s wheels. However, that is certainly not happening in this case.

1100. Mr McElduff: Although that is a good question and a justifiable concern, there is no duplication in this case.

1101. Can we hear more on the witnesses’ assessment of debt and the health-related problems associated with families in debt?

1102. Can the witnesses comment on how families living in poverty are unable to embrace healthy lifestyles? I am particularly interested in statistics on smoking — are people who live in poverty more likely to smoke cigarettes than those in higher-income brackets? If so, what does that tell us?

1103. Ms Sweeney: First, I will address the issue of families in debt. A number of issues were highlighted in our research; we examined the causes of debt and how debt impacted on families. We consulted different agencies on how to address that. The causes of debt were not necessarily what one would assume; a common cause was everyday lifestyle debt spiralling out of control because families could not afford normal weekly outgoings and had to borrow on the strength of low benefits. There was some money lending, catalogue debt, and store card and credit card debt.

1104. People in the community told us about cycles of debt and times of the year that were particularly difficult for them. The point struck home when we talked about summer holidays. That is a time when children are home from school and are not having their free school meals. They are in and around the house all the time and are hungrier because they are out in the fresh air. They want to go on trips, and the summer holidays can be an absolute nightmare. Those times of the year can be particularly difficult for people.

1105. Our report recommended that interventions should take place at individual, community and societal levels. There was not much that we could do to increase the levels of benefit that people could get, but we could try to maximise those benefits and ensure that people were getting everything to which they were entitled. We worked closely with the Citizens Advice Bureau (CAB), which expanded its outreach programme from two days a week to five days a week, delivered in different community venues. They were able to reach more people that way.

1106. We also considered individual interventions that simply made life easier for people. During the summer, for example, we provided all the summer schemes with funding for healthy lunches. That took an onus off those families. It was all about working at different levels.

1107. Mr Bonner: Lifestyle choices are not a priority for people living in poverty. It is about survival. Research carried out in the Western Board area on long-term unemployment showed that 60% of long-term unemployed men smoked. Those men also tended to buy their cigarettes from illegal and cheaper sources, which are more dangerous to health than cigarettes bought over the counter. Alcohol misuse is another big problem, particularly for people in long-term unemployment and their families. Our evidence shows that they tend to buy cheap alcohol from any source. Diet and nutrition are an important consideration. We discovered that there was a lack of knowledge and skills, particularly among young mothers, about the simple issues. They did not know how to dry-fry; they always used lard or butter, adding loads of fat to their diet.

1108. The major issue that arises from employing a holistic approach is that in dealing with poverty, we must work on self-esteem and personal development. Most people in poverty have no self-worth. It was interesting to hear mothers telling us that they did not feel good about themselves and, therefore, did not know how to instil confidence in their children. Work needs to be done with those mothers to build their personal development and that of their children.

1109. Mr Shannon: Thank you for your presentation. Like Barry, I am keen to find out how debt is addressed. You mentioned the involvement of the Citizens Advice Bureau, but there must be other agencies involved. It must have been a mammoth task to reduce a debt of £3·2 million and the related financial stress in one housing estate. What other bodies were involved? Did the Churches play a role?

1110. Local councils could have had a role on the summer programmes to which you referred. Siobhan talked about keeping the children busy and active. Summer schemes are a great vehicle for healthy activities, and you also mentioned healthy lunches. I am keen to know how those programmes worked. Did they have an effect on child poverty? How will those programmes progress so that those people do not fall back into debt?

1111. Ms Sweeney: I should have said at the outset that there were several other partners on the project. The Housing Executive was very involved, and CAB gave advice. Schools and Churches were also involved. A partnership steering group, comprising representatives from those agencies, took the project forward. We worked together and had some financial support from the Housing Executive towards the running of the summer scheme.

1112. CAB had a two-pronged approach. It set up outreach centres in the community where individuals could go for support on finance issues, and that worked well. It also held information sessions with playgroup mothers and others in the school. APR on store cards was one of the subjects discussed. CAB asked whether people knew what that meant, how much it would cost to pay it back, what happens when they get into debt and who they could go to for support. It was an awareness-raising exercise about CAB services and other information that people needed, alongside holding one-to-one meetings.

1113. The Western Health Action Zone examined times when spending was difficult. We tried to crack the nut in different areas; for example, in Catholic schools, we talked about spending at the time of first communions and confirmations. We were able to set up a school savings scheme. There used to be savings schemes in schools years ago, but that has been discontinued. The two local schools created their own savings schemes, which will encourage the idea of saving for difficult periods. We are encouraging people to save for periods of high spending.

1114. We have not solved the poverty issue in the area, but we have alleviated many problems and taken away a lot of the stress and the mental-health issues associated with that. As a follow-on, we have created a training scheme for trainers, which will train people in the community sector to provide that type of work in different areas. We have now rolled that out in other areas, and it seems to work well wherever we take it. However, there must be a partnership approach that includes all agencies.

1115. Mr Spratt: You are both managers, which implies that you have other staff. How many staff do you have, where does your funding come from and how much does it cost?

1116. Mr Bonner: The core Western Investing for Health Partnership has four staff — myself, an assistant manager, a co-ordinator and a secretary. Our funding, which is £170,000 a year, comes directly from the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. The WHAZ team also has four staff — Siobhan, two co-ordinators and a secretary, and funding of £170,000 a year. The Investing for Health Partnership receives an additional £380,000 a year for project development, whereas WHAZ receives no money for project development. It must find its own resources.

1117. Mr Spratt: The figure is roughly £750,000.

1118. Mr Bonner: Yes, that is correct.

1119. Ms Sweeney: One of WHAZ’s roles is to seek funding and to work in partnership with other agencies under various strategies or do the lottery or whatever. We have been very successful in doing that. For every pound from the Department [Inaudible.]. We are doing a job with leverage as well.

1120. Mr Spratt: Therefore, you do not have any European funding.

1121. Mr Molloy: Thank you for your presentation. Do you see a benefit in mainstreaming, or is there benefit in retaining the Western Health Action Zone as a focus group? [Inaudible.] Is there benefit in encouraging self-help schemes on debt, such as training trainers to pass that message on? Could the credit union movement or other organisations help with that?

1122. My main interest is in poverty proofing: how does it differ from equality proofing, and are there examples of poverty proofing that can be delivered across the area?

1123. Ms Sweeney: It did not take much money to make that project work. It involved getting different partners around the table in order to resource it in some way, whether that was in kind — for example, by having a person there who would deliver programmes, or whether that would be to give us some seed funding to undertake pieces of work. Such a project needs co-ordination. I am interested in mainstreaming it and rolling it out; although it would not take much money, it takes commitment from partners to make it work. That is crucial to its success.

1124. Self-help is also crucial. Sure Start was a partner with us in this area. In Sure Start, there were several very young teenage mothers who were extremely isolated, a number of whom had experienced domestic violence and were having a hard time. We ran a focused programme to help to build their self-esteem and encourage them to come together as a group. At the end of that project, all those young mothers said that everyone in the group had supported them. [Inaudible.] In addition to that, some of those young girls went on to become leaders in the next group. They set themselves up as an example: each of them thought that they had stepped up to a mark and had the confidence to make a difference.

1125. Mr Molloy: My final question concerned poverty proofing.

1126. Mr Bonner: There is no actual talk about poverty proofing, but there is a health-impact assessment. This concerns a holisitic approach to dealing with poverty. The health-impact assessment is a tool whereby one can examine policies or projects and ascertain what impact they will have on a person’s health and well-being. There are two in the west at the moment: there is one in Dove Gardens, which is an urban housing estate. Some 80% of the residents [Inaudible.] 1% of young people go on to third-level education. We are examining how the Housing Executive redesigns houses for lifelong learning, including space for study. We are also working with the credit union to try to set up a white-goods scheme. When people move into a new home, the first thing that they want is new white goods. The area is a prime location for loan sharks. We train people who had previously lived in flats and maisonettes how to live in houses. We have given them gardens, and we encourage them to grow their own root vegetables to assist with nutrition. That is all done through the health-impact assessment.

1127. We are also working on the west Tyrone area plan in connection with the impact that planners will have on dislocation of housing, roads and other services, and the impact that that will have on poverty.

1128. Mr Molloy: There would certainly be an advantage in having gardens and allotments.

1129. Mrs D Kelly: Thank you both for your presentation. My question follows on from Francie’s. I have heard that, in some areas, food co-operatives functioned in action zones — perhaps not here, but in other places — and that that had been used as a successful model. Have you ever piloted that type of scheme?

1130. Ms Sweeney: We do not have a full co-operative scheme functioning, but, for the past three years, the Western Health Action Zone has run the FFFOAB programme. Members may have heard of that. It stands for “fun fast food on a budget”, and it trains people and gives them the skills to cook such food.

1131. That scheme worked well, but during the three years of its delivery, we realised that the community sector needed much more. Therefore, we redesigned the scheme, and now a community food and nutrition team provides great support to any community organisation that works on the ground delivering food-related projects in the Western Board area. The team includes a senior dietician to give dietetic support and a development officer.

1132. Mr Elliott: Thank you for your presentation. I notice that much of your written submission refers to investigations in Londonderry. As the Committee learned last week, rural parts of the west of the Province suffer equally, if not more, than urban areas. How much research have you carried out in Fermanagh? You referred to the regional plan in west Tyrone, but your submission does not mention County Fermanagh once, despite the fact that its Belleek and Boa ward has the least access to services. County Fermanagh seems to have been ignored to some degree.

1133. Mr Bonner: Our submission was done jointly with the Derry Children’s Commission, which carried out specific research on child poverty. We have been involved in several other initiatives on child poverty, particularly through Rural Support. For example, we worked with 30 farming families in the Omagh and Fermanagh areas that had a broad range of problems relating to poverty and disadvantage.

1134. However, theirs is hidden poverty. During the consultation processes for Lifetime Opportunities and neighbourhood renewal, we campaigned strongly for a rural poverty policy. In rural areas, it is sometimes more difficult to demonstrate where poverty exists, because people live in isolated areas. It is easier to demonstrate where there are huge numbers of people living in poverty. However, that does not mean that we are not doing something for those who are living in poverty, particularly in rural areas. Several other initiatives, such as Health Promoting Homes, are targeted at urban and rural areas.

1135. All the other projects, particularly those concerned with debt that Siobhan mentioned. [Inaudible.] In Fermanagh, [Inaudible.] number of their clients were from rural areas in Fermanagh. Therefore, the area is not being ignored. It is unfortunate, however, that we could stand over, and include in our report, only the statistics from the in-depth research carried out in the Derry City Council area.

1136. Ms Sweeney: One of the Western Health Action Zone’s projects is concerned specifically with rurality and access to services and isolation. Much of our work is in rural areas focuses on transport and access to services. In particular, a project that examines access to health concentrates on transport in rural areas around Omagh, Fermanagh and County Derry. We have a strong focus on rural areas.

1137. Mr Elliott: It is good to hear that. However, when I read your submission, I saw no mention of it. Neither your written submission nor your oral presentation include recognition of the problems in County Fermanagh.

1138. The Chairperson: The Committee is happy to receive any additional material that the witnesses may wish to provide.

1139. Mr Molloy: Mr Bonner, you said that obesity is more prevalent in children than poverty. Do you have an explanation for that? Is it related to food alone, or are attitudes a factor?

1140. Mr Bonner: The statistics show that 5·9% of children from deprived areas are obese, whereas the figure for children from non-deprived areas is 4·9%. A major factor is that children from disadvantaged areas are not eating proper diets. They tend to eat more fatty foods. When there are other social problems in the home, diet and nutrition is the lowest priority. It is as quick to buy fish and chips from a van round the corner as to stay in and cook a nutritional meal.

1141. Mrs Long: You mentioned rurality and the deprivation in proximity to services in Fermanagh. Does that have an impact on the cost of living for families in rural communities because of the travel required, the cost of transporting goods, and so forth?

1142. Will you give us some information about that?

1143. In addition, several presentations have focused on the differences between people who are categorised as working poor and those who are out of work and on benefits. In the course of your work intervening on behalf of people in areas such as health, have you noticed whether living in poverty or being in work makes any difference to how people engage in the process?

1144. Mr Bonner: No work is being done to investigate people’s proximity to markets. However, we have been working with several groups to identify opportunities, and we have been encouraging people to get involved with organisations such as healthy-living centres and privately-organised, food co-operatives. Many of the neighbourhood renewal projects that we have encountered are considering similar initiatives in an effort to ensure that people in their areas have access to markets, supermarkets and cheaper sources of food.

1145. That is fine if one lives in an urban area; however, in rural areas, the biggest problem, as Siobhan said, is transport. Those of us who have been involved in rural development have been attempting to alleviate that problem, and we have piloted several initiatives, such as social-car schemes.

1146. Concerning the differences between the working poor and those on benefits, we assess the people who attend our various training programmes, which we run through our health promotion department, and we find that those on benefits are less likely to attend unless they are given some support. For example, 360 families have completed our health promoting homes programme, which lasts for 26 weeks and is quite a big commitment. Therefore, we incentivise that process. On completion of the first eight weeks, which is about personal development, the participants receive vouchers for activities such as aromatherapy, alternative therapies or something that will help them to improve their life, well-being and outlook. At the end of the part on diet and nutrition, they get a George Foreman grill.

1147. Mr Shannon: Do they get a steak?

1148. Mr Bonner: We do not give them a steak, but we encourage them to use local produce. After the physical activity module, they get free access to council gyms.

1149. The Chairperson: Thank you both for your excellent presentations, and if there is any further information that you wish to provide we will be happy to receive it.

1150. Mr Bonner: Thank you.

27 February 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mrs Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Ms Martina Anderson
Mr Francie Molloy
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jimmy Spratt
Mr Jim Wells

Witnesses:

Mr Gilly Irwin
Mr Gordon Topping

North Eastern Education and Library Board

Mr Jim Clarke

Council for Catholic Maintained Schools.

1151. The Chairperson (Mr Kennedy): I welcome Mr Jim Clarke from the Council for Catholic Maintained Schools (CCMS), and Mr Gordon Topping and Mr Gilly Irwin from the North Eastern Education and Library Board.

1152. The Committee is looking forward to what you have to say. I invite each of you to make a short presentation to the Committee, which will be followed by questions. I envisage that the session will last for approximately 35 minutes.

1153. Mr Gordon Topping (North Eastern Education and Library Board): Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee on a topic that is vital to the future of our society; how child poverty can be eliminated. We understand that the Committee has made special arrangements to allow us to attend, so we are grateful for that.

1154. Our submission will emphasise the role of the education service in tackling child poverty. Over the past 150 years, education in Ireland, North and South, has been seen as a route out of poverty. Success in education resulted in success in obtaining a good job. Today, we not only face the poverty of deprivation but also in many places the poverty of aspiration.

1155. The context in which the education service is being delivered has changed dramatically. Globalisation has changed the nature of work in the western world. Our manufacturing industry has almost disappeared, so we must raise our game if we are to compete in that new world. In particular, education standards must be raised, and the gap between the lowest and highest performers must be narrowed.

1156. Society is also changing. The nature of the family unit has changed — there is a greater number of one-parent families. Society is becoming more diverse so that, along with the two communities, there are immigrant workers from all over the world, especially from eastern Europe.

1157. Despite those huge global shifts, education and the education service still have significant roles to play in helping people to rise out of poverty. The response of the education service to those huge societal changes has been to change the nature of what is taught, and how it is taught, through the implementation of the revised curriculum and the entitlement framework. In raising standards for all, we have targeted funding to address deprivation. Our education service has also maintained elements of social service by providing free meals and a uniform allowance. We address special educational needs by providing programmes through the youth service to develop social and life skills for young people.

1158. Children from disadvantaged backgrounds are less likely to succeed in education. Family disadvantage is passed on from one generation to the next in a cycle of underachievement. The issue is how that cycle can be broken.

1159. Our schools intervene with children and young people up to six hours a day, but numerous factors are at play during the other 18 hours that affect a child’s ability to achieve — family issues, peer group pressures, and so on. Our view is that there are issues with regard to structure, policy and practice, which must be dealt with if we are to tackle the cycle of deprivation that results in child poverty.

1160. Many services impact on the lives of our children, yet they are largely unco-ordinated. There needs to be a structured arrangement to deliver children’s services in a managed, consistent and coherent manner. In England, for example, the Government has created a Department for Children, Schools and Families to address that very issue. The reorganisation of education structures under RPA perhaps provides us with an opportunity to examine that issue.

1161. We need to develop and deliver a more joined-up approach to policy-making. If the key policy objective is to enhance the educational achievement of children and young people, then the question is how social services, health services, and social policy can contribute? There needs to be an interdepartmental group, which can examine and screen all policies and see how they can contribute to the educational achievement of children and young people in order to address child poverty.

1162. There are differences in the way the different professions are trained, and how they deliver services. Indeed, because of different policy objectives, there are often different agendas at play. That creates confusion for the public: it also undermines the value of public services, is inefficient and often ineffective. At a local level, we have attempted to minimise confusion by developing an effective partnership with the Northern Health and Social Services Board and, more recently, with the Northern Health and Social Care Trust, which involves ensuring that children’s services are co-ordinated through the Northern Area Children and Young People’s Committee. That partnership model is our attempt to overcome the policy and structural difficulties to which I have referred.

1163. In conclusion, eradicating child poverty must be a key objective for the Assembly if it wants society to be prosperous, peaceful and progressive. It is an aspiration that the education service will work hard to achieve. However, we must have the right policies, the necessary structural support, the appropriate resources, and effective delivery arrangements. Thank you.

1164. Mr Jim Clarke (Council for Catholic Maintained Schools): I associate myself with the comments made by Mr Topping. In responding to the Committee’s invitation, the CCMS decided to examine child poverty from the education perspective and in a fairly broad policy context. As the Committee’s invitation was received around the same time as the consultation on the draft Programme for Government was taking place, we looked very closely at the draft programme and the public service agreement (PSA) targets, and tried to ascertain the potential for those to join up and create a better environment in which issues such as child poverty could be tackled.

1165. We recognise that education cannot, by itself, address social deprivation and the most severe elements of poverty; it must work with the other public and voluntary services. There is also a cultural attitude to be tackled, as there are particular ways in which some people in Northern Ireland tend to look at things. Some communities living in poverty regard themselves as being trapped in that environment and have neither the means nor the strategies to get out of it. We think that this is where Government have an important role to play. Furthermore, many of those people have a negative attitude towards education, in so far as it has not delivered for them, or they see it as being delivered by people who do not really understand their needs or aspirations. As Mr Topping said, we need to achieve those aspirations.

1166. There are limitations on what a school can do by itself. Those limitations can, in our view, be ameliorated with much more connected service delivery from all of the statutory agencies and, in particular, through community support strategies. It is the community which has perhaps the best means of making contact with those who do not see themselves as being part of the mainstream. In the context of schooling, we think that many policies actually work against the needs of children living in poverty, in that the structures are about getting people over lines, regardless of whether or not they are prepared to get over those lines.

1167. Education strategies should prevent failure through the use of diagnostic assessment and the analysis of that information in classrooms to ensure that children pass key learning thresholds when they are ready to do so; not forcing them ahead of their time, and not trying to do it in post-primary schools, when it is too late. That sort of approach must be supported by the parents in parallel.

1168. The crucial period in education is the early years, as Mr Topping has said. Therefore, a co-ordinated effort, or partnership approach, with families and communities is critical. We accept that resources are limited, but pooling those resources that have common outcomes — rather than having narrow departmental targets — would give better value for money. We must advantage the disadvantaged in order to achieve equality.

1169. With regard to the broader policy contexts, the information that we have gathered locally and internationally shows that the gap between the highest and lowest achievers is widening. That is an indication of a poor education system. It does not mean that we have poor schools, but that the system is poor, and we must address that issue. The same point could be made in relation to many aspects of health and lifestyle as well as income.

1170. As Mr Topping said, there needs to be a convergent, joined-up strategy. That is one of the reasons why, in our response to the draft Programme for Government, we made several points regarding the disparate nature of the PSA targets. They were departmentally-focused, and did not encourage the development of the sort of joined-up policies that the overarching elements of the draft Programme for Government were striving for. The final version of the Programme for Government has not developed in that respect, and that has been a significant disappointment to us.

1171. The accountability approach works against co-operative working. Taking a risk-averse approach means that people will only do things that they feel are safe. Unless all the participants can achieve joined-up outcomes, rather than narrow sectoral targets, poverty will not be addressed. In that respect, severe poverty requires special attention.

1172. An agreed strategy is needed for improving education outcomes; supporting parents and families; addressing health issues and supporting play — which is an important aspect of developing the young person as a sociable being, not only in school, but in wider society. Given that about one third of our schools have been designated as extended schools, we need to spend more time training teachers and, in particular, leaders to work in those environments.

1173. School principals were never trained properly to communicate with the community or other bodies in a structured way. They certainly never anticipated that their jobs might mean having to stay in school until 6.00 pm or 7.00 pm to run extended school programmes. Therefore, we must look at how we train people, especially those in leadership positions.

1174. Much of the work on equality has focused on many groups, but not on the poor. One failing of section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998 is that it makes no reference to the poor or disadvantaged. That is a structural policy difficulty that must be addressed, together with several others, such as academic selection, that impact on certain parts of the community.

1175. Finally, the CCMS hopes that the Committee will strive to develop a clear strategy that identifies outcomes, resources and processes for action, rather than a statement of aspiration, which is how we regard the Programme for Government.

1176. The Chairperson: Thank you for the presentations. I now invite members to ask questions. The first question is, not surprisingly, from Mr Shannon.

1177. Mr Shannon: That is only because I move quicker than the rest of them.

1178. Thank you for your presentation. Several matters have come to my attention, and, I suspect, to everyone else’s, in relation to several categories of child poverty. One category involves 16- to 18-year-olds who are not in education and, perhaps, not in employment. Could policies or programmes be introduced to bring those people into the process? I find the situation frustrating, because we do try to get those young people to take a course or claim benefits, but it is a case of their falling between two stools. I have two questions, Chairman; that is the first one.

1179. Mr Gilly Irwin (North Eastern Education and Library Board): The answer to the question is yes. Every child in Northern Ireland, whether they are in Belleek or Ballymena, will have access to education in line with the entitlement framework. Schools in Northern Ireland are beginning to implement the framework, and all children aged 14 to 19 will have access to the curriculum. That should address some of the concerns.

1180. Investment in education must be rebalanced, with the major investment going into early-years provision, if the problems regarding pupils over 14 and over 16 are to be addressed. The clear message is that early investment and intervention will address the problems that occur at post-primary level. Hopefully, legislation will be introduced to address the member’s problems in the near future. However, in the longer term, I encourage the Committee to seriously examine the possibility of rebalancing investment in education.

1181. Mr Shannon: My second question relates to a problem that is brought to my office quite often. Do schools have early intervention schemes or policies to identify children, in mainstream education, who have adverse circumstances, and those with complex special educational needs? Have you done anything to help children in both education streams? Did you set targets? If so, were those targets achieved?

1182. Mr J Clarke: There have been local initiatives, largely based around community groups taking steps with local schools to address specific issues. There has been significant learning from those initiatives locally and at a national and international level. One of the difficulties is that there are negative attitudes towards certain things in society that we in the middle classes might regard as mainstream. The culture that some children grow up in is sometimes different to that which the school tries to develop.

1183. We must reach parents early, and that was part of the discussion about the entitlement framework. We need to address issues that parents have while their young people are at school, so that those parents understand the importance of parenting. Parenting is the key issue, as is ensuring that parents are connected to the supports that will positively help them to be good parents. For many people, education is not the main concern — it is home management and dealing with poverty. We must try to create an environment in which such people see education as being valuable.

1184. As I said earlier, there must be people in the community who can carry that message and who can be trusted by young people. Services must be connected; particularly welfare services and health and social services: and the people who visit homes could also carry the message.

1185. Mr Topping referred to the work that the NEELB is doing with the Northern Health and Social Services Trust. There have also been some useful developments since the creation of the Belfast Health and Social Care Trust and the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust, with regard to health, education and neighbourhood renewal. Some potential strategies have been discussed. However, this is a long, slow-burning process. Again, to pick up Mr Irwin’s point, resources must be invested as a block — call it a bridging loan — in early years provision, so that we do not have to deal with the issue that was raised about 16- to 18-year-olds.

1186. Mr Topping: Identifying need is crucial. Sometimes need is identified by schools, and sometimes it is identified by the Health Service, the medical service or social services. When a child who is in need is brought to the attention of the education service, we go through a process to try to meet that need. The difficulty with meeting the need — and this is where the practice at ground level must be improved — is that quite often the complexities we have to face are multidisciplinary and, therefore, require a variety of services to work together. I am not sure whether we have cracked that problem yet.

1187. However, the NEELB and the Northern Health and Social Care Trust have worked together, through the committee that I referred to in my presentation, and there have been some successes.

1188. For example, we can quickly identify children who are not attending school, and attempt to address the problem. In addition, the education service has attempted to complement the work of social services regarding children with social problems. Looked-after children have featured in the media recently, and we have a policy and practice for dealing with them and improving their lot. Having said that, despite some successes, we have not cracked the problem, and we could do more to try to improve services and improve how they are co-ordinated at ground level.

1189. We will leave the Committee a copy of the ‘Northern Area Children and Young People’s Committee: Children’s Services Plan 2005-08’, which may answer some of the members’ questions. The plan is still active, and it refers to some of the issues that I have mentioned.

1190. The Chairperson: Do any of you believe that there is a need for legislative change to enable the joined-up planning and delivery of services?

1191. Mr J Clarke: I stated in my written submission to the Committee on the draft Programme for Government that there were too many PSA targets. Several of them could have been combined to create what we could call “super targets” that specifically state desired outcomes and allow each Department to assess its contribution to achieving those outcomes.

1192. For instance, the main targets relating to poverty are contained in PSA 7, but education is not mentioned — PSA 7 merely refers to PSA 8 and PSA 10. We would have expected education to feature in many PSAs, but it does not. The targets for education in PSA 19 refer to education and nothing else. Therefore, the problem is that there is no joined-up Government. I have to say that we have greater success in dealing with agencies and community organisations than when we try to knock the heads of departmental officials together.

1193. Mr Topping: I believe there are three issues. First, there is a structural problem in that children need to be put at the centre. The NEELB deals with the Department of Education, which is at the centre. However, we should be dealing with a department for children or, as I suggested in my presentation, perhaps the English model of a Department for Children, Schools and Families. That would allow all children’s issues to be addressed in one place.

1194. It strikes me that if tackling child poverty is to be a priority for the Assembly, then it should be dealt with as such. Equality has long been a Government priority, and the result has been that every policy must be equality-proofed. If we want to tackle child poverty, we must take it seriously too. Therefore, policies should be child-proofed in order to ensure that they address child poverty?

1195. The review of public administration provides us with an opportunity as regards the number and role of councils, and the bodies being created, such as the education and skills authority. To change practice at ground level, we must ensure that local needs are identified and met. That can be achieved through adopting a community-planning-type approach, which would give councils a central role in ensuring that needs in their areas are being met.

1196. Ms Anderson: Thank you for your presentation. I agree with everything that you have said, particularly about section 75, which should contain an additional socio-economic category. However, we have what we have, and we must ensure that it works.

1197. You said that you made submissions to the consultation on the draft Programme for Government. I am sure that you are aware that a new period of consultation on the Programme for Government, the investment strategy and the Budget extends to 23 April 2008. I hope that the arguments contained in your evidence today will be made manifest at those consultation meetings across the North. I hope that you will also make submissions before the end of the consultation period, because for account to be taken of your arguments when the money is being allocated during the monitoring rounds, you must ensure that your voices are heard now.

1198. It is appalling that there are just six hours of engagement with children in schools. Children receive 12 years of compulsory education, yet thousands of them are leaving school each year unable to read and write.

1199. The Chairperson:

1200. Would the member focus on the question?

1201. Ms Anderson: I ask Mr Clarke whether abolishing the 11-plus would help children gain access to education and a better life, and I ask Mr Topping if the gap in educational achievement is widening between communities that do —

1202. The Chairperson: I remind members that our emphasis is on child poverty.

1203. Mr Shannon: Not on party-political policy.

1204. Ms Anderson: That is why I asked, through the Chair, whether children gaining access to education would lead to their having a better quality of life.

1205. Mr Shannon: There is a difference.

1206. Ms Anderson: Please allow me to finish the question?

1207. The Chairperson: Order please.

1208. Ms Anderson: The Noble indictors show that there are high levels of social deprivation between the communities with better educational achievement than those who do not. Is the gap widening and, if so, why is that happening?

1209. The Chairperson: Members, please bear in mind that this is not the Committee for Education.

1210. Mr J Clarke: Several policies reinforce the differentials in our society. If, through policy, we can create more opportunities for the equal benefit of the citizen, then we are going in the right direction. The Education Reform (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 created what might be called “sink schools”. The curriculum was centrally prescribed, narrow and quite academic. It did not promote the skills agenda that we are now trying to promote through the entitlement framework.

1211. The funding mechanism was based on the number of pupils in a school. Therefore, as demographics changed, the schools at the bottom — those that were less popular — felt the impact. They were doubly affected, because they then could not provide the whole range of curriculum activities. Ironically, most of the disadvantaged children, and those who were not economically focused, went to those schools. We lost a generation. Again, with open enrolment and selection sitting side by side, there was a filtering that affected schools of all types.

1212. Similar policies exist with respect to a range of services. When the principle of choice is introduced, some people are better positioned to benefit from it, and they know how to play the system. The same point could be made for health, social services and cultural activities — a whole range of areas — where access to services is not equal. The situation does not apply to education only. Cultural differentials must be addressed through a radical programme that takes the principles of the Programme for Government regarding economic development and social inclusion as its baseline. The focus must be on advantaging the disadvantaged.

1213. Mr Topping: In relation to what Mr Clarke has just said, we need to take competition out the education service and work on collaboration, and I have said that to the Minister of Education. Although this is not the Education Committee, that point is still important if we are to address underachievement, deprivation and child poverty.

1214. In my introduction, and in my presentation, I said that we needed to raise education standards and close the gap between the lowest and highest performers. We must raise the bar, and we must close the gap. We support the recently announced school-improvement policy, ‘Every School a Good School’, in tackling that objective.

1215. Mrs Long: Thank you for your presentation and your written submission. You referred to important issues: poverty of aspiration; negative experiences of school and education within certain communities; family and community support and skills. You have drawn attention to extended schools throughout your submissions and to your view that the facilities, buildings and training are not geared towards delivering extended schools in a structured, coherent way. That has also been my experience as a member of a board of governors.

1216. Schools often have enthusiastic staff who are using fairly meagre resources to deliver the extended schools programme. What could be done, on a structural basis, to get the extended schools programme better embedded into departmental thinking, so that it permeates such issues as how buildings are designed, how staff contracts are written, and associated issues such as staff training and development?

1217. You mentioned the different forms of support that are being provided — free school meals, uniform grants and family and parenting support — which, to some degree, the education service delivers. Is education the best place for that support to be located? During a recent evidence session, it was said that parents find it difficult to cope with things such as the extra cost of keeping children at home, the extra meal a day, and other things, outside term time. Are there other ways in which people might access services, in collaboration with education services, which might provide a year-round care and support facility?

1218. Mr Irwin: I will answer the first part of the question. In our submission, we highlighted concern over short-term funding. I want to draw that to the Committee’s attention. We welcome progress in the extended schools agenda; however, the funding needs to be sustained and built-in as a core budget for schools. Over the past 20 years, schools have suffered greatly from initiative overkill. If the extended school is a concept that we all believe in, core sustainable funding should be built into the schools’ budget to allow them to make appropriate plans.

1219. One of the encouraging aspects about extended schools is that they are working together to deliver the shared future agenda. Schools are forming clusters to try and meet the needs of the local community. That, too, is to be encouraged and advanced.

1220. There is also the recognition that we are not asking head teachers alone to deliver that agenda: rather, it is head teachers in partnership with the statutory, voluntary and community providers. That may mean developing a different model of school workforce. We cannot ask head teachers to work from 8.00 am to late at night if we are to use their talents at schools to the best effect. It might also mean that we need a change in workforce planning and the type of people we employ in schools. Detailed reports on extended schools are available through the Department of Education — each of the employing authorities has lodged those recently with the Department.

1221. There is a model that the Committee may want to consider in particular — and we have argued for it for a long time. Where there are high indices of social deprivation, it may be worth looking at the development of extended schools into full- or whole-service schools. In such communities, one might consider realigning the support services that serve that community. A range of models are relevant, depending on where you look — America, Denmark, etc — where a range of statutory and voluntary organisations are based in the school and respond to clients in that school: police, community services, youth and social services.

1222. If one goes for that type of model, and it is being developed already in one or two areas of Belfast, services need to be realigned to meet the needs of children in those schools.

1223. Mr J Clarke: It must be remembered that the extended schools policy is not just about schools. One of the difficulties of launching the policy is that direct-rule Ministers wanted to get money out to schools. I heard them say at a meeting: “this is your money, go and get it”. The truth is that some schools took that literally. Effective working in extended schools is recognising that the programme is a resource for the community.

1224. To take the long view, we need to move down the route of the full-service school. We must move towards a situation where schools are regarded as part of community facilities, not as something that is free-standing and is closed to the community at certain times of the day.

1225. We also need to recognise that the funding of extended schools came from the children and young people’s fund, which direct-rule Ministers controlled. That funding has not translated directly into the education budget. Therefore, there are question marks over the resources available to extended schools. We have not seen the budget yet, but that is an issue. One way of dealing with it would be to exploit one of the developments of extended schools, which is to see it as a clustering mechanism, whereby several schools work together rather than simply replicating the same thing on an individual basis. Indeed, diversity ought to reinforce the cluster. Many schools also took the view that extended schools involved dealing with parents and giving them the skills to support education by being better-learning parents.

1226. Mr Molloy: I am glad to hear the comment about community facilities, and that the implementation of the RPA provides an opportunity, which was previously missed, to advance such proposals. The biggest obstacles are not to be found in the communities but in the people who manage schools, and who often claim that schools are not available, not insured or cannot be opened. We must change the legislation in order to allow schools to become additional community facilities.

1227. Provision of resources to early-years education was mentioned. How could such resources be utilised to provide future benefits, and would early intervention tackle the disparity in educational attainment between poorer and more affluent areas?

1228. Mr Topping: For some time, we have been saying that we have an upside-down education service. Children entering Year 1 go into classes of approximately 20 pupils; however, in year 13 or 14, sixth form classes often contain only eight or 10 pupils. Children aged four, five or six cannot look after themselves as effectively as those aged 17, 18 or 19. If we accept that the education service aspires to develop independent learners, we must surely recognise that those at the upper end of the service can look after themselves much more meaningfully than those at the bottom end, which is why I described the service as upside down. We want to reverse the allocation of resources.

1229. Class sizes must be reduced, and the resulting improvements in the pupil/teacher ratio would allow much more attention to be given to each child, which, in turn, would enable teachers to better identify young people’s needs. Therefore, if certain young people were to be identified as requiring particular special or social needs earlier in the education process, those needs could be addressed, and firefighting measures to make up for development lost early in such children’s lives would not be required later. Those are the sort of measures that we would propose. Other witnesses may wish to elaborate.

1230. Mr J Clarke: CCMS presented evidence to politicians negotiating the so-called package — which never materialised. We made a strong case for a “bridging loan” to invest heavily in early-years provision — by which I mean investment in education and support services for preschool and primary school provision — in order to change the culture that Mr Topping described. Such changes will not come about by tinkering with the LMS formula; major investment is required. Such investment would be repaid quickly because we would not have to spend the same amount of money dealing with, as Mr Shannon said, 16- and 18-year-olds who lack basic literacy and numeracy skills.

1231. The problem must be tackled early and by recognising that schools are not the only places in which children learn. Children learn in the community, supported by schools, and in order to recognise that, a cultural change must occur in the minds of teachers and parents. Some parents have a mental block in relation to schools: they consider them to be symbols of authority and of an authoritarian state.

1232. We must pool our resources. Rather than continuing to do what we have always done — which has brought us to where we clearly do not wish to be — the CCMS believes that the Committee and OFMDFM are strongly positioned to insist on outcomes from all Departments’ resources. In order to do things differently, we must adopt a series of policies and structures incorporating strategic outcomes, and politicians must measure success not by the achievement of narrow targets but by measurable outcomes that improve communities throughout Northern Ireland.

1233. Bearing in mind the question about the different structures that work against society, we must stop taking capacity out of certain communities. As regards academic selection, in a sense, that is what has happened over the years. Some people have been advantaged, but others have been left behind. As a result, there is essentially a social underclass in many parts of Northern Ireland.

1234. The Chairperson: No other members have indicated that they wish to speak. I want to make a couple of brief points. Are you convinced that teachers are adequately trained to identify children who are caught up in poverty? Are there any indicators that teachers can use in the classroom to identify children or families in that situation and take appropriate action?

1235. Mr Topping: Teachers are very well trained and are very capable. The highest-qualified young people in these islands are going into teacher-training, and we should be very proud of that. Their training is very well done. All three of us, having been teachers, recognise that poverty is very easy to identify in the classroom, particularly when we have been dealing with young people who need to have their education expanded not just in the classroom but outside, through educational visits and so on. It is not difficult to identify poverty in the classroom.

1236. The Chairperson: Do the necessary structures exist in training and practice to address that?

1237. Mr Topping: As I said earlier, the problem is not the identification of the problem, but addressing the need once it is identified.

1238. Mr J Clarke: A great deal of data is available — and much of it is in your report — to teachers in order to help them identify children in various stages of poverty. Teachers are very good at identifying those who are in severe poverty, because in those cases there is almost no connection between the school and the child’s parent or guardian. The problem is that those people are the hardest to reach, and in many respects the teacher is not always the best-equipped person to reach them. That is why I make the point that this is not an endeavour that can be the responsibility of the education sector alone. By the time a child enters a nursery school — if systems are working effectively — information about that child’s life circumstances and the support available to him or her from a range of sources should be given to the school and should grow as the child moves through the education system.

1239. You asked about the strategies that are in place, Chairperson. There are a number of initiatives emerging around Belfast in particular in which community groups, health and social services and education services are working together. One of the targets being set, in many cases, is to monitor the appearance of parents at schools; to target parents who do not turn up at certain key events in the school; and to set in place various structures to try to reach those parents. That is an early and simple step, but it is a necessary one.

1240. The next step is to identify the nature of the poverty. Sometimes there is money in the home; from the benefits system or from other sources. Lack of money may not necessarily be the reason for poverty. There are lifestyle issues such as nutrition that teachers are very good at picking up on. That is where the follow-up action has to happen. Children can sometimes bring messages home from school about the right way to eat and the right way to behave but find that they are in a cultural trap because their parents do not support that view. We need someone to provide parallel support to parents.

1241. The Chairperson: Unfortunately, that completes what we are able to talk about today. Thank you for your attendance. If there is any additional information that you wish to provide to the Committee, we would be very happy to receive it.

12 March 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mrs Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Francie Molloy
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jimmy Spratt

Witnesses:

Mrs Patricia Lewsley
Ms Seana Hume

NI Commissioner for Children and Young People

Mr Bob Collins
Mrs Evelyn Collins

Equality Commission for Northern Ireland

1242. The Chairperson: Good afternoon, Commissioner; you are very welcome.

1243. Mrs Patricia Lewsley, NI Commissioner for Children and Young People: I welcome the opportunity to present our evidence on Child Poverty, and I wish to put on record my congratulations to the Committee for undertaking the inquiry. I know that the Committee has heard from many organisations about the statistics, figures and facts. It is unacceptable that 44,000 children — one in every ten under the age of 18 — live in severe poverty. In the few minutes that I have I will offer you a glimpse of the veil that poverty throws over children in Northern Ireland. I want to give all of those children and young people a voice.

1244. I will give some examples of the children and the young people that I have met, and the kind of poverty that they find themselves in. A few weeks ago I met a teenager who was exceptionally good at art. For her mother to afford the art materials, they could either go without food for two days, or do without electricity for a day and a half. That girl had to make the decision. She felt that she could not put her mother in that position; therefore she chose another subject. That young person is subject to a poverty of opportunity.

1245. I met a young disabled person who, at the age of twelve, was told by the school that he attended that it could no longer do anything for him, and he was sent home to his parents to be looked after. As a consequence, his father had to leave work because his mother could not look after him alone, and that drove the family into poverty. The fact that he was also denied an education subjected him to a poverty of education.

1246. I have met young people who live in high-rise flats in north Belfast, where raw sewage comes up through the bath and sink in the morning. That they then have to wash in those conditions — not to mention the pigeon droppings, dead mice and whatever else on their balconies — subjects them to a poverty of health.

1247. Those are only three of many examples of young people that I have met. Such examples put the human touch behind some of the statistics and facts that you have heard over the weeks.

1248. If I were to identify a couple of key recommendations, the biggest concerns the need for joined-up Government. The Departments in the Assembly must work together. We need targets, action plans, outcomes and time frames. I would like to see a champion of children and young people at a high level in each of the Departments, to address poverty and the children and young people’s strategy. The RPA has provided an example of that, and each trust now has in place a director of children’s services — one key person to deal with issues concerning children and young people. I hope that, in the further Review of Public Administration, a director of children’s services will also be established in the education sector. Furthermore, the opportunity exists for the members of this Committee to influence the two junior Ministers when the ministerial subgroup is brought together.

1249. It is important that this report does not go into the ether or gather dust, and that any recommendations in response to it are implemented. There may be talk about resources, and Ministers will ask where they are to find the money to implement these recommendations. In reply to that I ask them where they will get the money not to implement them, because that will cost far more.

1250. Alistair Darling, in his Budget announcement today in Westminster, has specifically targeted child poverty, and the target is to halve the level of child poverty by 2010. The problem is that we in Northern Ireland become statistically insignificant when it comes to Gordon Brown’s overall target for child poverty. I therefore urge this Committee to influence the Executive to ensure that we meet our own targets that have been set out in the 10-year children’s strategy for 2010; and that any of the moneys that Alistair Darling puts in place to eradicate child poverty are specifically ring-fenced to tackle child poverty in Northern Ireland, and not consumed into the overall block grant.

1251. The Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation.

1252. Mr Shannon: Thank you very much for your contribution Patricia; it is nice to see you again. My first question concerns the Programme for Government. Have you identified any policy gaps that have a negative impact on child poverty? If you have — and the answer to that is probably yes— what actions do you consider are required to tackle that poverty?

1253. The second question relates to expenditure. You made the valid point that Northern Ireland may be lost among all the United Kingdom statistics. How does Northern Ireland’s expenditure on services for children and young people compare with that of other regions of the United Kingdom?

1254. Mrs Lewsley: In the Programme for Government, there are policy gaps concerning the length of time it takes to access childcare here, and the registration of carers. Childcare is a big issue, particularly for people who are trying to get out of poverty by entering the workplace or even by accessing training.

1255. Another big issue is the 10-year children’s strategy. We really need to see that implemented in full, and there must be ownership and commitment from each of the Departments to deliver that. A far more robust action plan is necessary.

1256. Benefit uptake is another big issue for us. Tax credits are a serious problem, particularly for people in the border area. It is difficult to explain the difference between the euro and the pound to someone in England, and it takes a long time to sort out. It means that the system puts people into poverty because they have to take out social fund crisis loans and so on. We make things worse for people. A locally accessible tax-credit system in Northern Ireland would help.

1257. Poverty-proofing is yet another major issue. I want to have poverty mentioned in section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

1258. My counterpart in England, Professor Sir Albert Aynsley-Green, is responsible for 11 million children; I am responsible for just over 500,000. The Office of the Children’s Commissioner in England could meet its poverty target without taking a single child out of poverty in Northern Ireland. I have called for the Northern Ireland Executive’s commitment to ensuring that, in our 10-year children’s strategy, we set our own poverty targets to be met in 2010 and 2020. Unfortunately, I do not see much progress towards the 2010 target. I hope we will see some as a result of this inquiry.

1259. Mr Shannon: How do we compare with the rest of the United Kingdom?

1260. Ms Lewsley: My office produced an expenditure report a few months ago, which focused on four different areas, one of which was personal social services. In Northern Ireland, we spend £287 per child, in comparison to £502 in Scotland, approximately £435 in Wales and £428 in England. Therefore, we spend much less on our children and young people than do other parts of the UK.

1261. My office considered the question of whether it is more accurate to take into account benefits before deduction of housing costs or after that deduction; and it decided that using benefits after deduction of housing costs produced a truer picture.

1262. Mr Molloy: Housing costs are a big issue. The new housing programme, contained in the Programme for Government and the Minister for Social Development’s announcement, will create a larger number of new houses and therefore a larger number of households. What effect, if any, do you think that will have on child poverty? The question of whether to calculate benefits before or after housing costs is likely to affect that.

1263. Ms Lewsley: The important point is that we lack social housing. That drives people, who should be in social housing, into the private rented sector and into poverty. The housing benefit that goes with private-sector housing is inadequate, because the tenant or the family has to pay the top-up from their benefit. That has a knock-on effect on children and young people.

1264. Mr Molloy: We have discussed at different times the various interpretations of child poverty. What changes do you propose to the current system of measuring and monitoring child poverty to achieve a better understanding of it and how it may be eradicated?

1265. Ms Lewsley: Child poverty must be understood in its widest sense. I gave examples of that. Some people do not consider poverty of opportunity as poverty; but the poverty a child is born into makes a difference to that child’s life. Therefore, poverty of opportunity must be added to poverty of health and other aspects of poverty.

1266. The absolute poverty in which young people and families find themselves must be monitored through action plans, timescales and outcomes, and through commitment and co-operation among Departments.

1267. Mr Spratt: I am intrigued to hear Patricia talk of joined-up Government. As someone who has had considerable experience of working closely with Government, you are obviously as frustrated as the rest of us.

1268. Ms Lewsley: Just a bit.

1269. Mr Spratt: You mentioned a director of children’s services. That is a cross-cutting issue, which will involve a number of Departments. There is always the danger that adding another director will create another layer of bureaucracy. Have you thought about how best to set up a sufficiently powerful champion for children in Government?

1270. I do not think that it is a good approach to have different people in various Departments dealing with that matter. You have obviously given the matter some thought, so could you elaborate a bit on the proposals?

1271. Mrs Lewsley: We are considering whether a senior member of staff in each Department could take the lead on issues affecting children and young people. It is not a case of setting up a new tier of bureaucracy. That person would report to his or her respective Minister, who can then report to the ministerial subgroup on his or her Department’s work to address children and young people’s issues, target child poverty and implement the 10-year children’s strategy. The problem is that everyone thinks that children are the responsibility of the Department of Education and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety. They are not; they are the responsibility of every Department, including the Minister of Finance and Personnel’s Department — and I have had this debate with him, too.

1272. I want a champion in each Department who will poverty-proof, or child-proof, policies and decisions to ensure that children and young people’s issues are being addressed — in this case, poverty. That work will then feed into the Executive’s work, so that the Executive can take those issues into account when preparing future Programmes for Government and Budgets. The key factor is that Departments work together to address those issues, and they are not the sole responsibility of one Department.

1273. Mrs Long: I welcome you to the Committee, and I thank you for your presentation. Concerning the proposal for children’s champions, I very much agree with your remarks, and I have previously pointed out the expectation that the Department of Education and the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety will actively address poverty and children’s issues. The difficulty arises in some of the more obscure Departments, such as the Department for Regional Development, which has responsibility for public transport, an issue that has a direct impact on poverty. Will you give specific examples to reinforce the principle of other Departments having a role in addressing those issues? The point must be made, because, increasingly, we realise that this matter is truly cross-departmental, rather than affecting only a few Departments, which is the traditional expectation.

1274. All of us recently received correspondence from Northern Ireland Council for Voluntary Action (NICVA), highlighting its concerns about the absence of an anti-poverty strategy and the void that has been created by not adopting the Lifetime Opportunities strategy. NICVA is concerned that there is nothing to replace it. The Lifetime Opportunities strategy was not perfect. However, which parts of it were most valuable and should be retained? What specific changes are necessary to improve its ability to address poverty issues, especially child poverty?

1275. Mrs Lewsley: As an example in answer to your first question, last week I visited a school that is badly run down. Although that school delivers education, the children are, in some ways, denied opportunities. They experience poverty of opportunity because of the environment in which they are educated. They were promised a new school ten years ago. Their school is situated in a rural part of Ballymoney, close to a main road, and there is nowhere for them to be safely picked up and dropped off by car.

1276. Our first action was to write to the Minister of Education to find out how the newbuild is progressing. We then wrote to the Minister for Regional Development, because his Department is working on a strategy to provide safer routes to school, and we wrote to the Minister of the Environment because she has responsibility for road safety. We also wrote to the Minister of Health, Social Services and Public Safety because children aged four and five are being educated in Portakabins and have to go out in the driving rain to access toilets across the schoolyard. That clearly raises health and safety concerns.

1277. Therefore four Ministers have responsibility for supporting that school in achieving a better environment from a health and safety perspective. Not all those Ministers will have to make a decision, but perhaps three of them could influence the other one to address the issue more quickly on behalf of those children and young people.

1278. My biggest problem with the Lifetime Opportunities strategy is that its targets were very vague. There was nothing tangible that would have led to better outcomes; therefore those were very difficult to assess. Again, there was no action plan. We were part of a collective body of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that met one of the junior Ministers last week, and we put some suggestions to him. However, a robust action plan is needed.

1279. My worry is that we must find out how the strategies interlink. There should be an overarching anti-poverty strategy, and all the other strategies, whether for children, young people or older people, should dovetail. We need strong targets, strong monitoring, strong outcomes and — most importantly — accountability.

1280. Mrs Long: The feedback that I increasingly receive about anti-poverty strategies and suchlike is that the strategy is fine but all the work has been done. People know what general areas need to be addressed and what needs to be done. They want to see action plans with dates, times and measures. You would say that it is not simply about looking for new strategies but about providing delivery mechanisms.

1281. Mrs Lewsley: However, neither is it about reinventing the wheel; rather, it concerns assessing what communities already have and adding value to that, instead of saying, “Here is a new project. This is great — let us roll it out across the board.” In that case, a project that does far more for a community is, perhaps, displaced in the competition for funding. The question, therefore, is how to add value to a project that is already in place. The most important issue is investing in intervention and prevention in the early years — investing in a new generation for the future. However, that is a parallel track, where available funds need to be invested.

1282. The Chairperson: I have two questions. Would you advocate any legislative changes to make things easier and provide better co-ordination? Are you optimistic that child poverty will be eradicated or simply alleviated?

1283. Mrs Lewsley: If I were the optimist and believed in Utopia then child poverty would be eradicated. The timescale of 2020 might not be sufficiently realistic for that to happen. Nevertheless, that should not prevent us from trying to achieve that goal. Child poverty could, in its widest sense, be eradicated if some of the issues discussed today were implemented. It is not about reinventing the wheel, nor is it always about resources: it is about policy and a change in culture and mindset. A change in legislation might also be considered, incorporating poverty and other childcare issues into section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

1284. Many women who want to enter training or employment find childcare a huge barrier. Childcare should also be flexible and not merely nine-to-five because some people want to work part-time or nights. It is important that such people are allowed flexibility.

1285. One other matter is the minimum wage for 16- and 17-year-olds where a change in the legislation is needed.

1286. The Chairperson: Thank you, that was very helpful. Have you any final comments?

1287. Mrs Lewsley: I hope that this report gathers momentum, that the recommendations that emerge from it are strong and robust, and that they will be implemented.

1288. The Chairperson: I congratulate you on producing the child poverty policy paper. Thank you for your attendance today, and the Committee looks forward to continuing its dialogue with you. If there are any additional points that you might like to make about the inquiry, the Committee will be happy to receive them.

1289. We are now pleased to welcome Mr Bob Collins, the Chief Commissioner, and Mrs Evelyn Collins, the chief executive of the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland. They are not related to each other. A copy of their written submission has been included in the members’ packs. We look forward to your making a brief opening statement, which will be followed by a question-and-answer session.

1290. Mr Bob Collins (Equality Commission for Northern Ireland): Thank you. We welcome the opportunity to give evidence and to engage with Committee members on an important topic. The Committee will have received a range of detailed submissions, addressing the extent, nature and distribution of child poverty. We will not retrace that journey; instead we will focus on the areas of intersection between child poverty and the areas for which the commission has statutory responsibility: equality of opportunity and discrimination.

1291. Currently, many aspects of Northern Ireland are good, positive and encouraging, and it is right that we note and celebrate that. However, that is only part of the picture. We live in a society in which significant inequality still exists. It is important for us to look for the real meaning of equality of opportunity in the impact of its absence. That prompted the commission last autumn to publish a statement on key inequalities in Northern Ireland, which served as a reminder to us and to everyone else of the work that needs to be done. The welcome deliberations of the Committee on the issue of child poverty reflect the same approach.

1292. Poverty is not a stand-alone issue; it influences a range of other aspects of life and its effects are not confined to childhood. The life prospects of a child who is born into, or grows up in, a situation of poverty are diminished. Childhood is a crucial time of life, and such children will be less likely to realise their potential than those who do not grow up in poverty.

1293. Children growing up in poverty will have a lower educational attainment than would have been the case had they not grown up in poverty. Furthermore, the educational attainment of a child with a disability who lives in poverty will be dramatically less than would otherwise have been the case. The issue of educational attainment has clear implications for the issue of access to, and advancement in, employment. Moreover, it has implications for the question of fairness in employment, and such topics have been frequently touched upon in the past.

1294. There are particular circumstances for Traveller children whose educational participation and attainment is dramatically less than is the norm. I do not want to appear to praise ourselves, but we have had a positive engagement with the statutory agencies and have carried out effective work.

1295. The health of a child in poverty will be dramatically worse. A two-way relationship is at work: it is not simply that children in poverty encounter ill-health or educational underattainment; rather, poverty is the cause of those.

1296. Section 75 imposes a statutory obligation on public authorities to promote equality of opportunity and good relations. Furthermore, the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 imposes duties on public authorities to respect people with disabilities and to promote their involvement in society. Neither of the duties involved in those pieces of legislation identifies poverty as an issue. However, it is an inescapable consideration in the discharge of those duties.

1297. Poverty and socio-economic disadvantage are antecedent barriers to equality of opportunity and they exacerbate inequality wherever it exists. Any approach by a public authority that does not recognise the implications of poverty in the discharge of section 75 duties will miss a key element in the process.

1298. For example, if a public authority considers the impact of a policy or practice on the grounds of age, it will look at the impact on children. However, that examination would be incomplete if the effects of a policy on children who live in poverty were not considered. Similarly, the consideration of the impact on people with disabilities would be incomplete if it were not recognised that the reality that households with a disabled parent — especially a lone parent — will be at greater risk of poverty than others. If a public authority considers a policy in respect of people with dependents, it stands to reason that it will look at its impact on those dependents who are in poverty, or who are the parents of children who encounter the effects of poverty. In other words, where the law requires the consideration of specific grounds, it is less than adequate not to consider the issue of poverty. Even if the law does not require the consideration of poverty as a specific category, nothing prevents a public authority from taking it into account.

1299. Geography can also be a barrier to equality of opportunity, and the concerns of those who live in rural areas merit attention. An underlying principle is that equality of treatment — treating everyone the same — is neither the meaning nor the measure of equality of opportunity.

1300. There is an increasing number of immigrants and migrants in Northern Ireland living side by side with longer-established minority communities. There is a real risk that the potential to encounter poverty of a community of children, and their needs, will be incompletely recognised. The participation of those children in the life of the community should be as complete and as comprehensive as anyone else’s. They are more than economic units. There is a fundamental issue in respect of the Race Relations (Northern Ireland) Order 1997, and of equality law in general, that must be taken into account.

1301. The Programme for Government makes significant and welcome commitments to reduce or eliminate poverty — very ambitious targets — and represents a real commitment on the part of the Executive and the Assembly that approved the Programme for Government. The investment strategy is an opportunity to ensure that both of those policy objectives are dovetailed. Every investment has social consequences, and there is a real opportunity for the investment strategy, while recognising the particular circumstances in which it will be articulated and delivered, to realise its potential for being part of achieving Government’s overall goals: in this case, specifically that of eliminating child poverty.

1302. The Commission and the Central Procurement Directorate recently produced guidance for public authorities on procurement. That important initiative offers opportunities for public authorities to realise the potential of their decisions in aligning with the needs of child poverty

1303. There is a range of issues that the Equality Commission believes would be important for the Committee to express in its final report, and some of those have been touched on in the interim report. First, poverty is not a stand-alone issue; it expresses itself in, and impacts on, a range of other areas. Secondly, the targets set by the Executive must have clearly articulated pathways to their achievement, and a co-ordinating role to lead the process.

1304. Policies that promote employment will obviously help to reduce the number of children living in poverty. In particular, encouraging measures that attract and facilitate disabled parents to enter employment would make a contribution with multiple benefits. Putting into effect the positive economic programme of the Executive offers an opportunity to realise the social consequences of the policies involved. Provision of comprehensive, professional and affordable childcare will yield significant benefits.

1305. For its part, the Equality Commission will work with public authorities to encourage a greater sensitivity to the issue of child poverty in the response to their statutory duties. Furthermore, it will work to ensure that public authority consultation processes take account of the voices of children and young people and that those views are integrated into the authorities’ work.

1306. Mr Spratt: Mr Collins, you mentioned the buzz topic of Travellers and migrants. How many children from those communities fall into the poverty bracket? In addition, given that the Province has recently emerged from a period of conflict, how have the Troubles impacted on child poverty?

1307. Mr B Collins: I specifically mentioned Travelling community and migrant issues, and those communities form two distinct categories.

1308. The Travelling community is small, representing about 800 children of school age, all of whom fall into the category of children living in, or experiencing, poverty. That figure suggests that the problem should be amenable to a reasonably easy solution. However, that is not the case, and a range of issues must be addressed. Furthermore, those children’s capacity to engage in employment is affected by the extent to which they participate, and attain, in education. Education-related work by the statutory agencies offers a real prospect of progress.

1309. A problem concerning new residents in Northern Ireland is that available data is scarce and not particularly robust. The most recent census was conducted in 2001 and, although labour-force surveys have been carried out in the intervening period, they do not adequately capture population movements. Therefore, we must have more robust data to extend our knowledge of children’s needs in such circumstances. That would, at least, be an important step towards recognising who is at risk so that we can take measures to alleviate their poverty.

1310. The period of intense conflict from which Northern Ireland has recently emerged has undoubtedly affected the environment in which children grow up. Those children’s parents were children during the conflict and will not have escaped its consequences. Furthermore, people who live in poverty are more likely than others to live in segregated housing, with apprehension about their own safety, and barriers to their engagement with other children and other areas. Undoubtedly, that dimension to people’s lives must be taken into account and, to some extent, it probably affects all children in Northern Ireland. However, the legacy of the Troubles especially affects children from deprived areas and those who live in poverty. Poverty expresses itself in many ways, and financial poverty is not the only dimension.

1311. Mr Spratt: Your submission focuses heavily on Travellers and migrants. Given that Travellers move about, their problems are not easily dealt with.

1312. The subject of migrants was discussed in a Committee that I attended this morning, and, in my constituency office, I encounter more and more people who have come here illegally — some of whom have been here for several years — and who suddenly require services such as healthcare. You emphasised the need to gather data about the migrant community.

1313. Those are only two elements, and I do not single them out; however, is there not a danger of overdoing those elements and forgetting about the real needs of local children who live in serious poverty? We do not have terribly good data on those numbers.

1314. Mr B Collins: The starting point must be that every child in Northern Ireland is entitled to the care and concern of the community in which they live. In Northern Ireland, 108,000 children live in poverty. The policy issues are concerned with that population. We identified subsets, and not only Travellers — who number around 800 — or migrants and immigrants, the vast majority of whom are citizens of the European Union and have the same legal entitlement as any of us to be in Northern Ireland. There is no hierarchy of entitlement or need among the categories that we identified. We do not mention specific examples of children with a disability or children in any other context; we simply see a population of children who encounter poverty. The key point is that no single policy set will resolve all of the issues, and particular policy responses will be required in different circumstances. That is why we give examples of the character of various groups; however, the target must be to address the more than 100,000 children who live in poverty.

1315. Mr Shannon: Thank you for your presentation, Collins and Collins. I think that there was a film with a similar name, although the name was not Collins.

1316. Your submission mentions suicide rates among young people. Do you feel that suicide rates are related to child poverty? Other members can speak for their own areas; however, there has been a problem of suicide in my constituency, without any previous indication that anything was wrong.

1317. Mrs Evelyn Collins (Equality Commission for Northern Ireland): You are right to point out that our submission summarises some of the available evidence about the impact of the conflict. It tries to draw that to your attention in much the same way as the anti-poverty strategy of OFMDFM tracked some of the evidence on that. We did not seek to say that child poverty was a direct causal result of suicide; there are clearly many causes of child poverty and many underlying factors when considering suicide. We sought to put forward facts for your consideration.

1318. Mr Shannon: That is one of the factors to be considered, rather than being a specific link.

1319. Mrs E Collins: Absolutely.

1320. Mr Shannon: Your submission also refers to the fact that food, clothing and footwear are significantly more expensive in Northern Ireland than in Britain. As a businessman, I am in direct contact with businesses across my constituency and I find that prices are rising astronomically quickly. I wonder whether there will be further child poverty, or poverty in general.

1321. The Chairperson: You are referring to child poverty, not MLA poverty, which most people think does not exist.

1322. Mr Shannon: My point is whether we will have to play catch-up in trying to meet the figures for the eradication of child poverty. Earlier, Patricia Lewsley was asked whether child poverty could be eradicated. I wonder whether we might find ourselves behind the eight ball and always trying to reduce the levels of child poverty because of outside factors beyond our control. In the Budget, Alistair Darling decided to postpone for only six months an increase in duty on diesel and petrol. Fuel prices are a critical factor in the rising of prices.

1323. I am curious to hear your point of view — not about Alistair Darling, but on how that will affect poverty.

1324. Mr B Collins: The objective to eliminate poverty is a remarkably ambitious one and, undoubtedly, is the correct one. If successful, it will be a remarkable achievement, as lifting every child out of poverty will have a transforming impact on the life of this society and its future. The evidence suggests that families in Northern Ireland, in a lower-wage economy, encounter greater costs in rearing children and running a household than those in the rest of the UK.

1325. Recent developments that show endlessly increasing oil prices — now at over $100 a barrel, compared to $20 several years ago —

1326. Mr Shannon: $106 at the moment.

1327. Mr B Collins: That is inconceivable in some respects. It has consequences for people who are already on the margins of their capacity to provide the basic necessities, and where their available funds determine their families’ food choices, rather than the nutritional needs of their children. International forces that push up the price of fuel and exacerbate the issue of child poverty for children in Northern Ireland are entirely outside the control of the Executive, or any Government, and will be a real headwind against any policy that attempts to eliminate child poverty. It is a very real issue and will act against the chances of equality of opportunity for children in Northern Ireland as long as fuel prices influence the economy.

1328. Mr Shannon: Your presentation refers to the poor levels of literacy and numeracy. How can we improve literacy and numeracy, so that people can achieve better jobs than low-paid, low-skilled and low-ability jobs?

1329. Mr B Collins: Educational underattainment is one of the most significant issues that confronts Northern Ireland as a society. In the main, it has a long-lasting impact on the capacity of the children who leave school without appropriate educational qualifications or achievements to get a successful place in life. It limits the kind of jobs that they can get, and it limits their capacity to advance in employment. Boys fare less well than girls, and that is a very serious issue that must be examined. It is counter-intuitive, in the first decade of the twenty-first century, that, in highly developed societies such as the UK, there are such levels of underachievement in basic literacy and numeracy. One wonders what precisely is operating for that to happen. It does not seem right, given the state’s investment in educational provision generally.

1330. Particular attention must be given to children with special needs. It must be recognised that everything operates within limited resources. There is no point in the Equality Commission coming before the Committee, and the Committee then going to the Executive and saying that it needs an unquantifiable amount of additional resources. Frankly, it will not be available. However, within the available resources, key attention must be focused on basic educational attainment, and the recognition that it is not simply the one-off issue of underattainment that affects that individual now. It affects that individual throughout his or her entire life; it affects his or her family and, subsequently, when it comes to his or her own children’s turn to achieve in school, it affects that individual’s capacity to help them. Therefore, undoubtedly, it has a long-term impact on the individual, the family, the community and the entire society.

1331. We do not have a simple answer. There is no simple answer, but it is an issue that deserves deep-rooted and fundamental attention.

1332. Mr Molloy: Your submission states that the conflict had a greater impact than people first thought. Is there any measurement of that impact?

1333. The areas that suffered in housing as a result of discrimination and inequality during the conflict are those that now have the highest levels of child poverty. Moreover, the issue of housing costs has an impact on poverty. What role can the Equality Commission play in the eradication of child poverty?

1334. Mr B Collins: The conflict, and even the present post-conflict environment, involves the diversion of investment that might have been allocated to other areas. That, undoubtedly, has an impact on Northern Ireland’s capacity, as a community, to use its resources in the areas of greatest social need. That is an enduring reality, and it is a basic fact that must be recognised.

1335. There is evidence, some of which has already been presented in submissions to the Committee, of an inescapable impact of the conflict on the psychological well-being, if nothing else, of the community. Furthermore, living in a divided community represents for children a poverty of life experience, as well as financial poverty.

1336. The area in which the Equality Commission has the capacity to intervene in those issues is in the work that it does with public authorities, which have a clear statutory obligation to promote equality of opportunity. As I said earlier, public authorities take an incomplete approach to that task if they do not consider the impact of poverty on children, children with disabilities and people with dependents. Furthermore, the issue of parents who themselves may be in poverty, and particularly the circumstances of lone parents, must be considered.

1337. Our role is to encourage public authorities to be sensitive to those concerns and to take real account of them in the development of policies and their implementation. We also encourage the creative and innovative use of the statutory mechanisms of section 75 as a way to develop effective policies that may address the question of education that Mr Shannon referred to earlier. That is preferable to section 75 being viewed as either a burden or a weapon, as is sometimes the case in public discussions. It is neither; the real benefit of section 75 is in the imaginative potential that it represents to be creatively used in ensuring that policies are aligned with the needs of the people whom they are intended to address.

1338. We recently concluded a review of the effectiveness of section 75, and one of the issues that clearly emerged from that was the need to focus on outcomes. The process is important, but the outcome is the crucial issue. Our work is to ensure that public authorities can link their policies to measurable outcomes.

1339. Mrs E Collins: As Bob mentioned, there is an opportunity, through the expressed commitment of the Programme for Government to grow the economy and its recognition that there is an overarching responsibility on the Executive to change the current patterns of social disadvantage, by using increased prosperity and economic growth to tackle ongoing poverty and general social disadvantage.

1340. Our guide, which will be published soon, will help public authorities to examine their procurement decisions, because it is lawful — and required by section 75 — that those decisions are taken with the promotion of equal opportunities in mind.

1341. The Equality Commission will encourage public authorities to make equality considerations in their procurement decisions and to engage meaningfully with local communities on how best to achieve that. That is an important piece of work, which we will carry out with the Central Procurement Directorate.

1342. Mr Molloy: Instead of alleviating poverty, tax credits put many families into poverty because of the system that is used. Do you have anything to say to the Departments about that because, although it is not under the Assembly’s control, it is under Westminster’s control?

1343. You mentioned the lack of investment here over the years, and there is an acceptance that there are no resources available. However, if the Government wanted to eradicate poverty, they could do it tomorrow; the amount of money that they have spent on wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere in the world is double the amount required to eradicate child poverty.

1344. Mr Shannon: They are fighting for democracy and freedom.

1345. Mr Spratt: About 30 years.

1346. The Chairperson: Order.

1347. Mr Molloy: If the Government wanted to eradicate child poverty, there would be sufficient resources to do so. However, the fact that they have not eradicated child poverty indicates that the Government are not focused on that goal. That is similar to Thatcher’s line that there were enough resources, but people did not claim them. However, once people started to claim the resources, she wiped out them out. I do not want to get political about the issue. [Laughter.]

1348. Mr Shannon: Do you not?

1349. The Chairperson: I would not accuse him of that.

1350. Mr Molloy: What recommendation would you make about the use of resources so that the Government could deal with child poverty?

1351. Mr B Collins: I echo your sentiment about being political; we will not get political.

1352. I reiterate my point about resources: the expenditure in the Programme for Government over the next few years, and the investment made as part of the investment strategy, is a significant commitment of resources in Northern Ireland. Some of that investment is from the Government and some from the private sector. All of that investment will have social and economic consequences. It represents an opportunity, and, creatively used with sensitivity to its potential to make social change, it will tackle child poverty and create employment. All of the submissions to the Committee echo the point that the most effective way to decrease child poverty is the creation of work and the conversion of workless households into households where one or both parents work. The potential for significant investment is a key consideration that touches upon the statutory obligations of public authorities, because they will, in the main, be engaged in the management or expenditure of that money.

1353. The Chairperson: Thank you for that answer. We will stay out of Iraq in our discussion.

1354. Mrs Long: I thank you both for the presentation and for your paper, because that reflects the complexity of addressing child poverty. When talking about child poverty, one thinks of a homogenous group of children. However, that is not the case, and the circumstances that lead families to be in poverty — such as disability, being migrant workers, being immigrants or Travellers — are complex.

1355. What must be put in place to address those circumstances will be different in each case. It is important that that is highlighted.

1356. In your presentation and in your paper you touched on the fact that levels of poverty and income inequality are greater in Northern Ireland than in other parts of the UK. Is that true of other inequalities? It is not just that there is experience of poverty; there is a widening gap between the haves and the have-nots. The Committee has heard that from several groups.

1357. You mentioned different aspects of the Programme for Government where your concerns are supported. Are there any aspects of the Programme for Government that, in your opinion, address that widening gap, or on which specific action would be required to stop that gap from continuing to widen? I sense that there tends to be more of a focus, not just in Northern Ireland, but generally, on social mobility rather than social equality. I am concerned that that leads to a widening gap between rich and poor. That is the first part of my question.

1358. Mrs E Collins: I am not sure that I entirely follow the first part of your question, for which I apologise. As I understand it, and you may correct me, you want to know whether we are concerned that not only is there a gap between here and GB in relation to income, but also other forms of inequality.

1359. Mrs Long: The issue is that the difference in inequality of income in Northern Ireland means that the gap between the richest and the poorest families here is wider than it is in GB, but also the levels of poverty are greater here than in GB. Are those two factors related?

1360. Mrs E Collins: I am not sure about that. What is clear is whether there are mechanisms in the Programme for Government that could be used to alleviate and change that gap, and there probably are. Although the Programme for Government is very strong on aspiration, the devil is in the detail in the outworking of each of its policies. We can see, and have welcomed the fact, that economic growth is the Programme for Government’s top priority, that there is a recognition of the connection between the other priorities involved, and that there is an explicit commitment by the Executive to improve the situation and experience of people who are in disadvantaged areas or communities, or who experience inequalities of some degree. There is potential for the actions that flow from the Programme for Government, whether in the strands related to employment, education or poverty, but the devil will be in the detail. As one of your Committee colleagues said earlier, poverty and inequality have many causes, but they require, potentially, a complex range of solutions. It will be of benefit to the Committee to look across Government and across the Executive’s plans and seek to make interventions for change.

1361. The Chairperson: Mr Collins, do you wish to comment on the earlier part of the question?

1362. Mr B Collins: I will bow to wiser counsel on those matters. However, if the measure of poverty is, for example, 60% of the median income, the location of the median point will alter as the gap between incomes widens. Therefore, the numbers falling below 60% are likely to increase as a consequence. In that sense, it captures the relative dimension of poverty in the way that it is measured.

1363. It is clear that that there is a higher level of economic inactivity in Northern Ireland than in other parts of the UK, which, in turn, has implications for poverty. There is a trans-generational element to that in Northern Ireland, which is probably more entrenched than in Great Britain as a whole, although there are places in Great Britain where that is experienced.

1364. That perpetuates the issue of children, whose parents and grandparents lived in poor circumstances, now also living in poor circumstances. Their prospects are less bright than those of other children.

1365. Mrs Long: The second part of the question related to the issue of child-poverty-proofing. Obviously, your organisation has considerable experience of proofing policy for other Section 75 issues. How do you see child-poverty-proofing, and poverty-proofing in general, being applied to Government policy? At what stage would those interventions be made? For example, would it be when policy is originally being thought-out, or would it be at the point where policy is becoming legislation? I am interested in exploring that matter, to find out when poverty-proofing interventions would be made.

1366. At the end of your paper you referred to targeting areas of social need, specifically with regard to education — will child-poverty proofing be proposed as one of the options for dealing with that? That is something that I have discussed with the Department of Education.

1367. Mrs E Collins: As you rightly pointed out, we have some years’ experience of looking at, and assisting public authorities with examining policy through an equality-proofing lens. We have seen benefits of that as understanding increases, and that is why our submission states that having a poverty-proofing approach would produce benefits. That approach can produce benefits at various stages of a process: the initial conception of a policy; when contemplating the implementation of a policy; and at the legislative stage. There is potential value ion a poverty-proofing approach, which is, essentially, to try to equip policy makers, and others, with the skills needed to analyse the impact of their policies on Section 75 areas, something which often they do intuitively.

1368. In answer to your question regarding education, when expenditure or planned expenditure is viewed through a poverty lens, that should expose its likely impact on different categories. That is why we consider poverty-proofing to be a useful tool, because we can see the benefits of using it under the Section 75 processes in relation to equality, as an aid to better decision-making, better policy-making, and potentially better targeting of resources.

1369. The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation and for the clarity of your answers. If there are any other points you wish to bring to our attention in respect of our inquiry, we will be happy to receive them from you.

2 April 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mrs Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Mr Tom Elliott
Mrs Dolores Kelly
Mr Barry McElduff
Mr Francie Molloy
Mr Stephen Moutray
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jim Wells

Witnesses:

Mr Paul Donnelly
Ms Pauline Keegan
Mrs Katrina Godfrey

Department of Agriculture and Rural Development

Mr Alan McMullan
Ms Mary Potter
Ms Louise Warde-Hunter
Miss Jan Harvey

Department of Education

Mrs June Ingram
Mr David Rogers

Department for Employment and Learning

1370. The Chairperson (Mr Kennedy): Good afternoon. I welcome Pauline Keegan and Paul Donnelly from the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD). The Committee has received your submission on child poverty. Please make a brief opening statement, after which members will have an opportunity to ask questions. We expect that the session will last no longer than 30 minutes, and I hope that everyone will co-operate in order to achieve that.

1371. Ms Pauline Keegan (Department of Agriculture and Rural Development): Thank you, Chairperson. I will make a short statement, after which we will be happy to answer any questions that members may have.

1372. Poverty, and child poverty in particular, would not appear to be part of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development’s remit. However, our strategic plan, which will run until 2011, sets out the Department’s vision for a thriving and sustainable rural community with all its various constituencies, including children. The Lifetime Opportunities action plan also contains specific targets relating to children.

1373. A key aim of our rural strategy, which I hope that members have seen, and which was published in 2006, is:

“Strengthening the Social and Economic Infrastructure of Rural Areas”.

1374. That theme is also reflected in one of our public service agreements (PSA). We believe that helping to alleviate child poverty goes some way towards achieving that aim.

1375. Another key aim in the strategy is for our Minister to become a rural champion. Essentially, that means being a strong advocate for rural issues with other Departments and putting effective rural proofing of cross-departmental policies in place. Through that work, the Department has an important role to play in encouraging the alleviation of child poverty in rural areas where that is within the gift of other Departments.

1376. Under the current rural development programme, as we have outlined in our paper, DARD has funded more than 170 projects, which are worth more than approximately £6·5 million. That money has gone to projects that have had a positive impact on child poverty, including direct work with children and young people, and on providing childcare in order to facilitate the training and/or employment of parents.

1377. In the new rural development programme, which will run until 2013, the social interventions measures will provide more scope for funding projects directed at children. Indeed, within the children and young people’s action plan, the Department’s formal target is that 5% of the Axis 3 programme funds — the quality-of-life measures — must be spent on specific programmes for children and young people. That will be an important target group.

1378. As members probably know, local councils are now in the lead in implementing those quality-of-life measures. The Department expects, and hopes, to ensure that all of the projects that have been funded will link with the work that is being conducted by local government to target disadvantaged groups. We want there to be complementarity.

1379. My Minister also takes the provision of childcare in rural areas seriously, and believes that the lack of it contributes to poverty as that can result in either parent being unable to work the required hours or the hours that suit them. Also, some parents are unable to afford accessible childcare because of their isolated location in rural areas. Furthermore, it is expensive for those who can afford it.

1380. The Minister set up the stakeholders’ group, which we referred to in our written submission, to consider the difficulties associated with childcare in rural areas. She has asked the group to provide her with a report with recommendations to address the issue. That report will be available later in April 2008, and the Minister intends to take it to the Executive for support.

1381. In a briefing paper that was commissioned by the Department, Save the Children — whose representatives have given evidence to the Committee — highlighted the lack of childcare provision as a significant contributory factor to child poverty, particularly in rural areas where childcare facilities are quite poor.

1382. The work of the stakeholders’ group will indirectly, and, I believe directly, help to address child poverty. More specifically, the Department has secured funding of £9·2 million over three years, as outlined in the Budget, to tackle poverty and social exclusion in rural areas. To help the Minister decide how those funds could best be spent, the Department commissioned the Rural Development Council and the rural community network to conduct consultations with stakeholders. Reports from both organisations were received on 31 March 2008, but have yet to go to the Minister. However, a quick analysis of the reports shows that beneficiaries should include families and their children. We will be discussing the reports with the Minister early next week.

1383. The Department is interested in knowing how poverty is to be defined before it begins to try to develop solutions. The consultation reports have said that a range of factors contributes to rural poverty, including limited access to, or an inability to access, resources and services that are viewed by society as essential. Such factors also include lack of employment opportunities and lower-level incomes, which are particularly relevant to the farming constituency.

1384. In the reports, stakeholders talk about access poverty, which means lack of access to services especially when compared to urban areas. Issues affecting children include lack of access to education, affordable and accessible childcare provision, and adequate transport, which result in some of them being unable to get to school cheaply and easily.

1385. Stakeholders also referred to financial poverty, which means lack of awareness of entitlements, including entitlement to child benefit; lack of investment in rural areas, which results in fewer jobs; lack of alternative employment opportunities, and, for farmers and producers, low income.

1386. A form of social and community poverty also exists. The reports made clear that the impact of conflict and division in Northern Ireland has contributed to profound isolation and exclusion in some rural areas and has led to stress and difficulties in families, which has impacted on children significantly.

1387. I said earlier that the consultation highlighted families with young children as the key beneficiaries of anti-poverty interventions. Stakeholders say that low income families’ and lone parents’ experiences of poverty are a direct result of higher costs of living and lack of childcare, and, indirectly, are a result of a lack of money, lack of employment advice and lack of access to health and childcare services.

1388. In rural areas, 40% of individuals earn 40% below the UK mean income, compared to 28% in urban areas — and the figure of 28% is also a worrying statistic. At 37%, rural areas recorded the lowest population of employees who work full time. The statistics also show that three out of every four households in Northern Ireland are in receipt of one or more state benefits, 82% of which are located in the rural and urban west.

1389. Therefore, there is clear evidence of poverty in rural areas, which is sometimes hidden and sometimes obvious. The effect on children can be stark. In the past, Government intervention through grants was sometimes of a scattergun nature — projects were funded for a short period of time, the funding came to an end, and communities were left in the same position as they were before the funding started. Therefore, Government needs to be in it for the long term.

1390. That is why it is important that DARD’s anti-poverty funds are being provided over three years, and, I hope, beyond. The Minister wants to ensure that our work complements and adds value to the rural development programme. Therefore, our strategy must be well planned and its outcomes must make a difference.

1391. We may want to consider improving financial inclusion by helping to create job opportunities, and we may consider measures that help people manage debt better, which could, if appropriate, include addressing rural-fuel poverty. We will continue to tackle social inclusion and stress.

1392. We will look at the issues concerning farmers and migrant workers. We are keen to assist farmers and farm families over and above the funds that are available to them through the Northern Ireland Rural Development Programme.

1393. However, all of that is subject to the Minister’s decision. She has not considered the reports yet. Therefore, the presentation today is only a snapshot of what could be achieved. The Minister wants to see increased job opportunities; opportunities for women returning to work; increased access to information, and equal access to services.

1394. All of those initiatives will have a significant impact on rural child poverty. However, the Department cannot, and should not, work in isolation. We have a relatively small, but important, part to play in helping bring back sustainable rural communities that have the welfare of children at their heart.

1395. The Chairperson: Thank you for that comprehensive opening statement. Does your Department have any statistical information about the number of children who might be living in poverty in the rural areas of Northern Ireland?

1396. Ms Keegan: Obtaining an evidence base is one of the big issues. Information does exist, but it is out of date; and that is why we carried out a consultation. The rural community network has provided us with a hefty document, which contains a great deal of statistical information. That information needs to be considered before poverty can be defined and solutions developed. I hope that the statistical information in the document can be utilised. However, we will need time to determine whether it is sufficient. Without sufficient information, solutions cannot be developed. We could come back to the Committee on that point.

1397. The Chairperson: We would appreciate that.

1398. Mrs Long: I want to explore a couple of issues, the first of which relates to transport. The impact of transport on children and young people has been raised by a number of people who have made presentations to the Committee. What conversations have taken place between your Department and DRD about addressing transport poverty in rural areas?

1399. My other question relates to after-school childcare provision. The Department of Education has a major role to play in that; therefore, what joined-up work or arrangements does your Department have with the Department of Education? The rationalisation of schools is under consideration, which could exacerbate some existing problems. Finally, I have spoken to the Minister of Agriculture about child poverty and social inclusion on a number of occasions, and my experience reflects what Ms Keegan has said about her drive to address the issues, and that is welcome.

1400. Ms Keegan: One way in which we are addressing rural transport issues with DRD is through the rural proofing interdepartmental committee, on which all Departments are represented. As I said in my presentation, some measures can be taken by our Department and others that should be taken by other Departments.

1401. DARD, as the rural champion, has been saying that rural transport is an issue as regards accessibility and isolation, and other Departments should be examining their policies in order to address the problem. There has been a lot of discussion on that point. Given that the anti-poverty package money has now arrived, DARD intends to move forward with other Departments on a one-to-one basis, to see whether there are gaps in provision that that money could meet, and in order to see if we could solve problems in that way.

1402. We have also talked to DRD about some of the rural development projects that DARD has funded in the past. DRD would be one of the key contributors to such projects. If a project concerns transport in a particular area, we would ask DRD whether something is already in place because we must be careful not to double-fund. However, there might be something that DARD could add to and fund. Such discussions have taken place and will continue to take place.

1403. As regards the Department of Education (DE) and the rural childcare stakeholders’ group, we set up another interdepartmental group because we had to be sure about what DE was providing as regards early-years, and after-school, childcare and there was no point in considering matters that were already being provided for. Therefore, a group of officials met, and continue to meet, to exchange information. We have to do that because if legislation or changes are being considered, officials must be able to feed in appropriate information to the process.

1404. Mr Elliott: You are very welcome, Pauline and Paul. First; what is the definition of a rural area?

1405. Ms Keegan: Thirty-five per cent of Northern Ireland has been defined as being rural. That figure comes from the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA). Sometimes, the Minister has mentioned a figure of 40%, but the figures that I see are roughly around 35%. In the rural development programme, a rural area is defined as one with less than 4,400 people.

1406. There is some contention on this issue, as the member probably knows, in that the figure has been helpful to us when allocating rural development money. There must be some way of defining whether an area is urban or rural when determining what DSD and others should do. We have used that figure as a guide. In the rural development programme, the figure used to be 5,000 people but it has come down to 4,500.

1407. However, in taking forward the reports that I mentioned earlier, we will need to review that figure in order to ensure that it is valid and robust, and that people are not falling into gaps. Some people have told me that they are unable to get funding from one programme or another.

1408. Mr Elliott: I asked the question because people who live in an exposed area in which there are about 10 houses within a 10-mile radius would classify themselves as rural. They might accept a village or a town with a population of perhaps one or two thousand people as also being rural. However, once we talk about populations of more than 4,000 people, I am not sure that that could be classified as rural. That is the gap in the Department’s assessments.

1409. My next question is about rural proofing, which is nonsense and is not working. I am sure that DARD accepts that rural proofing has never worked, and that all we are doing is paying lip service when we say that we have a system of rural proofing. Nobody takes a blind bit of notice of it, if you will excuse the phrase. We have to get a real definition of rural proofing. We are almost a year into devolution, and I would like to see DARD making progress on the matter. Are there any plans to do so soon? Unless that happens, we are not going to get anywhere.

1410. I want to turn to access to services, of which transport is one of the key services although not the only one. Families wanting to return to work, but who are living in areas in which there are only five, 10 or 15 children, do not have the same access to childcare services as those who live in built-up or urban areas in which there are quite a lot of children. I would like to hear the Department’s views on that.

1411. Ms Keegan: I do not disagree with what the member said about rural proofing. Any non-statutory proofing — and most proofing is non-statutory — is difficult to agree with other Departments, as we have discovered. I am not saying that other Departments have not tried to consider the rural perspective when developing their policies. However, other priorities do come along.

1412. We realise that rural proofing needs to be improved. In our corporate plan we stated that we will do just that, and we are looking at different ways of achieving it. It might be through externalising the process — determining whether the role should go outside the Department and to an independent body that would work with the various Departments. That is one possibility. I accept what the member has said, and we will be looking at resolving the issue shortly. I am happy to return to the Committee on the matter if that would be helpful.

1413. Mr Elliott: I also asked about access to childcare services. Do other Departments recognise the problem when you make that observation concerning rural areas?

1414. Mr Paul Donnelly (Department of Agriculture and Rural Development): I think they do, Tom. The work that the Rural Development Council and the childcare stakeholder group are completing for the Department is making those points strongly. With respect to your comments about rural childcare services, there are issues relating to critical mass, and where that mass is not present, services may not be provided. We will be working on that issue. However, I can give no commitment at this stage. We will be talking to DE to see how we can implement programmes to address the problems mentioned, which have also come forward in the reports from the rural community network and the Rural Development Council.

1415. Mr Molloy: There are issues about whether the rural development programme has contributed to addressing poverty and exclusion. Has there been any measurement of how successful that programme has been? What is the baseline level of childcare facilities? Is there any plan to link services; for instance, rural transport and schools? Each Department seems to be doing its own thing. However, if one looks around the countryside, one can see that buses are parked for most of the day, yet if we have a new organisation then we will have new buses.

1416. How can the efforts be co-ordinated? I appreciate that DARD cannot manage every aspect, but it does have a facilitation and co-ordination role.

1417. Mr Donnelly: The member makes valid points. DARD has secured only £9·2 million for its work in combating poverty and social exclusion, and we know that we must work with other Departments to deliver something that is sustainable and will work for all.

1418. We will have to tease out all of the issues, and we will have to talk to DE and DRD to see how we can better utilise buses and various facilities. The Rural Development Council makes the point that community facilities should be multi-purpose and should facilitate childcare.

1419. The big issue emerging in relation to rural schools is that if one school runs preschool and after-school childcare services, perhaps children from other areas could attend. Currently, none of the facilities stay open; they all close at 3.00 pm. Those are the issues that we are tackling; but we cannot address them alone: we need to work with other Departments which, in most cases, have the statutory responsibilities. Those issues have been flagged up in the reports and we will try to drive that forward.

1420. Mr Molloy: The other problem with rural development programmes, and European programmes such as Peace II etc, is that they are designed somewhere else and are handed down to us but do not meet the needs of our community. There is no opportunity to consult with the community and tailor programmes to reflect its needs and requirements.

1421. Ms Keegan: I take your point with regard to European programmes. As I said in the presentation, disparate projects have emerged, which have targeted individual groups such as children and old people, but have not taken a holistic approach. I hope that we can achieve such an approach by involving local councils and provide programmes that complement one other.

1422. That is another reason why the Minister made a bid for a specific anti-poverty package — to target that area directly, and complement, and link up with, other things that are happening in the rural development programme. There is no doubt that other childcare projects will be taken forward within that programme, and it would be crazy if such projects did not link up. The anti-poverty package will be used to address something specific, and this is the first time that we have been able to do that. It is new money.

1423. Mr McElduff: I want to focus on rural childcare provision. The main reason for that is that my constituents are lobbying me about an excellent facility in Eskragh. I suggest that it is an example of best practice.

1424. The Chairperson: No advertising, please, Mr McElduff.

1425. Mr McElduff: You asked me to declare an interest earlier, Mr Chairperson, but I have none — except that it is an excellent childcare facility. [Laughter.]

1426. Mrs D Kelly: Could I just clarify that the representative for the area has no interest in childcare provision in Eskragh? [Laughter.]

1427. Mr McElduff: I mean interest with a capital “I”.

1428. The Chairperson: The press has started to take notice. Please continue Mr McElduff. [Laughter.]

1429. Mr McElduff: People there are telling me that childcare provision is not meeting the needs of the community. What is DARD’s responsibility in this matter, and what is the responsibility of DE? How is that responsibility shared? It has been said that there will be job losses in that childcare centre, and that there will be 30 applicants for 14 positions, and so on. If that provision is not meeting the needs of the rural community, then how is DARD, together with the other Departments, working to meet those needs? It is the biggest issue in that community, and it requires urgent attention.

1430. Ms Keegan: Mr Donnelly has visited Eskragh and, therefore, can talk about that matter. Tackling poverty is not in the obvious remit of DARD. However the phrase “rural development” is part of the Department’s name, and in the past we have funded rural development programmes. As I said earlier, we are working to make those programmes more effective, holistic and strategic. The anti-poverty package is new also.

1431. We have been working with other Departments on issues such as rural proofing, although I take the point that that has not been as effective as it should have been. We have been helping Departments to define their roles in these matters. Although DE, DHSSPS and other Departments have their individual remits, with which we do not want to interfere, we do need to work with them on rural matters in order to improve the situation in rural areas and address any gaps in provision that exist.

1432. I think Paul has visited Eskragh —

1433. Mr Donnelly: Yes.

1434. Mr Wells: Where it is? [Laughter.]

1435. The Chairperson: Was that with or without the knowledge or permission of Mr McElduff? [Laughter.]

1436. Mr Donnelly: I am sure that Mr McElduff is aware that the childcare group in Eskragh held a meeting a couple of weeks ago, at which a lot of anxiety was expressed by that group and other groups. The group has a funding crisis on the horizon, and, on attending the meeting, it was made clear that it is a worthwhile project.

1437. As regards where the responsibilities lie between DARD and DE, the most recent evidence demonstrates — as you and others have said — that there is a lack of rural childcare provision and that more is needed. That is a matter that DARD will have to address. However, we cannot do so alone — we must work in close conjunction with DE. The first step will be to establish what provision exists, what funding is provided, where gaps exist and, perhaps, how Departments and others can fill those gaps. That is the current position.

1438. Ms Keegan: When the Minister took office, one of her first actions was to ask the Department to examine rural childcare provision. We established a rural stakeholders group quite quickly. Although it may not seem that the period from May 2007 to March 2008 is particularly brief, the Committee will appreciate the time required to set up a group, gather evidence, outline recommendations and produce a report, which will be presented to the Minister on 23 April. As Mr Donnelly said, the Minister will then considering how the work should progress.

1439. Mrs D Kelly: Thank you for the presentation. Ms Keegan, I assume that the £9·2 million you mentioned is not European money?

1440. Ms Keegan: No, it is money from public expenditure.

1441. Mrs D Kelly: That amounts to roughly £3 million per year over three years, and is not only for tackling poverty, but is for tackling the whole gamut of poverty and social exclusion. Older people in rural areas must not be overlooked.

1442. Perhaps I could make a bid as regards tackling fuel poverty. I was involved in a successful project in conjunction with Craigavon Borough Council and Armagh and Dungannon health action zone called ‘Home is where the Heat is’, which adopted a holistic approach to tackling fuel poverty and community safety in that area. Eleanor Gill was involved at that stage, and the Department should consider it as example of a good model for service delivery.

1443. As a rural dweller, I am concerned about the impact of draft PPS 14 on the future sustainability of rural communities. What analysis has DARD carried out on the impact of draft PPS 14, both on the opportunities for —

1444. Mr Wells: Excuse me, Chairman, but I cannot see the relevance of that.

1445. Mrs D Kelly: If the member will wait for a moment, he will see the relevance.

1446. Mr Wells: The bungalow breeders have had their day.

1447. Mrs D Kelly: Chairman; I did not interrupt anyone. The relevance of draft PPS 14 is in its relation to economic regeneration and the provision of social housing. Is draft PPS 14 sufficient to meet the future needs of rural communities as sustainable communities?

1448. Ms Keegan: Draft PPS 14 is outside my remit. However, DARD is examining it and is talking to DOE about the general effect on rural communities and on the farming constituency. I take the member’s point, and we will not be ignoring draft PPS 14.

1449. Mrs D Kelly: I want to concentrate briefly on the youth in rural areas.

1450. The Chairperson: I am glad that we are moving on to youth and children. Go ahead.

1451. Mrs D Kelly: It is not merely a matter of providing childcare for children up to the age of three. The marginalisation of young people is also a major concern. I am interested in what DARD does to support young people in rural areas?

1452. Ms Keegan: The member was right to mention fuel poverty, and we have taken a note of that. Thank you.

1453. The anti-poverty package aims to tackle poverty across the board. When DARD talks about targets and strategies, some of those relate to children and young people — and we regard young people as being those up to 25 years of age. That is an important target group, and it emerged from the consultation process as being a key beneficiary. Young people have received quite a lot of money from the programme, and we expect them to get more from the EU’s rural development programme. However, I agree that it is essential to find money for young people from the rural poverty package. That point emerged clearly from the consultation responses, and we are happy to come back to the Committee on that.

1454. Mr Shannon: DARD has a role to play in transport provision for rural communities. If child poverty in rural communities is to be tackled, transport provision in those areas must be improved. Rural transport is a bit like the grey partridge or the red squirrel; either almost extinct or rarely seen.

1455. Mr Wells: Do you shoot them?

1456. Mr Shannon: Steady on now. I should let members know that both are protected, so I could not shoot them — for the record.

1457. Mr McElduff: Would you want to shoot them, Jim?

1458. Mr Shannon: No, I would not want to shoot them — for the record.

1459. The Chairperson: Not in Northern Ireland anyway.

1460. Mr Shannon: What relationship does DARD have with DRD in trying to improve transport for rural communities? I am making my mark for the Strangford constituency, and I am aware of the need for improved transport there, particularly on the Ards Peninsula. Peninsula Community Transport Ltd is one body that provides transport, and if its services disappeared, or were diminished in any way, the impact would be huge.

1461. Ms Keegan: As I said to Mrs Long, we talk to DRD officials about the general projects that we fund for rural transport. DRD is a key contributor, and we ask its opinion on whether something is a good idea; what it is doing in the area, and whether there is a gap that DARD could fill. It is that kind of relationship.

1462. However, as I also said, we need to expand that relationship. Rural transport emerged from the consultation process as a key issue affecting people and impacting on poverty, particularly child poverty. We will progress the issue by discussing what is happening now, what DRD’s plans are, what DARD’s plans should be, and how the two Departments can work together.

1463. Rural transport remains within DRD’s remit. However, as there is a rural element involved, the DRD policy needs to be rural proofed. Rural transport emerged from the consultation process as a flashing light, and it is one of the first issues that we need to address. We will be meeting our DRD colleagues to see how we can link with, or help, them without taking over their responsibility. We must be careful not to do that.

1464. The Chairperson: Pauline and Paul, thank you for your contribution. If you wish to provide any additional information to the Committee, we would be happy to receive it. I am pleased to say that we have stayed within our allotted time today. Thank you.

1465. I now welcome Katrina Godfrey, Mary Potter, Louise Warde-Hunter and Alan McMullan. Please make a brief opening statement and I will then offer members the opportunity to ask questions. It is hoped that the session will last no longer than 30 minutes, although that depends on everyone’s co-operation.

1466. Mrs Katrina Godfrey (Department of Education): I will kick off on behalf of the DE team. First, we welcome the opportunity to give evidence to the inquiry because, through its policies, the Department can, and will, make a real contribution to the cross-departmental work to reduce and eradicate child poverty. More importantly, we have a real commitment to playing our part in that.

1467. I am responsible for policy in school standards, the curriculum, school improvement, literacy and numeracy, and other aspects of core school policy business. Louise Warde-Hunter is head of the division that is responsible for school finance, early years and youth services. Alan McMullan is head of the school administration branch, which looks after school governance policy, policy on school meals, boarding and clothing, transport, educational maintenance allowance and other such areas. Mary Potter is head of the pupil support unit, whose work involves pupil support, including bullying, pastoral care, welfare issues, teenage mothers and other areas that might be relevant to the work of the inquiry.

1468. I will not say much by way of introduction because my colleagues will be able to speak far more eloquently about their own policy areas than I will. They will be ready to answer questions.

1469. We see our work as contributing to the reduction and eradication of child poverty in three broad ways. First, we work to ensure that all children, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds have access to quality education and youth services. It is also important that they have the help and encouragement that they need to make the most of those services. An example of that is our work on early years, including programmes such as Sure Start, which have a clear focus on disadvantage as well as on access to preschool education. We know from research that that can make a real difference to the educational outcomes of children in the longer term.

1470. Our support of extended schools in the most disadvantaged areas is relevant to this discussion. Extended schools are capable of supporting and enhancing the learning of young people, and helping them to overcome barriers that they face. The work on Ms Potter’s side, such as supporting school-age mothers and special educational needs, is also beneficial in that regard.

1471. We also play an important role in providing practical help to those people who are least well off. For example, we ensure the provision of free school meals for children from low income families; we now also ensure that those meals are of a higher quality, and of better nutritional balance, than they were in the past.

1472. The educational maintenance allowance route provides support for older people to remain in school. School principals have told me that that has made a real difference — not only in encouraging people to stay on at school but — in encouraging attendance, since it is linked to physically being in school every day.

1473. We provide support towards the cost of school uniforms for those pupils from low income families. Schools with disproportionately high numbers of children from disadvantaged backgrounds face disproportionately greater challenges. We reflect that fact through an additional targeting social need factor in the local management of schools (LMS) funding formula; which this year saw around £47 million distributed to schools purely on social need grounds.

1474. The examples that I have mentioned constitute the Department’s practical help, access and support.

1475. I return to my personal area of work. As our written evidence clearly indicates, we face a real challenge regarding the underachievement of young people from socially disadvantaged backgrounds. That underachievement is often masked by high levels of achievement at the top end of the spectrum. One example of that is that only 22% of pupils entitled to free school meals leave school having achieved two or more A-level passes. In contrast, at least 50% of their peers who are not entitled to free school meals achieve those grades.

1476. The achievement of five good GCSE passes — at grades A* to C, and including English and Maths — unlocks access to further and higher education and to well paid jobs. Despite that fact, only 26% of free school meals entitled children achieve those grades. That points to the real need for us to take further action; not just on the structural reforms that we are advancing in education but on the revised curriculum. If we do not get the basics of literacy and numeracy right, we will not make the necessary progress in other areas.

1477. A clear focus on school improvement is required, together with the realisation that work on outcomes and achievements will not have immediate gains. However, if we are successful in what we aspire to deliver, that will have a major influence on breaking the cycle.

1478. Educational under-achievement leads to social exclusion, good job opportunities being denied, and will perpetuate — in generations to come — a sense that education did not do any good. We are incredibly committed to tackling the gap in underachievement. We will play a more significant role in eradicating child poverty for this generation and for future generations than is sometimes realised.

1479. I have presented the key points of our contribution. We are very happy to take questions.

1480. The Chairperson: Thank you for that comprehensive — not in the educational sense — presentation. I do not want this meeting to become a subcommittee of the Committee for Education, so I will remind myself and members that we are focusing on child poverty.

1481. Has your Department conducted research that has produced accurate statistics of how many children are affected by child poverty?

1482. Mrs Godfrey: Traditionally, we tend to use entitlement to free school meal as a measurement method. We have found a clear correlation between free school meals entitlement and other indicators of poverty and disadvantage.

1483. However, we are moving to more sophisticated measures. We now have access to postcode information that provides details of the areas in which young people live, and which links to our work with the neighbourhood renewal partnerships. That has allowed us to use a more sophisticated determinant of the schools suffering most from social disadvantage in, for example, our work on extended schools. However, free school meals entitlement is still our main indicator.

1484. Alan will keep me right, but I believe the average entitlement to free school meals is around the 20% mark.

1485. Mr Alan McMullan (Department of Education): That is correct. The total number of children receiving free school meals at the moment is in the region of 44,000, out of a total of 155,000 children who take school meals: so that is 29%.

1486. Mrs Godfrey: That is considerably higher than in England, for example.

1487. The Chairperson: The argument has always raged as to whether the indicator for measuring entitlement to free school meals was appropriate or accurate. Are you satisfied that it remains the best tool in your toolbox?

1488. Mrs Godfrey: There is scope for us to use other information that is becoming more readily available to us, in relation to the wards where our young people live, which could complement the free school meals entitlement indicator. However, that indicator should be very robust, because it is directly linked to the eligibilities to certain core benefits, and we measure entitlement rather than uptake. Committee members will know that, as with any benefit, there are always going to be difficulties in encouraging everyone who is entitled to a benefit to declare that entitlement and avail of it. We have done some preliminary work with the Social Security Agency (SSA), for example, to try and ensure that more people are encouraged to establish their entitlement.

1489. Mrs Long: Thank you for the presentation, it was very helpful. How effective has the extended schools programme been in the alleviation of child poverty? What measures are you using to gauge its success? Have you been engaged in any discussions about teaching training, for example, particularly for members of schools’ senior management, in order to redefine the roles that the extended schools programme brings? I have corresponded with the Minister directly about matters such as the buildings handbook, which I believe also needed to be amended to reflect that change.

1490. What other Departments are engaged with DE in its attempt to address the generational cycle of underachievement in education? Clearly, if you are dealing with parents and grandparents then you are not dealing only with people who fall within the direct remit of DE, so what inter-departmental discussions are taking place on that matter?

1491. Mrs Godfrey: It is fair to say that, after a year of operation, it still is very early days for the extended schools programme. We know from research, from the evidence of extended schools elsewhere, and from the work that the Inspectorate has done with us on the first year of the programme, that it is capable of making a huge difference where it is working well. That is because it is starting to provide opportunities for schools to be seen as places that offer much more than the traditional 9.00 am to 3.00 pm classroom activities.

1492. If people can be encouraged to participate in, for example, an after-school computer club, a breakfast club or a cookery course — as I have seen recently in a school not far from here — and are starting to enjoy that and are developing their confidence and self esteem, then it is fairly clear from the research and from what we have seen already that that enjoyment will affect what happens in the classroom.

1493. Many barriers to learning relate to low self esteem and to people having low expectations of their own ability, therefore it is important that those people have the sense that someone can help them with that. Therefore, we know that the extended schools programme is making a difference and is capable of making a difference. We need another year or two to see that difference coming to fruition. That programme is only in its first year of operation and I know that a lot of time was — necessarily — spent on planning the activities.

1494. We also want to get better at making sure that the extended schools activities link back to the specific needs of communities, so that the programme is relevant, and that parents and community leaders can see its relevance and that it is not simply more of what takes place between 9.00 am and 3.00 pm. We really want to build on that.

1495. The programme has worked effectively where links have been made between parents, communities and schools; where, for example, parents and communities are availing of the opportunities to use the school’s facilities or be actively involved in a “dads and lads” computer club, or suchlike.

1496. With regard to teacher education, the Department and schools have learned much in the first year of the programme about what works and what does not. There is also a clear sense that activities must be differentiated from what happens during core school time, so that they can be seen to add value. We are examining teacher education generally. One issue that has emerged clearly is that of the extra professional development and support work that might be needed in order to allow connections to be made more effectively between schools and local communities. You will not be surprised that that is a recurring theme, not only in extended schools, but also, for example, in literacy and numeracy.

1497. That brings me to the third area. With regard to initiatives such as improving literacy and numeracy, we are working closely with officials from DEL, who, I believe, are due to meet the Committee later. It is clear that there is no point in DEL’s family- or adult-literacy efforts not being joined up with ours. DEL has very deliberately been given observer status, as has DSD, in the new literacy and numeracy task force that the Education Minister recently announced, in order to ensure that opportunities to dovetail more closely with the work of those Departments on family literacy, adult literacy and essential skills, and also the wider neighbourhood-renewal agenda, are not missed. The other relevant areas are early years and health. Louise will probably want to add to that.

1498. Ms Louise Warde-Hunter (Department of Education): The question related to interdepartmental working. The nought-to-six early-years strategy that DE is currently developing involves five other Departments: DHSSPS; DEL; DSD; DARD, and OFMDFM. That comes from a shared understanding that those around this table who attended the Assembly debate on early years, which mentioned the Heckman research, and so forth, will appreciate.

1499. Although it is recognised that it is vital that there is a lead Department, the power of early-years intervention to mitigate disadvantage and multiple deprivation is not sorely the responsibility of one Department — other Departments must also actively become involved. We hope to be able to initiate consultation on those matters later in 2008.

1500. Mr Shannon: This Committee is charged with the responsibility for inquiring into child poverty. The last two speakers mentioned underachievement. Latest figures show that the educational achievement of young, male Protestants in urban and rural areas is well below average. If you intend to reduce child poverty and underachievement — as I know that you do — what will DE do to raise the educational achievement of young, male Protestants in urban and rural areas, taking into account the reasons why they have not been able to achieve before? I understand that the overall problem must be dealt with; however, I want to know what you will do for that group specifically.

1501. Mrs Godfrey: As regards the school system, underachievement was revealed graphically in a recent Northern Ireland Audit Office report, focusing particularly on Belfast. In parts of the city, around 50% of 14-year-old boys, and over a quarter of girls in that age group, do not achieve at the required level at Key Stage 3.

1502. The Department believes that all gaps in achievement must be dealt with. However, different classroom and policy strategies may well be needed for different groups. For instance, we know that smart use of ICT in the classroom, in a way that is stimulating, effective and requires an active approach, can appeal to boys, in particular, and can encourage the sort of involvement from them that might be harder to achieve in a more traditional setting. We do know a lot about what works well.

1503. We have discovered that in some schools where the pattern and profile of disadvantage is similar the outcomes can be markedly different. We need to understand better why, for example, some boys’ secondary schools are doing exceptionally well with their cohorts while too many kids in other schools are not achieving a level that would be considered the norm.

1504. The underachievement of boys in Protestant areas, in Belfast in particular, is a concern. Too many other groups are also underachieving, and our key aim should be to close the gap wherever it exists and raise the bar overall so that every young person can achieve. However, that is also an issue for the youth sector in the work that it does.

1505. Ms Warde-Hunter: The work areas relating to the role of the Youth Service that would be relevant include the development of outreach youth workers, which is about trying to reach out to young people who are already disengaged, or marginalised, for whatever reason in their own communities. Those youth workers are directly on the front line and were funded by the children and young people’s funding package, which came to an end on Monday. That work has been mainstreamed through our departmental budgets. The money for children and young people’s projects enabled us to continue outreach work, particularly in rural areas, but also for other marginalised people for different reasons, such as disability or sexuality.

1506. In Belfast, where outreach work in Northern Ireland was founded, the main hub of activity was on the Shankill Road. Detached workers are still pursuing important objectives there. There are questions about how they can gainfully engage with young people and direct them back into education, training or employment. We are also trying to catch young people before they fall out of the school system. Some board areas will provide funding for projects such as the Prince’s Trust excel programme. Other education and library board areas take a different approach.

1507. Mr Shannon: Is that work going on in rural as well as urban areas? I think you mentioned that.

1508. Ms Warde-Hunter: I did.

1509. Mr Shannon: I am very interested in how you will specifically target underachievement in young people; in this case it is mainly among young Protestant males. That is happening in my constituency and I want to know why. It would be helpful if you could provide that information to the Committee.

1510. Mrs Godfrey: We will be more than happy to do that.

1511. Mr Molloy: What plans does the Department have to increase the level of accessible and affordable childcare? Are there any plans to introduce training courses into the curriculum in order to ensure that young people can pursue childcare as a career? Are there any other courses that are available in the further education colleges?

1512. In rural areas, school transport plays an important role in making schools accessible. I was surprised yesterday when officials from the Southern Education and Library Board told me that they had the authority to change routes and drop people off three miles from their homes. They also said that they did not have to provide school transport either to a child’s home or, indeed, back to the original pick-up point. Surely such decisions should be subjected to an equality impact assessment — they should not be made by officials from education and library boards on their own. Is there any direction from the Department on that issue?

1513. Ms Warde-Hunter: First, I would refer to my previous answer about the Department’s commitment to develop the 0-6 early-years strategy — the early education and care strategy. The overall issue of school-age childcare beyond the age of six is not the responsibility of DE. I am sure that the members of the Committee will be interested to know that my focus in developing and working on the 0-6 early-years strategy is to ensure that the integration services, from the Sure Start providers to the preschool provision, and the childcare that would wrap around that, will be central to what we are trying to do. We want to make that an integrated piece. Beyond that, school-age childcare is an issue that members may wish to raise later.

1514. One of the important areas that we want to examine in relation to the specific question about a workforce strategy is to identify the skills required and the people involved. We know that a well-qualified workforce, no matter where it delivers on that education and care spectrum, can provide significant benefits to the very youngest children. That will definitely be an important strand of the strategy to come out later this year.

1515. Mr McMullan: With respect to transport, DE sets out the main criteria for children’s eligibility for assistance, and we expect the education and library boards to apply the criteria uniformly. With the forthcoming establishment of the new education and skills agency, it will be important to ensure that all boards are operating on a uniform basis. I would not expect the boards to be making up the rules individually. They should be operating within the criteria that the Department provides.

1516. The Chairperson: We shall see. Which Department is responsible for childcare for school-age children?

1517. Ms Warde-Hunter: Before the transfer of the early-years policy, DHSSPS had responsibility for the childcare agenda. There are challenges when a policy, or part of a policy, becomes the responsibility of a different Department, and there will still be issues and ambiguities involved. However I want to put it on record that it is not the Department of Education.

1518. The Chairperson: I am glad that you clarified that.

1519. Mr Elliott: That is called “passing the buck”. [Laughter.]

1520. Thank you for the presentation. My first question is similar to the point made by Mr Molloy and concerns school closures. DE has no strategy regarding school closures, particularly primary-school closures. It just waits until a school does not meet the criteria, or has a deficit of more than 5%, and then allows it to close. There is no system, or strategy, to address that, which is making for a very uncertain situation for people in rural areas.

1521. That leads me to the second point — which Mr Molloy has started to address — concerning inconsistency in the provision of school transport. I declare an interest in the issue, as there is a school bus that drives past my home, yet it will not bring my child to school, even though we live two miles away from the school. It is a total nonsense. Why is there no practical, common-sense approach to that? Please do not pass the responsibility back to the board: there should be a strategy from the Department to deal with such issues in a practical, common-sense manner. That would help alleviate poverty and benefit the environment as there would be one less car driving to the local village or school.

1522. The Chairperson: I am glad you made that linkage. Would officials care to comment?

1523. Mrs Godfrey: I will deal with the issue of rural school closures as best I can, but it would be sensible if one of my colleagues followed that up with fuller information in writing. A consultation took place recently on the sustainable schools strategy, which, I understand, will be finalised shortly and made public.

1524. The Minister has also made clear her intention to press ahead with very robust arrangements for area-based planning, and has set up a central group, and appointed the chairs of five area-based groups. Those groups have been tasked with looking at what constitutes a sensible and sustainable level of provision within different areas — and within sensible areas, because lines cannot be arbitrarily drawn on a map; there are natural hinterlands and areas in which people move to and from schools that make sense when dealing with travel-to-school areas. There is work well under way on that issue.

1525. The big challenge that we will always face is getting the balance right between having a school handy and convenient, and having one that offers high quality education, the right sort of peer interaction, the right level of professional challenge and support for teachers, and the right level of peer interaction and opportunities for young people.

1526. If it would be helpful I can provide the Committee with a bit more information on the position of the sustainable schools strategy. One thing I will add is that the Department has always made clear that a deficit in a school budget is not a reason for closure, but it is a reason for questions to be asked about why it has happened. That then provides an opportunity to look at whether the school is in fact sustainable, and whether the number of pupils is at such a level that the quality of education is perhaps in jeopardy. It may also indicate whether a different type of support is available.

1527. Mrs D Kelly: Given that children with disabilities seem to be at risk of suffering from poverty disproportionately, what specific measures are being taken by the Department to address the needs of children and young people with disabilities or special educational needs, and how is it co-operating with the health sector, in particular, to ensure that statemented needs are addressed?

1528. Ms Mary Potter (Department of Education): I would prefer that that question is answered by a colleague who is a specialist in special education. If it is OK, we will write to the Committee with more detail on that point.

1529. The Chairperson: That is OK.

1530. Ms Warde-Hunter: If I may add a brief point from the youth perspective, the inclusion of young people with disabilities is very important. The key themes of the youth sector are inclusion and participation. On a practical level, for several years, we have run a minor works scheme that gives grants to youth-based organisations to ensure that they can put in place such things as disability access. That is one of the issues.

1531. In the North Eastern Education and Library Board, for example, when young people with disabilities wish to access youth services, they can join a programme that will help them to make the most of those services. Equally, the youth workers who provide the programme are skilled in supporting those young people. That is just one of the aspects of the non-formal way in which we help and support young people with disabilities.

1532. Mrs D Kelly: Given that some young people with learning disabilities have difficulty accessing summer schemes, does Youth Service provide additional grant assistance so that young people of all abilities can access those schemes?

1533. Ms Warde-Hunter: It is not a matter of additional funding, but of responsibility. We delegate the youth budget to boards for their areas through the assessment of relative need (ARNE) formula. Ensuring that they section-75 proof the distribution of those funds, and the way in which they ensure that they support organisations in the voluntary sector to do the same, are at the heart of the matter. It is not about additional funding; it is about ensuring that that issue is central to the way in which the boards approach their distribution and allocation of funding and the priority that they give to it.

1534. Mrs D Kelly: I am interested in how that is monitored. Will you come back to me with information on that?

1535. Ms Warde-Hunter: I am happy to try to do so.

1536. Mr McElduff: First, it is my understanding that assistance, in the form of a school-uniform allowance, is available for post-primary schoolchildren only. Perhaps I am wrong about that. Is assistance towards the cost of primary-school uniforms available for families on low incomes and, if not, why not?

1537. Secondly, is the SSA working closely with DE to ensure greater take-up of free school meals? In other words, do they share information?

1538. Mr McMullan: You are correct to say that we give school-uniform grants only for post-primary schoolchildren. Primary schools mainly do not use school uniforms. As far as I am aware, that is the primary reason why the allowance does not cover primary-school uniforms.

1539. Mr McElduff: May I challenge that?

1540. The Chairperson: That is not my experience also.

1541. Mrs Godfrey: In the past, the distinction was made because primary-school uniforms tend to be generic, and, in theory, they ought to be available in shops and be reasonably priced, whereas, post-primary school uniforms require greater expenditure, and — as I know from having just bought one — blazers and raincoats are not cheap. That was the traditional rationale. The Committee may take the view that that rationale it is no longer appropriate, but that is the history to the theory that, traditionally, post-primary school uniforms have required a greater financial outlay than primary-school uniforms.

1542. The Chairperson: Are there any plans to review that policy?

1543. Mr McMullan: There are none at the moment.

1544. I am sorry, would Mr McElduff repeat his second question?

1545. Mr McElduff: Is the SSA working with the Department to ensure the greater take-up of free school meals and greater sharing of sharing information?

1546. Mr McMullan: With regard to free school meals, we have had preliminary discussions with the SSA regarding electronic access to the customer information system that holds data on people who are receiving the relevant qualifying benefits.

1547. That work is ongoing in England, and we are working with colleagues there to examine the feasibility of such access. It would help to facilitate the more efficient processing of free school meals applications and would enable boards to target those people who have not made applications. In Northern Ireland, legislation will be required from the Department for Social Development. That legislation may be introduced in 2009, to be in operation by late 2009.

1548. Mr Moutray: What programmes are in place to help to address the educational problems of the ever-increasing number of children from migrant backgrounds?

1549. Mrs Godfrey: There are programmes in place, including the recent creation of a single ethnic minority achievement service. That service has a clear focus, which is to try and co-ordinate and consolidate the range of support services that are available to children who have come to Northern Ireland with their parents.

1550. Ms Potter: The Department has recently worked with the education and library boards to establish a single service that aims to support youngsters coming from countries in which English is not the main language. The clear focus of the policy is to support those youngsters to gain sufficient competence in English so as to be able to fully access the curriculum and to support them in continuing to do so.

1551. The service is relatively new and is in the process of developing materials to support schools, assessing the teaching needs and developing an assessment tool that will be used with the youngsters to determine their competence in English. That service will identify the appropriate support necessary to increase the youngsters’ competence levels so that they can access the curriculum fully. It is very much an embryonic service. Demands on the service are increasing year on year. It is a case of watching and monitoring what is going on, and it will be closely monitored indeed.

1552. Mrs Godfrey: I have a further point, which is relevant to special educational needs. Colleagues in the Department have been undertaking — and are close to finalising — a much overhauled strategy for meeting additional educational needs. That may come as a result of what we traditionally understand as special educational needs (SEN). However, it may also be associated with the fact that a child’s first language may not be English, that they have a physical disability or that they are in the gifted and talented spectrum and the support available in the classroom does not meet their needs. Therefore, the focus will be on moving away from the old definition, which, at times, focused on almost creating a culture of dependency and moving towards a system that is capable of recognising additional needs and of providing more tailored support to children whose needs are more complex than might be the norm.

1553. The Chairperson: Thank you very much for your presentation. We would be grateful for the additional information that you have agreed to provide.

1554. I welcome June Ingram, Jan Harvey and Dave Rogers, who will provide us with the Department of Employment and Learning’s input into the child poverty inquiry. I invite you to make a short presentation and to answer questions. I envisage that the session will last no longer than 30 minutes.

1555. Mrs June Ingram (Department for Employment and Learning): A wide range of activities have been set out in our submission. The Department for Employment and Learning (DEL) is in the process of drawing together a new corporate plan for 2008 to 2011. Our aim is to promote learning and skills, prepare people for work, and support the economy. Our key areas of activity relate to the provision of learning and skills; research and development; helping individuals to acquire jobs; and the framework of employment rights and responsibilities.

1556. Within the wider context of economic conditions and resources available, we sit firmly in the Programme for Government in contributing to a dynamic and innovative economy in different ways: for example, we have a target to increase the employment rate from 70% to 75% by 2020; targets for the provision and achievement of qualifications; and in the context of the priority to promote tolerance, inclusion, health and well-being, we have a target to put in place by 2010 a careers advice service to meet the needs of people with disabilities.

1557. Within the Programme for Government framework, DEL contributes to a range of public service agreement. We lead on skills for prosperity; increasing employment; ensuring that people have the right skills to deliver economic prosperity now and in the future; and increasing employment levels and reducing economic inactivity by addressing the barriers to employment. We want to set our work in the context of economic prosperity, and in that way we will contribute to the eradication of child poverty.

1558. DEL has an indirect impact on that objective in the context that the best route out of poverty is through well-paid, sustainable employment and increased household income. Along with other Departments and other interventions, we will progress our PSAs in a range of ways, with a range of targets related to an improvement in skills levels, assisting people into employment, and increasing qualification levels.

1559. We have a range of measures in place to address particular barriers to employment, such as ill health, disability, mobility, childcare, skills issues, and drug and alcohol misuse. Those specific barriers can often lead to economic inactivity.

1560. DEL is taking forward a range of measures and activities. The first is our skills strategy, Success through Skills, which is an overarching strategy with three strands: raising the skills levels of the workforce; enhancing the quality of those entering the workforce, and addressing the skills of those furthest away from the workforce. We will review the Success through Skills strategy in 2008.

1561. We have developed an all-age careers and guidance strategy, which is examining a differentiated service-delivery model, development of an evidence-based approach and providing a clear commitment to helping young people and adults who are vulnerable to social exclusion. We hope that the final version of the strategy will be published in the summer.

1562. Preparing people for work is set within the context of the welfare to work policy. There is a clear focus in our programmes on those who are economically inactive. We have a range of measures such as New Deal, Bridge to Employment, Pathways to Work, Steps to Work, Training for Success and so on. Some are in pilot mode, and others have been introduced across the piece.

1563. The essential skills strategy and action plan were launched in 2002. We have set a new target for the achievement of essential skills qualifications by 2011, which are designed to improve quality of life, personal development and employment opportunities. Essential skills can, in turn, help in the family context by improving family literacy and increasing confidence and self-esteem. There is a range of good examples in the family literacy area.

1564. Training for Success is the replacement for Jobskills and was launched in September 2007. It has two separate strands; job ready and apprenticeships. The former is designed to help people who need a bit of extra support in preparing to enter the world of work.

1565. In general terms, the employment service, the jobs and benefits offices and job centres are the key portals to services that are relevant to all jobseekers or job changers. The local employment intermediary service (LEMIS) is designed to address the needs of those who are furthest from the labour market in three areas that currently suffer from high levels of unemployment or low employment.

1566. One barrier to increased wealth and economic success is finance, and we have worked closely with stakeholders to ensure that people can identify and make use of as many measures as possible to help them financially to enter into the world of education and training.

1567. As well as student-support arrangements, there is an education maintenance allowance of £30 a week, which helps young people in the 16- to 19-year-old age group to remain in full-time education. There are also concessionary fees and some childcare allowances, which are available where appropriate, and they also help to break down barriers.

1568. As I said, there are three strands to the skills strategy, which deal with people who are in work, those who are entering the workforce and those who are furthest away from the world of work. It is an overarching strategy that involves working closely with the employment service and a range of initiatives that straddles areas such as careers, higher education, further education and Training for Success.

1569. It is important to stress the economic conditions within which we operate, which can pose an additional barrier to progress, but we try to tackle that through our different strands of work on economic inactivity.

1570. The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation. Has DEL undertaken any research on child poverty that shows how it directly affects the work of the Department, or do you rely on other people for statistics?

1571. Mr David Rogers (Department for Employment and Learning): We are aware of information and research carried out elsewhere. For example, when dealing with people who are out of work, our main focus is on the barriers that they experience and how those might be overcome to enable them to return to work. Over the past 10 years, the economic and labour market conditions have been relatively benign, which has been very fortunate for us. Unemployment has fallen quite sharply. The number of children in workless households in Northern Ireland has fallen quite considerably — by about 20% or 30% at least. The figure could be as much as 40%.

1572. One reason why those figures have fallen is because there has been a reduction in unemployment. Whereas about 10 years ago, half of the children in workless households were in two-people, or multi-person, families, that number has now fallen and the main issue now is lone parents. That is one reason why some of the provision that DEL is organising is extending later this year to better cover lone parents as well as our main target group hitherto which has been people on jobseeker’s allowance.

1573. Mr Shannon: Thank you for your presentation. The question that I asked of previous departmental officials is probably more relevant to DEL. In your submission, you say that DEL has a range of key delivery instruments for skills, including numeracy and literacy skills, for helping people into work. The latest figures show that educational achievement for young male Protestants in rural as well as in urban areas is well below average. What steps are being taken by DEL to address that issue and raise the educational standard and achievement of those young male Protestants in rural and urban areas?

1574. I ask that because I have personal knowledge in my own area where educational achievement has not been realised. How will the Department address that? You make clear in your submission what you are trying to do; but if that is not working — and the latest figures show that it is not working — what else are you going to do to make it work?

1575. Mrs Ingram: First, I will talk about the essential skills strategy whereby we have rolled out an initiative to increase the essential skills of literacy and numeracy and, increasingly, ICT across Northern Ireland. In addition, there has been a successful initiative called the vocational enhancement programme, which looks at relationships and co-operation between schools, including special schools and further education colleges. That is specific to local areas and looks at the needs of pupils in those areas.

1576. The career service’s new strategy, which looks at differentiated provision and individuals, is a way of addressing the needs of different groups. The employment service’s local employment intermediary service (LEMIS), specifically in Belfast, Strabane and Londonderry, is increasingly looking at the climate in those areas, the barriers to employment and the best way to get people re-engaged. Part of the issue, as you say, is that a way needs to be found to engage those groups that are not engaged.

1577. Mr Shannon: Are you aware of the latest figures on young male Protestants in rural and urban areas?

1578. Mrs Ingram: I am aware of the figures for the different groups.

1579. Mr Shannon: What I am trying to get from you or your Department is how you will specifically target those areas and thus help us to achieve part of what we are trying to achieve in relation to child poverty. That is the issue before us. If you are not in a position to answer that today then the Committee, and the Chairperson in particular, would like a response.

1580. Mr Rogers: There are two things that we have done. We have worked recently on a DSD-led initiative in the greater Village area in Belfast. That involved collecting data and looking at the particular issues for that area; looking at the available provision; and working through partners to see how that can be delivered. That initiative was led by a task force to which DEL contributed. That is one example of an area-based initiative. LEMIS is another example of an area-based initiative.

1581. Yet another example of where we try to understand the issues is through working closely with DE on a strand of education that used to be called education other than at school but which has recently been renamed alternative education provision. That work examined some of the issues that affected children who are most excluded from mainstream education.

1582. DEL has taken a two-strand approach: the Department supported research by Queen’s University that was sponsored by DEL and DE and published in 2007. Secondly, the careers service has been working closely with education providers to consider what can be done to help children in that position. It is not a particularly area-based approach but, by definition, it tends to operate more in areas where there are higher numbers of children with difficulties.

1583. Mr Shannon: Do you intend to roll out that second example across the Province?

1584. The Chairperson: Presumably it would be rolled out to address areas of need.

1585. Miss Jan Harvey (Department for Employment and Learning): June mentioned the barriers-to-employment strand of the Training for Success programme. That strand has been contracted out to several community-based organisations, some of which, such as Opportunity Youth, specialise in dealing with the disengaged. Much work is being done on the ground to try to re-engage with the disengaged.

1586. Mr Shannon: Is the Prince’s Trust one of those organisations?

1587. Miss Harvey: I will need to come back to you on that, Mr Shannon. I do not recall that the Prince’s Trust is one of the organisations, but I will clarify that for you.

1588. Mrs Ingram: It strikes me that the many initiatives on the ground that are undoubtedly being run by contracted providers in different ways might usefully provide more information on that.

1589. The Chairperson: We would be happy to receive that information.

1590. Mrs Long: I want to tease out a couple of issues that were raised during previous evidence sessions.

1591. First, the disability or long-term illness of either parents or children contributes significantly to family poverty. One reason for that, which was cited to the Committee in a previous evidence session, was the lack of access to properly paid flexible employment for people who either have a child with a disability or long-term healthcare need or who have such needs themselves. Is the Department taking any specific action to try to address the key factor of employability?

1592. I explored the second issue with officials from the Department of Education following their presentation. It relates to how parents and their children get locked into a cycle of underachievement in the education system and how we could break that cycle. DEL has a commitment to lifelong learning — will you outline some of your financial commitments to that, specifically its promotion? What support does DEL provide for existing ventures? What innovative methods do you employ to reach the parents of children who are struggling at school to help them engage with lifelong learning opportunities?

1593. The Chairperson: There are quite a lot of questions there.

1594. Mrs Ingram: I will kick off with the question on disability. As referred to in our written evidence, there is a range of initiatives, activities and structures. I will touch on those, and, if the Committee wants further information, I will be happy to provide it.

1595. The disablement advisory service is part of the Employment Service and works closely with individuals and groups to provide a range of specifically tailored opportunities. We can provide further information on a range of initiatives. In the context of its new social inclusion strategy, which creates an enhanced focus, the Careers Service has a new target to work more closely with people with disabilities by 2010. A range of support measures is in place to encourage people who have a disability to be able to take advantage of further education to improve their skills and employability.

1596. Miss Harvey: Specifically on the issue young people with disabilities, as members will be aware, Training for Success was launched only in September 2007, but has already committed to review its accessibility to young people. The support needs of its participants are also being reviewed in order to facilitate both getting them onto a specific programme and better support for them once they are on a programme. That is a specific and ring fenced piece of work.

1597. DEL has also commissioned the Education and Training Inspectorate to investigate the whole spectrum of its disability provision; to consider what is in place and highlight any gaps. That piece of work is about to get under way.

1598. Mrs Long: Will you give us some information about the Lifelong Learning programme?

1599. Mrs Ingram: You referred to the need to “break the cycle”; this is also very relevant to the Lifelong Learning programme. I mentioned the vocational enhancement programme earlier, and Miss Harvey has talked about considering the whole spectrum. Lifelong Learning is about the enhancement of skills and qualifications throughout life, and the vocational enhancement programme is aimed at the 14 to 19 age group.

1600. We are also aware of the need to target those who are not in education, employment or training. In order to do so, we have the local employment intermediary service (LEMIS); the careers service; the job-ready strand of Training for Success, as mentioned by Miss Harvey; and a proposed new pilot scheme in the further education sector of learner access and engagement. All such schemes will enhance the focus to reach out to those communities to try to bring people back into the process in a way that makes them feel comfortable and supported, which will enable the cycle to be broken.

1601. I also mentioned earlier the family literacy projects of the essential skills strategy, which treats, when possible, the family as a whole and encourages family members to achieve skills and qualifications. We do not have a specific budget line for the Lifelong Learning programme per se.

1602. Mrs Long: I understand that.

1603. Mrs Ingram: We can come back to the Committee with figures that will show how it will be included in our budget.

1604. Mrs Long: That would be helpful. The additional information that you referred to earlier about some of the other projects and so on would also be helpful.

1605. Mr Molloy: If the Assembly is going to serve any purpose, then we need to change the way in which we respond to issues. What targets have been set, particularly for LEMIS? Is DEL currently meeting the targets it has set? What specific measures are being put in place to help people with disabilities get into employment or further education?

1606. The link between childcare and child poverty has been raised a number of times. Is the Department addressing that issue? We have been told that the lack of affordable or available childcare is the biggest barrier to employment, and that there is a shortage of trained carers. Is childcare part of the curriculum or part of any course, or is a training course available?

1607. There is an issue about how we respond to existing needs. It is unacceptable to simply say that need exists but we cannot address it. The Assembly must introduce legislation, or change existing legislation, in order to address the issue of child poverty.

1608. Mrs Ingram: The member has raised several issues. Our PSAs include a wide range of targets — which is the best place to start. Earlier, I mentioned the Careers Service target to meet the needs of people with disabilities by 2010. I also mentioned the targeting of those who are not in education or permanent training. The target was to engage with 30% of such people by March 2008. I do not have the figures available to tell you whether we achieved that target. However, the Careers Service does have targets for those specific categories.

1609. Also, in further education, our target is to increase enrolments from people from the more deprived Northern Ireland regions from 22% in 2005-06 to 24% in 2010-11. There has been a range of initiatives in higher education, and we want to review our strategy to widen participation: by 2011, we want to make progress year on year towards fair access to higher education for disadvantaged groups. The Department tracks figures on participation by socio-economic groups five to seven, and we want to implement a strategy to increase participation from those groups.

1610. As I said earlier, and in the disablement advisory service in particular, there are many different programmes. I can send the Committee specific information on programmes such as the job introduction scheme, Access to Work, and New Deal for disabled people, which are tailored to the requirements of clients. The Department is working with other bodies such as Ulster Supported Employment Ltd to look at different initiatives. I must also mention Pathways to Work, which is an initiative run across Northern Ireland to help people move from incapacity benefit to work. In the first year of that initiative, 10% of those who went to interview gained employment, and there have been some notable success stories.

1611. Mr Rogers: There is an issue about disability on which we must be careful: although people with disabilities often have barriers to employment associated with their disability, they may have a host of other problems that are not associated with their disability. The single biggest barrier to employment for people with a disability may not be their disability. Therefore, there is a tension between ensuring that there is a service to help them gain employment and recognising that they have issues in common with other unemployed people. This finding came out of some of the research that the Department carried out on New Deal. We must concentrate on the barriers that exist for each person, because they will be different in each case.

1612. There is a delicate balance in trying to provide a service for a particular group and recognising that everyone has a suite of different issues: such issues may include addressing essential skills barriers, addressing a dependence on alcohol or drugs or issues regarding a disability or illness. Some people will have two or three of those issues. Therefore, concentrating on programmes for people with a disability does not fully capture the essence of what the Department will do for people with disabilities.

1613. The Chairperson: It would be useful to have more details of the programmes.

1614. Mr Molloy: I also asked about childcare training.

1615. Mrs Ingram: Many of our initiatives involve the provision of childcare allowances where appropriate, which is one way that we help. The Department is also working closely with DE in the early-years context and will look at workforce issues with the relevant sector skills council for the childcare sector and take advice on how we can address those issues that are in our remit through the curriculum and training opportunities. Also, in programmes such as New Deal, there is provision for people to gain qualifications in childcare-relevant areas.

1616. The Chairperson: Thank you. That completes the session. Thank you for your attendance and your willingness to provide additional information, which the Committee will happily receive. Good afternoon.

9 April 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mrs Naomi Long (Deputy Chairperson)
Mrs Dolores Kelly
Mr Barry McElduff
Mr Francie Molloy
Mr Stephen Moutray
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jimmy Spratt
Mr Jim Wells

Witnesses:

Mr Noel Cornick
Mr Fred Frazer
Mr Graham Davis
Mr John Hinds

Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment

Mr Stephen Martin
Dr Chris Morris
Mr Dave Wall

Department for Social Development

Mr Fergal Bradley
Mr Andrew Elliott
Ms Patricia Nicholl
Dr Bernie Stuart

Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety

1617. The Chairperson: Good afternoon. We are pleased to welcome Noel Cornick, Fred Frazer, Graham Davis and John Hinds —officials from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment — who will assist us in our inquiry into child poverty. Gentlemen, I invite you to make a brief opening statement, and then to make yourselves available for questions from Members.

1618. Mr Noel Cornick (Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment): I would not presume to make a brief statement, then cut and run.

1619. The Chairperson: I admire your tie, Mr Cornick.

1620. Mr Cornick: I wore it after due consideration, since I wanted to demonstrate to my colleagues in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment, and to the Committee that, despite a minor setback at Anfield last night, my commitment to the best football team in north London remains undimmed.

1621. The Chairperson: That is something that we have in common, Mr Cornick — I, too, am a Gooner. My tie is black this morning as a result of the events of last night.

1622. Mr Cornick: Officials from what I describe as the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment (DETI) family are grateful for the opportunity to come to the evidence session this afternoon, to try and amplify the written contribution that the Committee received from the Minister Mr Dodds. I shall briefly explain why it takes four of us to provide that amplification when the role of the Department is perhaps not the most prominent in the contribution that the system makes to child poverty.

1623. As the written material makes clear, the primary objective of the Department is to encourage the development of a competitive and successful economy that will produce wealth, stimulate job creation and thus lead to the growth of a more prosperous society, in which everyone — including children and others in the more vulnerable sections of society — can be lifted out of poverty, like the somewhat trite remark that all boats lift on a rising tide.

1624. The Department seeks to do that in several ways, not least through the work of Invest Northern Ireland. Mr Davis is much better qualified that I am to talk about that, and will do so in a few minutes’ time. The Department also seeks to do that through its work on innovation and enterprise, through promoting tourism — which has been identified as a key economic driver — and so on.

1625. Two key aspects of DETI’s wide range of responsibilities make specific contributions to the fight against child poverty. Over many years, my colleagues in the energy division have engaged with the energy industry to help tackle fuel poverty — a subject that I know is of close interest to the Committee. That certainly contributes to child poverty, and Mr Frazer from the Department’s energy division can expand on that later.

1626. In addition to those people who are already in difficulties, DETI is well aware of the psychological and financial problems arising from accumulated debt. For many years, the Department has recognised the need to offer support in that difficult and sensitive area. Mr Hinds from our training standards outfit is well able to explain that to you.

1627. I am here purely as someone who sits at the centre of the web and seeks to co-ordinate contributions to exercises like this. I describe myself as a jack of all trades and a master of none. I suggest, Chairman, that you invite your Committee members to address their questions to my three colleagues, who have a much greater grasp of their specific responsibilities. However, I will happily endeavour to chip in as and when necessary.

1628. The Chairperson: You display a most attractive modesty, Mr Cornick.

1629. Mr Cornick: Thank you.

1630. Mrs Long: In your written submission, you state that Invest NI targets first-time inward investment projects at disadvantaged areas. How will you ensure that any inward investment that results from the forthcoming investment conference will benefit areas of economic disadvantage? Perhaps more importantly, what work is being done with DEL to ensure that people who live in those areas will be in a position to compete for the resulting jobs?

1631. Mr Graham Davis (Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment): First, Invest NI’s general target is that 70% of all inward investment should be directed towards areas of social disadvantage, and our record is approximately 74%.

1632. As for the investment that may or may not flow from the conference, we can take people to locations that we want them to consider. However, in recent years, there have been marked changes in the flows of inward investment. People who now come to Northern Ireland are fully conversant with the opportunities. Using the Internet, they have researched the unemployment levels in different areas, where people with the right levels of skills are to be found, and so forth. Therefore, they often arrive with a particular location in mind.

1633. These days, the flow of foreign direct investment (FDI) focuses mainly on knowledge economies. Usually, that means that investors want to set up in centres with large populations. That creates some difficulties for us, and we take it into account.

1634. At the moment, it is a major challenge for us to ensure the availability of enough people with the right skills for the knowledge economies to make Northern Ireland an attractive place in which to invest. There are skills gaps, and we have been working closely with DEL to try to ensure that, moving forward, universities offer the appropriate skills. For example, there has been considerable investment in the north-west in the past few years. However, the companies who invest there have difficulty finding people with the right skills base. As part of the cross-border business park, we are using some of the available INTERREG money for a skills enhancement programme. We are also installing computer and IT stations in Strabane, Limavady, Derry and in the University of Ulster to increase the number of people who take courses that provide the appropriate skills. We are working to ensure that the skills gap is addressed.

1635. Mr Shannon: I have taken guidance, and will ask only one question at this stage. If I get a chance, I will put another question later, but members were told off about that beforehand, so I must be careful.

1636. Everyone is aware that child poverty is a real problem. One factor that drives child poverty is the vast increase in the cost of fuel over the past few years, and everyone can see that from their household bills. Do you have figures that show how much costs have increased in that time? If so, and, focusing on those in the child poverty trap, how dramatic have those rises been?

1637. Do you have figures to show how fuel costs have increased in the past few months? I have an idea from my own figures. Families who experience extreme difficulties come to see me, and I suspect that more of them fall into the poverty trap each day. If even more people fall into that trap, how can the targets be achieved?

1638. Mr McElduff: If I may ask a supplementary question, I will forgo my other question. What is DETI doing in co-operation with other Departments to address fuel poverty?

1639. Mr Fred Frazer (Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment): The Department has no direct influence on setting the level of energy prices: that is really driven by world wholesale energy costs. We try to create the market conditions that can drive down energy costs through economies of scale, greater competition and supporting different models of asset ownership.

1640. We are all aware of increases in costs driven by the demand for oil and gas in the world markets. It is no secret that oil prices have risen above $100 a barrel. The price is now about 52½ pence a litre, which is a significant increase. In Northern Ireland, gas prices increased for a couple of years, but there was a 14·6% reduction about a year ago. However, there is some press speculation that Northern Ireland prices may increase again, due to the fact that gas prices have increased in Great Britain. It will come as no surprise if prices increase here.

1641. In summary, energy prices have been increasing, and there seems to be no likelihood that they will decrease in the near future.

1642. Mr Shannon: More children will fall into the poverty trap because of rising fuel prices. That is an issue that we must somehow address. When we set targets for the reduction of child poverty, they must be realistic. However, if outside factors hit us, it will be difficult to meet those targets.

1643. Mr Frazer: Increasing energy prices impact most harshly on those on lower incomes. Therefore, more children from families on lower incomes could fall into the poverty trap as energy prices increase. I am not sure how much more I can say about that.

1644. Mr McElduff: Have there been discussions with the utility regulator to ensure that an increase in fuel prices is minimised?

1645. Mr Frazer

1646. The utility regulator has a significant role, as the established energy regulator for electricity, gas and water. It is responsible for determining price controls, and the general operation of the electricity and gas markets in particular. Electricity and gas companies must liaise with the utility regulator regarding any price changes. A price control determination is carried out. The proposed level of price changes is assessed and details on it are requested. The regulator then comes to a decision on whether any price change is reasonable.

1647. Mr Molloy: One area that I represent is Dungannon, which has been identified as having high levels of child poverty. However, when we went to Dungannon to hear evidence, we were told that it has not been identified as an area of economic disadvantage. We have had trouble getting Invest NI and other groups to invest in the Dungannon area. If child poverty is identified in an area, why do DETI and other organisation not step in to try to alleviate that poverty?

1648. Mr Davis: It is not right to say that Invest NI has not invested in the area. We have tried to provide the infrastructure. For example, we are opening that up to allow investment to take place in Granville. After a slow start, it is filling very well. We are actively pursuing the next phase and moving planning on a bit more quickly. Therefore, we invest in local companies in Dungannon.

1649. I think that you refer to foreign direct investment. Child poverty is never an issue for people wishing to invest in Northern Ireland. Their primary interest is to make money. When foreign investors come to Northern Ireland we will certainly take them to Dungannon, if possible. However, the number of available workers in Dungannon is well below the threshold. The unemployment rate there is slightly over 1%, which is well below the Northern Ireland average. The first thing that investors consider is whether there are people available and whether they are skilled. To get significant foreign investment in Dungannon, one would have to rob Peter to pay Paul.

1650. Mr Molloy: It is clear that, although unemployment is low in Dungannon at present, poverty is still rising there. Employment alone does not eradicate poverty. Although it is not your Department’s role in particular, it has been proved in that area that the migrant population in the area increases if work is available, and that also increases the value of the area. It is a matter of linking the services together, and the way in which Departments link together in that situation is important.

1651. Mr Davis: Yes, that is important. Perhaps you were there when we visited the council recently. I suggested that we should consider what we want the Dungannon area to be like in five or 10 years’ time. The types of business that are there are largely based on engineering and food processing. Those businesses are quite vulnerable, because their raw materials are imported, expensive labour is added to that, and the final product is sent out to an increasingly expensive euro market. That creates vulnerabilities for businesses in several areas, including Dungannon.

1652. RPA gives us an opportunity to work on that with councils and other bodies. For example, if we are to have any hope of attracting either inward investment or local, indigenous investment that can be competitive in world markets, we really must consider the types of skills that will be needed in each area. We need really good joined-up Government and joined-up central and local government to make that happen.

1653. Mrs D Kelly: Given that one of the biggest barriers to employment is access to affordable childcare, and that that is a factor in child poverty, how is the Department taking forward or establishing initiatives that might give employers incentives to provide childcare?

1654. Mr Davis: Is that question addressed to me?

1655. Mrs D Kelly: I do not mind who answers it.

1656. Mr Davis: We have worked on childcare in several areas. Social economy is one of our responsibilities, and our social economy programme is aimed at new businesses. To be sustainable in the long term they must be self-sustaining businesses that make a profit, which must be retained in the business, rather than used for personal gain. Several areas have sought help from us under the social economy programme. Childcare facilities were among the viable schemes in some of those areas in the past, so we can do such things.

1657. We have several programmes that impact on children in the longer term. Since the instigation of Invest NI, one of our major thrusts has been in encouraging entrepreneurship and increasing the number of business starts. From our research, we realised very early that our level of business starts was one of the lowest in Europe. It is certainly the second-lowest level of all the UK regions, and it is about half the level of that in the USA. One examination, we realised that education was one of the keys to getting it right. Therefore, we go into to the education system at all levels — from primary school onwards — and we fund organisations, such as Young Enterprise Northern Ireland, which teaches schoolchildren about the benefits and excitement of running a business. We try to instil the ideas that people do not have to be doctors, accountants or lawyers to be successful, and that people who generate wealth are needed.

1658. Last week, I talked to executives in my regional office. We discussed the results for the year just ended, and considered the operating plan and targets for next year. It is not merely a case of achieving 200 projects this year. More important is the impact that 200 projects can have — more jobs, better education standards, and children having a reasonable upbringing. Our people are aware that what we do is vitally important to the quality of life of people in Northern Ireland, and they take that into account when assessing the viability of a project.

1659. Mrs D Kelly: I have been involved in Young Enterprise projects in the past, and I appreciate their value. However, the question asked specifically about what initiative your Department has shown to address the childcare deficit. It cannot simply be left to the social economy. In the past, health trusts have examined the provision of childcare for their staff. I think that Craigavon Area Hospital had considered that at one stage.

1660. What incentives or encouragement does your Department give employers to provide affordable childcare? I am happy for you to come back to us with an answer if you do not have one today.

1661. Mr Davis: We do not directly assist childcare in individual businesses, or have any programmes to assist childcare.

1662. Mr Moutray: What has been the level of uptake of the debt advice service? What plans, if any, are there to retain and expand that service?

1663. Mr John Hinds (Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment): The debt advice service has proved a successful collaboration between the Department and Citizens Advice, with which we have had a contract for the last two years. During the financial year 2006-07, the service dealt with almost 2,000 clients, who had accumulated a combined debt of about £15 million. We have advisers based across Northern Ireland — Belfast, Londonderry, Antrim, Coleraine, Ballymena, Newry, Enniskillen, Omagh and Craigavon.

1664. Last month, Minister Dodds announced a £1·2 million investment over the next three years that will secure the continuation of the debt advice service for that time. We will strive to enhance the coverage and quality of the debt advice service.

1665. The Chairperson: Does the Department have a programme equivalent to the UK’s £139 million financial inclusion programme? What action is the Department taking to ensure financial inclusion?

1666. Mr Hinds: The Department is not involved in financial inclusion — that is a reserved matter, led by HM Treasury on behalf of the entire UK. The Treasury has identified plans and funding for a range of measures to aid financial inclusion across the UK.

1667. The Consumer Council, and my colleagues in OFMDFM, have an interest in financial inclusion because it is the sort of measure that could help to alleviate poverty in Northern Ireland. Financial inclusion seems to be part and parcel of the OFMDFM anti-poverty strategy.

1668. The Chairperson: Mr Cornick, what key change does your Department need to make in its tackling of child poverty?

1669. Mr Cornick: We need to do more of the same. I do not see the likelihood of — or the need for— dramatic policy changes. We must proceed with the sort of work that has been outlined to you this afternoon, particularly by Graham Davis, on behalf of Invest Northern Ireland. We must continue the work of stimulating and growing the economy by encouraging indigenous entrepreneurs and seeking foreign direct investment, so that, as the general level of prosperity in Northern Ireland improves, more and more people are removed from the poverty trap.

1670. As Fred Frazer indicated, local Government cannot do much about factors such as global energy prices or fiscal incentives. Those are outside our gift and lie at the feet of Alastair Darling and his Whitehall colleagues. However, at a broader, strategic level, we shall continue to do everything possible to ensure that Northern Ireland’s expected prosperity arrives more quickly and is more lasting.

1671. Mrs Long: It is disappointing that any Department would think that continuing to do what it is currently doing would make that difference, because, as people have continued to do what they are doing, child poverty has grown. Therefore, radical rethinking is required.

1672. No one has mentioned the fact that, in the effort to encourage renewable energy sources, the environment and renewable energy fund is one mechanism to diversify energy supply that might make us less of a hostage to the international situation. What priority is that being given within the Department, given that it is being cut? How does the Department intend to diversify away from our reliance on particular forms of energy supply? That could contribute to fuel efficiency, the alleviation of fuel poverty and sustainability.

1673. Mr Frazer: You make the point about our reliance on fossil fuels — two out of three of our power stations generate electricity using natural gas, and the other is coal-fired. In conjunction with the Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources in the Republic, we have just completed a major study into how additional renewable energy can be provided and dispatched onto the grid in an effort to replace a proportion of the fossil fuels that are currently used. That study reported that up to 42% of power generation could come from renewable sources, particularly onshore wind, which is the cheapest and most available renewable resource on the island. Further work must be done on that, but we are engaging with the relevant bodies, such as Northern Ireland Electricity, the Utility Regulator in Northern Ireland and the Planning Service. There have also been several initiatives under the environment and renewable energy fund, which was promoted by the Secretary of State.

1674. The Chairperson: Gentlemen, thank you for attending and for your evidence. If we require any additional information, or you wish to impart any to us, we will be happy to arrange that.

1675. The Committee Clerk: We received information from the Consumer Council that financial inclusion is a devolved matter and, therefore, would relate to Barnett. Given that the indication was that there would be Barnett consequentials — perhaps not for DETI, although it is a devolved matter — perhaps officials might clarify whether that is the case.

1676. Mr Cornick: Primary responsibility may lie with Gerry Mulligan and his colleagues in the Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister, but we will do some beavering in order to nail that point, and then come back to you.

1677. The Chairperson: OK. Thank you for attending, and I look forward to someday seeing Mr Cornick in the north end of the Emirates Stadium.

1678. I now welcome Mr Dave Wall, Mr Brian Doherty, Mr Stephen Martin and Dr Chris Morris of the Department for Social Development. Thank you for attending. We are here to consider your evidence as part of our inquiry into child poverty. Proceedings are being recorded by Hansard for publication. After your short opening presentation, members will ask questions.

1679. Mr Dave Wall (Department for Social Development): I am the director of the central policy and co-ordination unit in the Department for Social Development (DSD) and my responsibilities include supporting business areas to work together where there are cross-cutting issues. For the Department, poverty is a major cross-cutting issue. I am accompanied by Mr Brian Doherty of the Social Security Agency; his particular responsibilities are anti-poverty measures and benefit uptake. Mr Stephen Martin is from the housing division; he leads on the fuel poverty strategy. Dr Chris Morris is from our statistics and research branch.

1680. Our Minister is committed to a vigorous programme of work to address poverty. She welcomes the opportunity to engage with the inquiry to explore what further efforts can be made as a Department and across Government to tackle poverty and, specifically, child poverty. The Committee has already received the Minister’s evidence, which sets out her commitment to, and interest in, this most important area. The Programme for Government includes ambitious targets focused on tackling poverty, with an emphasis on child poverty. Much of our work in DSD focuses on tackling poverty and requires that we work closely with colleagues across Government.

1681. Child poverty does not exist in isolation. Much of our work that addresses child poverty is delivered through our efforts in support of families and communities. For individuals and families, the benefits system is central in alleviating the worst impacts of poverty. In recognition of the importance of the benefits system in support of families, our priority — in addition to ensuring the effective, efficient and accurate assessment of claims — is to maximise the take-up of benefits. Our benefit take-up programme is a key initiative, and we will provide the Committee with further details.

1682. However, benefits alone will not lift families out of poverty. It is not only the families that are dependent on benefits that are poor. The benefits system is an essential safety net for many and a stable platform from which to improve their circumstances, but it must not be the only focus of our efforts to lift children out of poverty. In that regard, the Programme for Government’s focus on growing our economy is important. So, too, is ensuring that those families who are currently poor also benefit from that growth. That means using the benefits system to help those who are able to work and to support their efforts to find a job. The employment support allowance, which will be introduced later this year, will help in that regard. DSD also works closely with the Department for Employment and Learning in supporting people back into work.

1683. Shelter is a basic need for all families. The availability of good-quality housing is critical for families, and, as the Minister’s recent statement made clear, the Department is undertaking a range of work in relation to affordable and social housing. Our Minister’s approach to housing is primarily focused on assisting those who are the most vulnerable in the housing market. Increasing the availability of social housing, tackling the issues of affordability, considering measures to protect those who get into difficulties with mortgage repayments and delivering on a commitment to provide 10,000 additional homes over the next five years will assist all of those who are less well off. Work on the empty homes strategy continues, and it is hoped that this too will produce early results in improving availability of affordable and social housing.

1684. In the broader housing arena, the Department has a number of initiatives that bring tangible benefits to families. The fuel poverty strategy and the warm homes scheme seek not only to improve the quality and efficiency of homes, but to make a tangible difference to the cost of heating for people on low incomes or benefits.

1685. In disadvantaged communities, neighbourhood renewal aims to improve the quality of life and the life chances of people in the poorest communities by tackling inequalities on core issues such as health, education, employability and skills, crime, and community safety. Neighbourhood partnerships have been established in 36 neighbourhood renewal areas, where 280,000 people live and have an investment fund of approximately £60 million that will be spent over three years to supplement existing mainstream Government funding.

1686. The voluntary and community sector is often best placed to respond effectively and quickly to the requirements of disadvantaged groups. Although individual Departments, according to their specific remits, are responsible for addressing the requirements of communities of interest such as those with disabilities, young people and older people, our Department accepts its lead role in the sector. The Department is focused on the changing demands of the voluntary and community sector to tackle disadvantage. For example, we are addressing structural deficiencies through initiatives such as the advice strategy, the modernisation fund and the community investment fund. The latter two initiatives deliver £23 million.

1687. There are areas where the Department has greater or lesser influence. For example, parity arrangements with Westminster for benefit claimants and taxation set limits that the Department must recognise, and the influence of the market on fuel and house prices presents serious challenges.

1688. In conclusion, the work of the Department is at the centre of the Government’s efforts to tackle poverty through the Programme for Government, which is — correctly — very ambitious. Notwithstanding the limits that the Department works within, it wants to work closely across Government and with communities to support the vulnerable and get people back to work in a growing economy.

1689. Mr Molloy: How can the success of the neighbourhood renewal scheme be measured? I declare an interest as the chair of a neighbourhood renewal partnership. Many areas have not benefited from neighbourhood renewal. In your submission, you say that neighbourhood renewal areas have a higher proportion of children, and a higher proportion of child poverty, than other areas. In my own area, Coalisland, two Travellers’ sites were excluded from the neighbourhood renewal area, which was alarming. I wondered where the person who designed that had lived, because he or she did not seem to have looked at the site. So, a small area was designated, yet two Travellers’ sites adjacent to it on the other side of the road were excluded. How are child poverty and the success of neighbourhood renewal schemes measured?

1690. The other issue that I want to touch on is fuel provision policy. It is strange that, in rural areas, people are forced to replace their solid-fuel fires and back boilers with oil heating systems. Therefore, people are dependent on oil; it is their only source of heat. My brother, who works in the oil business, says that the number of people who are buying oil for the weekend in five-gallon drums is alarming, because it means that people are sitting cold for the rest of the week. That situation is caused by the policy of removing the solid-fuel fireplaces and making people completely reliant on oil. That is a flawed policy, because it is not working in ordinary houses.

1691. Mr Wall: As you are aware, there are four targets for neighbourhood renewal areas — health, life expectancy, educational attainment and the attraction of inward investment. Those targets have been established; targets in relation to crime, fear of crime, skills and employability levels are still under development.

1692. I want to say a bit more, on behalf of the Minister, about the difficulties in establishing the neighbourhood renewal strategy. Thirty-six neighbourhood partnerships are now in place. They involve a different way of doing business than was previously the case for development officers in our Department. As the Committee will be aware, they involve a considerable change in the way that organisations funded through our Department deliver services to neighbourhood renewal areas. We have to support the organisations that specifically focus on services to neighbourhood renewal areas. That will involve considerable change in the funding strategy for the voluntary and community sector, and that is quite a difficult process to go through.

1693. The Minister has made it clear that there will be three categories of organisations and, therefore, three different approaches to future funding. We will move towards providing three-year contracts for organisations that are delivering services specifically for neighbourhood renewal areas. Organisations that are not delivering services, and are therefore not relevant for neighbourhood renewal areas, will be given a short period of five months — until August of this year — to explore where they may seek alternative funding. The third category includes organisations that are delivering services but are not specifically the responsibility of the Department — rather, they are the responsibility of other Departments. Those organisations will be funded for a year, which will enable the Department, through the neighbourhood partnership and with other Departments, to negotiate how those services may be continued.

1694. The real benefits of neighbourhood renewal, in relation to the four targets, will only be seen after a minimum of three years. Mortality rates and levels of employability do not turn around within a year; it will take longer to identify whether real change has occurred.

1695. Mr Molloy: You seem to have a fixed map. Surely, whenever flaws are pointed out, the Department should have the flexibility to be able to acknowledge that it made a mistake? In relation to the example that I mentioned, where two Travellers’ sites are on the bounds of it but not included in it, the Department should have the flexibility to include those, because poverty is rampant in those two particular sites.

1696. Mr Wall: I am not familiar with the particular local issues, but we will certainly come back to you about them. My understanding is that the areas have recently been redesigned because of an update of the Noble deprivation information. I believe that there are more winners, so to speak, or more satisfaction now with the parameters of the area than there was with the first attempt at it. However, given that measuring levels of deprivation is always going to be about bringing quantities of data together, it is never going to absolutely satisfy everybody.

1697. Dr Chris Morris (Department for Social Development): The Noble index of multiple deprivation was used as a major guide for determining which areas were included in the neighbourhood renewal areas. However, after the initial determination was made based on census returns and data largely related to the census, there was then a process of consultation with people in the areas. I am aware that the people involved in drawing the boundaries were working at street level, so I am surprised that it was not mentioned at the time, but, obviously, if it was —

1698. Mr Molloy: It was.

1699. Mr Wall: We will look specifically at the two areas that you mentioned and get back to you.

1700. Mr Stephen Martin (Department for Social Development): A regards your point about fuel poverty, as far as I am aware, the Housing Executive strategy for heating replacement is that gas is installed where it is available. Gas is not yet available in some rural areas, so oil is the only alternative. I am not quite sure what the Housing Executive does about solid fuel, but I am responsible for the warm homes scheme, which does something similar in private homes. Under the warm homes scheme, we do remove back boilers, but the fireplaces are still serviceable and can be used for an open fire. I can raise your point with colleagues in the Housing Executive, but I know that the warm homes scheme leaves a serviceable fireplace.

1701. It might be useful to bring one other matter to your attention. Oil is the only real alternative in rural areas, so we have just initiated a £500,000 programme, jointly funded by the Department for Social Development and Northern Ireland Electricity, to test renewable technologies and determine how to deal with hard to treat homes in rural areas. We are aware of the limitations on fuel types. We want to obtain some good data on whether renewable technologies are a long-term solution to fuel poverty, particularly in rural areas. We hope to have some cost-benefit information in about 12 to 18 months to allow us to make a decision on how to proceed.

1702. Mrs Long: I want to ask two questions, although the Chairperson has advised me not to. First, what action is the Department taking to address the gap between housing benefit levels and private rents? There is an issue around the regulation of the private sector, because of the standard of housing that people are subjected to in the private-rental market.

1703. Secondly, I want to ask about neighbourhood renewal and targeting social need. You mentioned that not all poverty relates to specific areas and that there are people outside those areas. There are small pockets in my constituency, and others, where there is severe deprivation. What is the Department doing to target small groups of people or individuals who have fallen into the poverty trap, but are not identified as being a part of those larger areas of deprivation?

1704. Mr Martin: On the question of housing benefit and the private-rented sector, the local housing allowance, which was introduced recently, is a new element of housing benefit. The Assembly expressed particular concern about the local housing allowance and the potential gap between the amount paid and the rent, and the Minister has given a commitment to the Social Development Committee that she will introduce the new allowance on a pilot basis and that there will be no losers because of it. Quarterly reviews will be submitted to the Committee for Social Development during the year of the pilot scheme. Providing that that Committee is content, the Minister will then bring the matter back to the House to obtain the Assembly’s permission to extend the scheme further. She has given a no-detriment commitment on that issue.

1705. On the wider issue of the regulation of the private-rented sector, the Minister has tasked us with examining the models in Scotland and the Republic of Ireland, and I have been doing that work myself. We are about to present an initial report to the Minister that outlines our findings about the regulation systems in those jurisdictions. The Minister will then make her decisions on the way forward.

1706. The Chairperson: Thank you —

1707. Mr Wall: Shall I answer the second question —

1708. Mrs Long: That is the problem with asking two questions.

1709. The Chairperson: I can only ever remember one.

1710. Mr Wall: There are a number of deprivation initiatives. The areas at risk programme and the local community fund are both targeted on the 10% to 20% level of deprivation, and provide wider coverage, albeit on a lower level, than the neighbourhood renewal scheme. The voluntary and community sector work that we support is clearly focused on communities of interest rather than geographical communities. We expect the strategy, with the support of the voluntary sector, to have an impact on the kind of pockets that Mrs Long mentioned.

1711. There are two specific initiatives that make a contribution in that regard. The first is the support given to the women’s centres, and the childcare fund in particular. We support 13 women’s centres across Northern Ireland, five of which are in neighbourhood renewal areas. We are providing £850,000 this year for childcare through those centres. We will also begin a new advice-sector strategy called Opening Doors, and we will be consulting on that strategy later this year. Citizens Advice is one of the best organisations at identifying where problems exist, through its social policy work. We hope that the advice-sector organisations, through a more co-ordinated advice strategy, will be able to identify individuals in difficulty, but also to help us to identify where those individuals live and what strategies should be developed to deal with those problems in future.

1712. Mr McElduff: What is the Department doing to maximise the uptake of benefit entitlement? Is the Social Security Agency willing to share information with education and library boards to allow the maximum uptake of free school meals? During previous evidence sessions, some sort of blockage to the uptake of free school meals has been identified. There may be good reasons for that; however, there is a desire for that information to be available at source, which would help to maximise the uptake of free school meals.

1713. Mr Brian Doherty (Department for Social Development): As Mr Wall said earlier, the issue of benefit uptake, specifically regarding child poverty, has to be addressed by the Social Security Agency (SSA) through targeting families in poverty rather than children, as children do not fall within our customer base — only those over 16 years of age are eligible for benefits.

1714. Over the past three years we have delivered a number of targeted campaigns to try to support those who are most in need — the most vulnerable groups. In 2007-08, a specific exercise was conducted to, as far as is possible, address child-poverty issues. That involves contacting — through the information and advice sector — families that include more than three children or that include a child with a disability to ensure that they are claiming their full benefit entitlement.

1715. We have been somewhat encouraged by the response rate. Early indications are that the amount of benefits that should be in payment but are not is low, which is encouraging because it means that people are getting their full entitlement to benefit. Although the level of extra benefit uptake resulting from that exercise is low, we intend to try to run a similar exercise this year. However, that will be subject to approval from the Minister.

1716. The second part of your question was about free school meals. All the staff in our front-line offices, particularly in the jobs and benefits and social security offices, are responsible for giving information and advice about benefit-related matters. That also extends to other non-SSA-related matters, such as free school meals and support with school uniforms.

1717. Unfortunately, the sharing of information with the education boards is restricted by data-sharing legislation. Current legislation does not allow us to directly share our information with any other Government body. We are working with the Department of Finance and Personnel to try to create a legislative window that would enable us to share information.

1718. The Committee can be assured that anyone in receipt of benefits is advised of the potential entitlement to free school meals. The education boards liaise with us to verify that an individual is in receipt of income support or some other benefit. Therefore, good close working relationships do exist, but we recognise that more could be done if the legislation on data-sharing practices was changed.

1719. Mrs D Kelly: During the course of this inquiry, we have heard that a number of families are living in severe poverty. Although benefit uptake campaigns are conducted, many people say to me that the Department holds the information and that surely it is simply a matter of the Department asking whether people’s circumstances have changed in order to determine what benefits they are entitled to. That sounds simplistic, but sometimes the simplest suggestions provide the solutions.

1720. There is also an issue about child tax credit. I am sure that many MLAs — let alone members of the public — have had difficulties in getting through to those offices. It has been a horrendous experience for many. Does the Department have any plans to offer a one-stop-shop type of service so that people can go and talk to someone in a local office, get their queries answered quickly and have the relevant telephone calls made for them?

1721. My final question is about neighbourhood renewal. I want to know what evaluations are conducted, and how the Department ensures that the money that is meant for the communities is actually going to the communities. There are many bona fide people in the community and voluntary sector, but there have been accusations that in certain areas former paramilitaries without any skills or experience are being employed through that fund.

1722. Mr B Doherty: Brave person that I am, I will address the issue of tax credit, if that is OK. [Laughter.]

1723. The Chairperson: You are very wise.

1724. Mr B Doherty: I hope that the member is aware that tax credit is administered by HM Revenue and Customs. We have a close working relationship with that organisation —

1725. Mrs D Kelly: Perhaps you could tell them to answer their phones.

1726. Mr B Doherty: When customers come in to our local offices, we can conduct what are called better-off calculations, which enable customers to go well-armed with information and to know what their potential entitlement is.

1727. Furthermore, HMRC have ongoing initiatives to ensure that individuals and families can maximise their income through the benefits system or tax credits. We work locally with HMRC, and nationally in GB, to ensure that we are well linked in to those developments.

1728. We have established partnership agreements with HMRC on the allocation of National Insurance numbers, child benefit and tax credit; and we can signpost any individual who comes in to any of our offices, or calls any of our helplines, or give them sufficient information to make a claim for a tax credit.

1729. The Chairperson: Who wants to deal with that one?

1730. Mr Wall: As I have outlined, neighbourhood renewal is a very different animal to the way in which money was distributed in the past through regeneration and tackling disadvantage. Each neighbourhood renewal area has action plans. Emerging from those, Departments will have service delivery requirements. We then contract people to deliver on those services. That, therefore, will be measurable as people do, or do not, deliver the services required.

1731. Concerning the individuals employed by those organisations, you may be aware that, in the context of equality legislation, we can not use that to discriminate on what services we may or may not fund. Part of your question related to the changing nature of the voluntary and community sectors. The shift towards a greater role in service delivery and, perhaps, away from what was called the democratic deficit — now that we have an Assembly, an Executive, and a rigorous democratic process — will have a significant impact on the voluntary and community sectors, on the work that they do and, I hope, in the way that we measure the services that they deliver.

1732. The Chairperson: Thank you very much. Unusually, Mr Shannon is the last questioner in this session.

1733. Mr Shannon: You may have changed the order. I see that other people have taken advantage of that, so I have a couple of questions. [Laughter.] I am keen to know how the large gap between housing benefit and private rentals will be addressed. I put a question to the Minister for Social Development; and although her responses are normally very good, she did not give a particularly positive response to that question. Therefore, I am keen to hear from officials can be done to address that chasm, which widens as housing benefits stop and rents continue to rise.

1734. My second question concerns the review of incapacity benefit. The Government has indicated that its policy is to get at least some of those people on incapacity benefit back into work. Dave Wall spoke earlier about a “leading role”. That reminds me of a war film when they are down to four soldiers, and the sergeant major says: “Get down to the first aid camp and see who is able-bodied. The boy who has a bandage over his eye, stick him up against that wall; and the boy who has a broken leg, prop him against the wall because he can still fight.” That is a facetious comment; however, I wonder how on earth some of those people are going to go back to work? The people on housing benefit who come in to my office are clearly not able to work. I wonder how that Government policy can be pursued. Central Government policy seems to have one way of approaching that issue; the Assembly, quite clearly, has a different way because it is trying to address the issue of child poverty. Which of those masters are you going to serve — central Government or the Assembly?

1735. The Chairperson: The question that I am going to ask you, Mr Shannon, is:

“What was the name of that film?”

1736. Mr Martin: Perhaps I may address the issue of housing benefit. As I mentioned earlier, the Minister has given an undertaking to the Committee for Social Development on the local housing allowance so that there will be no detriment. There will be a one-year pilot period, and no one will be worse off as a result of the introduction of that scheme, which will be closely monitored. The precise operation of the housing-benefit scheme is undertaken by the Housing Executive and Land and Property Services. I understand from the Housing Executive that there is a new approach to calculating the local reference rent, and housing benefit levels are based on that. Those, I understand, are going to be set slightly more generously, which will narrow the gap and result in fewer people on housing benefit having to make up a shortfall.

1737. There are issues about the supply of housing, and the Minister has made clear her commitment and her desire to supply more social and affordable housing, which will impact on the number of people who have to access the private-rented sector. Members have been particularly concerned about the local housing allowance, and the Minister has decided that the new system should be implemented in the Housing Executive to ensure that no one suffers detriment.

1738. Mr Shannon: People have told me that the issue is not being addressed. Those who live in private, rented accommodation are getting even further into debt, and that is what I try to address. Perhaps you could come back to the Committee with a more substantial plan, because we must get to the nitty-gritty. I do not mean to be critical, but the Minister’s answers to my questions were not particularly positive.

1739. I would also like an answer to my other question.

1740. Mr Wall: First, as a follow-on to the previous answer, the first 12 months of the implementation of local housing allowance will be progressed on a pilot programme basis. Concerns have been raised in GB about the impact on rural communities and on families with children, but there is no evidence to suggest that that is the case here. Nevertheless, the Minister said that she wanted to pilot the introduction to see if there are specific issues and concerns in Northern Ireland that will be negatively impacted upon by the new programmes. There is, therefore, a pilot programme, and we should receive results from that.

1741. Mr Doherty will answer the specific issues relating to incapacity benefit, but it is important to make the distinction that the Department’s policy is not merely about getting people back into work; it is about giving people the opportunity to go to work.

1742. Mention was made of the relationship between central Government and the Assembly. I mentioned the difficulties with regard to parity. As you will be aware, the benefits paid to Northern Ireland come from Westminster, so they are not part of the block. However, there are ways in which the block can be used by the Assembly and the Executive to tackle poverty and to address issues of disadvantage, but they come at a cost. That is the tension. Our mechanisms for travel for the elderly, for example, are different to those in the rest of the UK. They are not as generous as those in some parts of the UK, but they are different. Those are some of the difficult questions that you, as elected representatives, will have to tackle.

1743. Mr Shannon: The public needs to know — and elected representatives would like to be assured — that there will not be a purge upon those who are on incapacity benefit. Many people believe that that will be the case. The Prime Minister — who masqueraded as a champion for those people when he was Chancellor — has changed his mind. I suspect that that is where part of the problem lies. The Committee would like an assurance from the Department that there will not be a purge upon those on incapacity benefit.

1744. Mr Wall: I can give that assurance, and I am sure that the Minister will want to do the same.

1745. Mr B Doherty: I do not wish to contradict a colleague, but I am not sure whether we can give that assurance. As David said, we operate on a basis of parity. It is planned that the employment and support allowance will commence in October 2008, at which stage only new customers to the employment and support allowance will fall into it rather than to incapacity benefit. There are no immediate plans to visit people who receive incapacity benefit now, but Westminster will determine what happens in the future.

1746. Mr Shannon: I am sure that you do periodic checks on people who are on incapacity benefit; therefore you can bring people into it.

1747. Mr B Doherty: We can bring people into it, but it is important to understand that we can only abide by what is decided by the Department for Work and Pensions or ministerial colleagues in GB with regard to parity. We must follow that. Perhaps it is in the gift of the Assembly and the Executive to look at whether they can go outside of that. I do not want to give an assurance that anybody who is on incapacity benefit will not be subject, potentially, to a personal assessment to encourage them, or to give them the necessary support, to get into work — which they may well want to do.

1748. Mr Wall: My comment did not contradict what Mr Doherty said. It related more to the reference to the notion that the Department would run a personal campaign against people who are on benefits; the Department would not do that.

1749. The Chairperson: I understand that. We must move quickly, or time will beat us.

1750. What are the Department’s fuel poverty targets, and how has the Department performed against those targets in the past three years? What are the key plans of the Department’s strategy to minimise rising fuel costs for low income families?

1751. Mr Martin: Over the past three years, the Department has exceeded its targets to help 10,000 households a year that are in fuel poverty. Last year, under the warm homes scheme, 11,250 people were helped, and another 5,500 were helped by the Housing Executive. Those targets have been exceeded year-on-year. The fuel poverty strategy, which was published in 2004, has wider-ranging targets for the eradication of fuel poverty by 2016. Rising fuel prices mean that it will be difficult and challenging to meet those targets.

1752. Supply of fuel is not an issue for the Department for Social Development; it is an issue for the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment. However, DSD is committed to supporting the extension of the gas pipeline. The business case for doing that is built, at least in part, on the Housing Executive transferring supply in some of its estates in towns outside Belfast to gas. That has been of great benefit.

1753. In my answer to Mr Molloy, I said that the Department is trialling renewable technologies. We have already put over 2,000 renewable energy installations into Housing Executive properties. We will carry out a further pilot with Northern Ireland Electricity, which will cost £500,000, for hard-to-treat homes in rural areas to see if that is a viable alternative source. If the cost-benefit analysis works through, we will look to roll that out in future years.

1754. The Chairperson: What is the PSA target?

1755. Mr Martin: The PSA target is to assist 9,000 homes. That recognises that a lot of the homes that remain to be assisted are harder to treat. Homes without cavity walls, for instance, require more expensive treatment. Rather than exceed the target to help 10,000 households, we will perhaps do fewer interventions, but those interventions will be more complete.

1756. The Chairperson: Thank you for your presentation and your input. The Committee may seek clarity on some issues. If you want to provide us with any additional information on any of the queries that have been raised, we will be happy to receive that.

1757. I welcome Andrew Elliott, Fergal Bradley, Patricia Nicholl and Bernie Stuart. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. The Committee will hear your short presentation on its inquiry into child poverty, after which members will ask questions. The session should last no longer than 30 minutes. Do you wish to make a short opening statement or are you happy to take questions immediately?

1758. Mr Andrew Elliott (Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety): I will make an introductory statement. As a Department, we are grateful to have the opportunity to provide evidence. This important inquiry will make a huge difference to the Department’s capacity to achieve its strategic objectives on the health and well-being of the population and we look forward to the report.

1759. The Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety performs a vital role in supporting children and working with other Departments and organisations, both in and outside the public sector, to improve the lives and well-being of children in Northern Ireland.

1760. The four officials present represent a range of policy areas in the Department. It is important that I make that point, because the Department’s work on children straddles a wide range of policy areas. I am the director of population health and am responsible for policies that improve the population’s health and well-being; rather than policies that treat the sick, which are dealt with elsewhere in the Department.

1761. Many of the Committee’s concerns will pertain to services. Therefore, I introduce Dr Bernie Stuart who is the director of the mental-health and disability policy — an area that covers the departmental implementation of the Bamford Review. Fergal Bradley is responsible for policies that relate specifically to child protection, looked-after children, care leavers and adoption. Patricia Nicholl is from the office of social services and, among other things, provides professional advice for family-support policy. I hope that, between the four of us, we can answer at least some of your questions.

1762. The Chairperson: All, we hope.

1763. Mr Shannon: Last week, I was involved with the Prince’s Trust scheme that targets disadvantaged young people. How does the Department support those children during the move from care to independent living? Are there any mechanisms to prevent such young people becoming trapped in a cycle of poverty? Boys and girls I spoke to fit in to that category, and the Department for Employment and Learning gives some assistance. Those children need an opportunity to find their niche in life. What will the Department do to help?

1764. Mr Fergal Bradley (Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety): Several things are in hand for children who need care. First, the Department operates a regional project, with a project officer who brings together all the trusts working on that area. We are involved with the Housing Executive in jointly commissioning appropriate accommodation for young people who leave care.

1765. Secondly, we have a regional scheme that is unique in the United Kingdom, in which we enable young people leaving care to continue living with foster carers until they are 21 years old. Reliable research shows that the outcome, across a range of indicators, is much better for young people who continue to live in a family until a much older age and into early adulthood. Around one third of our care leavers, aged between 18 and 21, live with their former foster carers, and are financially supported by the our health and social care trusts under this initiative. That initiative has been picked up in England and is being piloted in several local authorities.

1766. We have personal advisers in place for all young people as they prepare to leave care, and we have in place with the Department for Employment and Learning a joint protocol to ensure that all young people in care have access to careers advice at an appropriate age.

1767. Several initiatives focus on improving educational outcomes for young people leaving care. At the moment, only around 11% to 12% of our care leavers achieve five or more GCSEs at grades A to C by the time they reach 19 years of age, and we want to improve that significantly.

1768. The Department’s Fostering Achievement project allows foster carers direct access to funds to pay for a range of support, including tutoring for numeracy and literacy, and tutoring for young people taking GCSEs. Around 30 young people in the care system are learning to drive as part of that scheme. Last year, a young person who wanted to be an airline pilot was able to use that scheme to begin lessons towards gaining a solo licence. We try, as parents, to provide our young people with access to a range of services.

1769. Last year, under the Fostering Achievement project, 500 computers were provided to foster homes. Young people in education not only use computers for IT, but for almost every other subject. Furthermore, we recently launched an initiative whereby foster carers can have access to a helpline staffed by a teacher, who can advise foster carers on how to help foster children with homework. An information pack on CD and DVD-ROM is also available to provide foster carers with advice on how to help children who have difficulties with numeracy and literacy.

1770. I could go on. We are introducing a range of measures, one of which is to have dedicated workers in each health and social care trust who focus on getting young people aged 16 and over, who are in care or who are care leavers, into full-time and part-time employment. That is a brief outline of what we are doing.

1771. Mr Shannon: That is a comprehensive reply — and without referring to notes. I am interested in the relationship between the Department for Social Development and the Department for Employment and Learning, as that is important.

1772. People I spoke to last week, whom I have known for some years, are those who do not achieve GCSEs. After listening to what they said, and knowing where they live, I fear that they will fall into a poverty cycle, if they are not careful. I appreciate your response; it was excellent. We need to hype up those people.

1773. Mr Spratt: The number of young people with special needs in transition from primary school to secondary school in the South Eastern Health and Social Care Trust is high. Some of those young people have health problems and find it difficult to get places in day-care centres. Has the Department any intention to increase the number of day-care places where young people can continue with their learning and still be provided with substantial medical care?

1774. A good scheme is operating in the Stricklands Bay area of North Down where accommodation for independent living has been built alongside what used to be the Northern Ireland Institute for the Disabled. The Department for Health, Social Services and Public Safety and other Departments have been involved in that. However, I am not sure whether that has been rolled out to other parts of Northern Ireland.

1775. There are many people with special needs. This week the Assembly debated continuing education for young people with disabilities, and looked at ways of getting them into some sort of employment. Some young people have moved into fairly good jobs as a result of fairly intense care.

1776. Dr Bernie Stuart (Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety): We hope to address the issue of transitions during the comprehensive spending review. We have already put £900,000 of current funding towards 150 purposeful places, and those will continue. The aim is to move away from the traditional image of day care, as simply somewhere for people to go, to something more meaningful. Therefore, we aim to increase those places.

1777. Several working groups involving the Department of Education and the Department of Health have examined the needs of children during all of the transitions that they experience, such as from primary school to secondary school and from secondary school to adulthood. That work has identified several problems. We hope to spend other money on respite care, again focusing that on meaningful places that will, perhaps, allow people to do part-time work or engage in some kind of employment, rather than simply be taken away from their families.

1778. Mr Spratt: So there is liaison with, for example, DEL?

1779. Dr Stuart: As part of our response to the Bamford Review on the learning-disability side, we liaise with almost all of the other Government Departments.

1780. Mr Spratt: Many families fall into poverty as a result of trying to provide care.

1781. Dr Stuart: Yes. Traditionally, there has not been enough respite provision. The demand for respite has not been fully quantified because not enough of it is available. Therefore, the Department has focused on respite in its bidding during the CSR process. We hope not only to improve respite care, but to make it meaningful by allowing patients, and their carers, to work. Perhaps, it will enable people to find some kind of employment.

1782. The Chairperson: Are there any targets?

1783. Dr Stuart: The targets relate to the number of respite places. The aim is to provide 200. That figure refers to the number of respite-care packages, not the number of people. During the coming period, we anticipate that there will be four people to a package. The duration of a package could be a couple of weeks or an overnight stay. We do not want a one-size-fits-all model. We hope to vary that.

1784. Mrs D Kelly: Following up on that, there is a difficulty with age bands, such as when young people have to go into care with older people. Have you designed packages or facilities that will meet the needs of the youth in particular?

1785. Dr Stuart: I mentioned that packages have been designed for children who are progressing into adulthood. Do you mean that children who are leaving school should not be placed in care with the older community?

1786. Mrs D Kelly: Packages should be tailor-made.

1787. Dr Stuart: You are right. Work is being done to develop such packages.

1788. Mrs D Kelly: But it is not at that stage yet?

1789. Dr Stuart: No, it is not there yet. As you said earlier, there have been examples of good practice. However, there have been examples of when people do not have the access that they require. We aim to resolve that.

1790. Mrs Kelly: There is a huge gap.

1791. The Chairperson: It is your turn to ask a question now, Mrs Kelly. Perhaps, you have had your turn.

1792. Mrs D Kelly: Indeed, I have not. As a former occupational therapist and day-care manager in social services, I have a vested interest in the matter — not a pecuniary interest, I hasten to add, but a professional one. I am keen to examine the effect of the children and young people’s Executive programme fund, which closed on 31 March, and the security of Sure Start provision in the future. What impact has the fund had and what guarantees are there, now that it has closed?

1793. Mr F Bradley: Is that question directed to me or to Patricia?

1794. Mrs D Kelly: Patricia has not volunteered to answer it.

1795. The Chairperson: This is the point at which I keen. [Laughter.]

1796. Mrs D Kelly: It must not be good news, Chairman.

1797. Ms Patricia Nicholl (Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety): I am just anxious not to speak out of turn because most of the responsibility for that matter lies with the Department of Education.

1798. Mr F Bradley: Responsibility for Sure Start actually transferred to the Department of Education in 2007. Clearly, there is a linkage for us as regards our interest in Sure Start. We want to see it progress, survive and continue to provide the service that it offers at present. However, the matter sits primarily with the Department of Education.

1799. Mrs D Kelly: Therefore, it has fallen between two stools.

1800. The Chairperson: I doubt if you will get an answer to that.

1801. Mrs D Kelly: One lives in hope. The answer to the previous question was brief. With regard to the targets that have been set for investment in health and for dealing with health inequalities, I believe that the investing for health partnerships have been a success story.

1802. Mr A Elliott: Targets have been set under the latest public service agreement to reduce the differential between people living in the 20% poorest areas in Northern Ireland and the remainder of the population. They are extremely challenging.

1803. One problem in this area is that, no matter how well we might do with respect to the poorer part of the population, in improving their health and well-being, the rest of the population tends to race ahead of them. The rest of the population have quicker access to the media, and to information about healthy eating, not smoking, the importance of controlling alcohol intake and so on. That target is a constant challenge to the Department, but we have invested a great deal of work in that area. We continue to invest in partnership with other Departments, for example in relation to neighbourhood renewal and other areas of work. The Committee has received evidence from the Belfast Health Action Zone; that sort of initiative, and that kind of partnership, will be extremely important to the new public health agency which the Minister has recently proposed.

1804. We will want local authorities, too, to play an important role in progressing health and well-being. There is a great emphasis on well-being: people’s mental well-being is understood to be a significant contributor to the relationship between poverty and health. A great deal of important work is ongoing on at the moment in Scotland. One of the opportunities that we have, as a result of the Bamford Review, is to put a great deal more resource into helping people through talking therapies and other ways of lifting their sense of mental well-being in ways that allow them to be healthier and, potentially, more successful in life.

1805. Mrs Long: During the course of the inquiry, many people have raised the issue of affordable childcare. It is a major factor in being able to access the workplace and lift families out of poverty. What actions has the Department taken to try to shorten the period which it takes to register childminders, once they have applied to become registered childminders? What level of funding and priority is given to that issue in the Department?

1806. With respect to childcare for children of school age, what role does the Department of Health have? We have asked this question of the Department of Education, and it responded that it had no responsibility for that area, but did not tell us which Department did. Therefore, we are now asking other Departments whether it falls within their remit.

1807. Mr F Bradley: I can deal with the first part of that; I am not sure that I can deal with the second.

1808. Although responsibility for early-years childminding transferred to the Department of Education, we remain responsible for the regulation and inspection of childminders. However, because of the split, the review of the registration of childminding falls within the policy remit of the Department of Education. However, steps are being taken to sort that out. Since September 2007, the Department of Education has been working with early-years teams in each trust to review their policies and procedures. The working groups comprise members of the early-years teams of each trust. Procedures for registration and inspection of childminders are now at the review stage.

1809. Following recent publicity, Paul Martin, the chief inspector of the Social Services Inspectorate, wrote to all four boards and is setting up an urgent meeting to review what is happening. Earlier this week, he met Bridget Nodder of the Northern Ireland Childminding Association.

1810. In addition, a joint Education and Training Inspectorate/Department of Health workshop is taking place later this week to consider what is happening in relation to regulation and inspection of early-years childminders. The current 0-6 early-years strategy, which is being developed by the Department of Education, will include recommendations on regulation and inspection and on the future development of the early-years workforce. We expect to see something in that about how this will move forward.

1811. Ms Nicholl: Under the legislation, responsibility for early-years and day care is for children aged from 0-12. In relation to the development of the new strategy, when it comes to consultation across Departments we will be seeking information on those aspects. However, because it is a Department of Education responsibility, to date, I have had no involvement in the development of the strategy.

1812. Mrs Long: The Department of Education does not seem to be aware of that. It might be worth bringing to the attention of that Department.

1813. The Chairperson: I think so.

1814. Mr Molloy: Has the Department actually thought about the eradication of child poverty when formulating its policies? Is child poverty a central theme, or simply a consequential issue? I come from Dungannon, where high levels of child poverty have been identified, yet a hospital has been closed and services have been transferred from the area. I cannot help but wonder about the Department’s thinking; has it not linked the two issues?

1815. There is also the matter of the costs that families face. How are families who do not have a car supposed to travel to hospital, particularly on a Saturday or Sunday when there is no public transport? Where do the policies link up to tackle that problem? What measures are in place to address the needs of rural communities, and how they are affected by child poverty?

1816. Mr A Elliott: The Investing for Health strategy is one of the Department’s most important strategies in tackling poverty in general, and child poverty in particular. It was designed to promote working with communities and a whole range of partners to lift and improve the well-being of the population. As regards the overall measure of life expectancy, the Department has been quite successful — by and large, people are living longer and healthier lives than they did 20 years ago. That is one of the success stories. Some of the improvements in Northern Ireland have been quite significant, even in comparison with other parts of the UK, albeit that the absolute levels of life expectancy are still lower.

1817. The relationship between poverty and health is very powerful. The evidence suggests that it is not simply a matter of someone being ill and therefore finding it more difficult to get to work. In fact, the understanding of the causal relationship is that poverty causes poor health. I am not talking about the kinds of circumstances that are to be found in very poor parts of the globe where poverty has a very direct impact on health; for example, where children suffer from malnutrition or families are unable to fund the basis necessities of life. The problem here is much more subtle than that. The Department is putting a lot of work into addressing the link between poverty and people’s well-being, and there are many partnerships in the community that are tackling those issues.

1818. I know from work that I have carried out in other parts of the Department that there are policies in place to provide assistance to people who require transport to health and social care facilities. Obviously the decision to close hospitals involves a quite different set of criteria — there are issues about the quality of services and so on and where services should be sited. Others in the Department are better placed to speak on those matters than I am.

1819. Mr Molloy: The Department says that it is looking at areas that have high levels of poverty and deprivation. I would have thought that the services should be focused on those areas, rather than being removed from them. That removal of services means that transport becomes an issue.

1820. I want to broaden this issue a little to consider the strong link between mental health and poverty, which you mentioned earlier. What impact has the mental-health promotion strategy had on improving well-being? Is account taken of social need when allocating funding to that strategy?

1821. Mr A Elliott: There are a whole range of programmes designed to tackle mental-health issues and well-being in the community. The Department’s strategy for promoting mental health and well-being is one of my priorities for review at the moment. It really is time that we had a fresh look at that area. As the Committee will be aware, the Department’s policy focus over the past couple of years has been very heavily skewed towards suicide prevention. That work on suicide prevention and the interventions that are being introduced obviously bring huge side benefits for mental health and well-being in general.

1822. I want to draw the Committee’s attention to one particular service: the establishment of a 24/7 helpline for people who feel that they are in some sort of crisis. That service will be of particular benefit to younger people, who are perhaps less likely to go to a GP than older people, and who are more likely to pick up the phone.

1823. Those are the kinds of initiatives that we are trying to put in place. We are also trying to ensure that care pathways are established so that those services are better integrated and people can better move through the system.

1824. Dr Stuart: The Bamford Review, which finished last year, resulted in 10 reports, and we are developing the Government’s overall response. In summary, we are focusing on early intervention for mental-health problems, and, in order to reduce the need for hospitalisation, we are addressing those problems in the community, where possible. Such a movement from hospital-based to community-based services will require a culture shift. Therefore, respite care, which I mentioned earlier, treatment for mild and moderate depression, and the new targets for the introduction of psychotherapies are designed to prevent conditions from deteriorating and to encourage early intervention. In addition, all areas now have crisis intervention teams, which have recently been supplemented with, for example, personnel specialising in the treatment of eating disorders in children. If such disorders are not treated early, they lead to worse outcomes. Crisis intervention teams aim to intervene at an early stage in order to solve problems before they get worse.

1825. The Chairperson: Some people have given us the impression that there are problems with co-operation at a local level between various Departments and agencies that provide services, particularly in health and social services. Is legislative change required to enable better joined-up planning for the provision of services? In particular, what is your opinion about the arrangements for the planning and provision of children’s services in order to ensure wrap-around delivery for those most in need?

1826. Mr A Elliott: The Minister recently announced new structural changes, and one important proposal was the establishment of a single regional health and social care board. An important dimension to that is that the proposed board would have a much greater capacity to commission services locally, and the Department and the Minister believe that those local commissioning powers would strengthen the capacity for joined-up local services and achieve better results than the current arrangements.

1827. In the public sector, a common problem is that things tend not to work quite so well at the boundaries between organisations; ensuring that services are joined up at a local level is a problem that we continue to wrestle with. Undoubtedly, there is the potential for legislative changes to affect that; however, cultural changes could prove to be more important. We want to reach the point at which people who work on the ground, at a local level, know each other and are able to readily contact each other in order to sort out problems. That is one of the strengths of the health action zones — different sectors meet to consider such issues.

1828. Mr F Bradley: Each board produces a children’s services plan, and, under our expenditure proposals for the next three years, approximately £10 million will be spent on family and child care. We intend to spend approximately half of that money on family support services, and we have instructed boards to take account of children’s services planning when determining the allocation of resources. Children’s services planning is a partnership between several agencies, including the voluntary sector. Therefore, as a result of such planning, we expect a much more targeted and co-operative approach to family-support services.

1829. Dr Stuart: In response to the Bamford Review, the Minister has set up a ministerial group to address its cross-cutting recommendations. That consultation has begun, and we await its response. It should be of assistance from the ministerial point of view.

1830. The Chairperson: Thank you. If you wish to provide any additional information or help us with any outstanding queries, we will be happy to hear from you.

16 April 2008

Members present for all or part of the proceedings:
Mr Danny Kennedy (Chairperson)
Mr Barry McElduff
Mr Francie Molloy
Mr Stephen Moutray
Mr Jim Shannon
Mr Jimmy Spratt
Mr Jim Wells

Witnesses:

Dr Stephen Donnelly
Dr Gerry Mulligan
Mr Michael Pollock

Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister

1831. The Chairperson (Mr Kennedy): On behalf of the Committee, I welcome the witnesses to this part of the meeting, which concerns our inquiry into child poverty. This evidence session will be recorded by Hansard. Perhaps you could make a brief opening statement, after which members may wish to ask questions.

1832. Dr Gerry Mulligan (Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister): I thank the Committee for the opportunity to provide evidence in respect of its inquiry into child poverty. We have provided a written submission on child poverty in Northern Ireland. We have also provided additional statistical and technical information on the rebasing of our estimates of child poverty, and the implications that that would have for the targets that have been set in the Programme for Government. Since the drafting of those submissions, there have been significant announcements by the Treasury and the Department for Work and Pensions in a joint publication that outlines proposals for changes in the benefits and tax-credit systems. Those changes would have a positive impact on reducing levels of child poverty.

1833. The Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister has just issued a paper to the Committee, outlining how the First Minister and deputy First Minister intend to take to the Executive Committee proposals for the adoption of a strategy to tackle poverty and social exclusion here. Therefore, with apologies for the lack of notice in respect of that paper —

1834. The Chairperson: The Committee did not have enough time to consider that paper before this meeting.

1835. Dr Mulligan: I am happy, if the Committee finds it helpful, to outline those proposals in broad terms, and take questions.

1836. I wish to advise the Committee about some not-quite-concluded but important work that is relevant to the Committee’s consideration of child poverty — particularly work concerning lone parents and people with disabilities, as part of the cross-departmental Promoting Social Inclusion process. That work is aimed at developing proposals to address problems that leave lone parents at risk of poverty, and it involves representatives from the voluntary/community sector. We are close to finishing similar work, as part of the same process, focusing on people with disabilities.

1837. Separately, British-Irish Council officials are examining the issues of lone parents and child poverty within the Council’s jurisdictions. British-Irish Council Ministers are not due to meet until 20 May 2008, when they will receive — and decide whether to accept — that report. However, the secretariat is happy for the Committee to see the draft report, in confidence, before it is considered for formal ministerial endorsement. I am keen that the Committee include the report in its deliberations.

1838. We are happy to answer questions on any of the issues that I have raised.

1839. The Chairperson: Thank you very much. We shall break the Committee’s questions into three sections: definition and measurement; strategic plans; and policies for tackling child poverty.

1840. We will take up your offer of looking closely at the BIC report before the Council meets in May. That will be helpful in our overall consideration of the issues.

1841. We shall begin with the first banding of questions, concerning the definition and measurement of child poverty.

1842. Mr Shannon: Child poverty is an important issue for all of us. Your written submission to the Committee refers to severe child poverty and makes particular mention of the experience of Nordic countries in respect of issues such as unemployment, low wages, lone parenthood and levels of social expenditure. All of that probably applies in Northern Ireland.

1843. Fuel costs are making news headlines, and that is an issue that greatly concerns me. Those costs are driving up the price of delivery and are contributing to the cost of living, which is rising at an alarming rate. How can we really address child poverty when faced with factors that are beyond our control? Moreover, grain prices are at their highest in years.

1844. Such costs are basics. The price of fuel drives delivery costs, and grain prices drive the cost of basic foods. How can we address those matters? Is it possible that we are setting targets for ourselves that cannot be achieved? I ask that question because more people are falling into the poverty trap all the time. Those whom we hoped were getting out of the poverty trap are falling back into it.

1845. Dr Mulligan: Some factors — particularly fuel costs, as Mr Shannon suggested — are outside our Government’s direct control. The Department for Social Development operates a programme of winter fuel payments, and it has set targets for reducing fuel poverty. Those targets will be affected by increased fuel prices, and the Department is quick to acknowledge that those increases will make its job more difficult. However, the Department continues to provide financial assistance to help people insulate their homes and make more efficient use of fuel. Although the Executive have no control over the actual costs, the Department for Social Development will continue to monitor their impact on the targets and continue with the policies over which it has control.

1846. The same applies to food and the effects that its costs have on material poverty. People have less disposable income when they spend more money on food and fuel. That will impact on the numbers of people who are falling into the poverty trap.

1847. Advisory services have a role to play in helping people who are in financial difficulties take stock, and they will audit how people are managing their budgets — particularly in times of increasing food and fuel prices. Such price increases will make that task more difficult.

1848. Mr Shannon: How can those issues be addressed? You mentioned the insulation of homes, which may be part of the answer. High-street prices are going through the roof — that is one of the main concerns that people in my constituency are expressing to me, as an elected representative. Those people do not know how they will keep going. What ideas does the Department have to address that concern?

1849. Mr Michael Pollock (Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister): I sit on the interdepartmental working group on fuel poverty, which is chaired by Minister Ritchie. Although many of the issues that Gerry mentioned, such as winter fuel payments, are important to vulnerable groups, the working group does not restrict itself to those areas. We are looking at the wider costs of energy and transport to see how the overall costs of fuel could be reduced — for the benefit of the economy and vulnerable groups. For instance, we are looking at how power stations are fuelled here and examining initiatives aimed at reducing fuel costs in the future.

1850. The Chairperson: It might be helpful if the Committee were to seek internal research to obtain more detail on the impact of fuel costs and their impact on poverty. Are members content to do that?

Members indicated assent.

1851. Mr Spratt: Earlier this week, a newspaper article stated that thousands of people in the United Kingdom would fall into the poverty trap as a result of the increase in fuel prices. That is worrying, particularly as we are trying to do something about that now. The Department must get a handle on that issue, and we must ascertain the impact of rising fuel prices. The Chairperson has said that we will conduct some research on that, and that is important.

1852. How do the Executive define poverty? How does the Department propose to measure child poverty?

1853. Does the Department propose to adopt the UK Government’s approach to the assessment of child poverty, which involves measuring absolute income, relative income and material deprivation?

1854. Dr Mulligan: Dr Stephen Donnelly is best-placed to answer that question; he is our senior statistician and can advise on poverty measurement.

1855. Dr Stephen Donnelly (Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister): The Department uses the family resources survey, similar to that used by the UK Government, to collect statistics on household poverty. That means that we can and will monitor poverty using the three classifications of absolute poverty, relative-income poverty and a mixed measure of income and material deprivation. DSD is examining how that mixed measure of income and material deprivation should be constructed.

1856. The UK target refers specifically to the “before housing cost” relative-income poverty measure, and our statistics on 1998 poverty levels suggest that the 2010 target will be met when child-poverty levels reach approximately 67,000 — a figure estimated from the family resources survey. The results of the 2007 survey will not be available for a couple of months and, therefore, we are currently using data collected by DSD between 2002-03 and 2005-06.

1857. Mr Spratt: How quickly will the results of the 2007 survey be reflected on the measurements, bearing in mind our discussion on rising costs, and so on?

1858. Dr Donnelly: That will not feed through for at least 12 to 18 months. However, we could estimate impacts on poorer households based on an increase in fuel expenditure of 4%, 5%, 6% or 10%, for instance.

1859. Mr Spratt: That might be helpful because indications suggest that that is a major problem. Our figures might be inaccurate, given the current situation.

1860. Dr Mulligan: Would it be helpful, therefore, if we were to conduct a sensitivity analysis on possible differing assumptions about rising food and fuel prices to determine how that fits in with child-poverty estimates and poverty in general?

1861. The Chairperson: Yes, that would be useful. The fact that different Departments use different measurements seems to cause difficulty. The Department of Education uses free-school-meals figures to assess — or certainly assist with — the determination of levels of poverty. Gaps exist between the various Departments, and they all use different measurements. That sometimes causes confusion as to the accuracy of the final measurement statistics.

1862. Dr Mulligan: The Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister sets strategic targets for poverty, and makes reports on those. Therefore, we consider our measurement to be the official measurement of poverty. Other Departments use their own measurements of disadvantage because it allows them to estimate the need for particular programmes. For example, the free-school-meals statistics certainly have an impact on the need for resources in education. However, the Department of Education’s indicators are not an alternative to our measure of poverty, but are a different measurement of need.

1863. The Chairperson: The Department of Education applies those measurements within its remit. There is a slight problem in respect of who co-ordinates the overall response to child poverty, which measurement is most appropriate and which measurement is applied by all Departments to tackle poverty. We are told that OFMDFM is the lead Department and, therefore, it is surely your responsibility to ensure that all Departments use your statistics, rather than go off on a tangent and measure poverty on free school meals or other indicators?

1864. Dr Mulligan: As Ministers take those issues forward with their Executive colleagues, they will want to achieve agreement on the measurements and indicators that are used to monitor progress.

1865. The Chairperson: Given that OFMDFM is the lead Department, it should instruct, rather than ask or suggest. It should tell the other Departments how to monitor progress.

1866. Dr Mulligan: The Office of the First Minister and deputy First Minister holds lead responsibility for monitoring and reporting poverty, and we assume that other Departments would not take issue with the way in which we do that. Other Departments have not taken issue with that, but they will always insist in developing their own measurements of need, perhaps in respect of unemployment levels or free school meals. We want to let Departments to continue to do that, but they would not substitute those statistics for measures of poverty.

1867. The ministerial group, which will take ownership of the strategy, will seek agreement on the broad range of indicators of progress, but I agree that the bottom line is that our measure of poverty must be used across Departments and must be consistent with those that are used in other jurisdictions. Poverty must be measured in a way that is consistent with other parts of Europe, and that must be done consistently over time so that progress cannot be explained away by changing measurement criteria.

1868. The Chairperson: The Programme for Government aims to eradicate child poverty by 2020 and seeks to alleviate it substantially by 2010. OFMDFM will have its feet held to the fire on that commitment, so it is in your interest to ensure co-ordination with other Departments to ensure that the targets are being met and that the indicators are consistent, to allow everyone to sing off the same hymn sheet.

1869. Dr Mulligan: That is certainly the case, and I anticipate that Ministers will be anxious to ensure that programmes deliver the targets that are set and agreed centrally by the Executive. OFMDFM will continue to raise those issues with ministerial colleagues as progress on those targets is monitored.

1870. Mr Molloy: The target of reducing of child poverty by 50% was retained in the Programme for Government, but the public service agreement to lift 67,000 children out of poverty by 2010, which appeared in the draft Programme for Government, was removed. What figure would you set now that would meet the 50% target?

1871. Dr Mulligan: I invite Dr Donnelly to comment on the removal of that figure, the reasoning behind that and our current estimates.

1872. Dr Donnelly: There is no difference in the meaning of the two targets: lifting 67,000 children out of poverty is the same as a 50% reduction. When we receive new and better information on poverty from the family resources survey, we will be in a better position to rebase our estimate of what child poverty had been in 1998. It is unlikely that the figure will change substantially — it may be 65,000 or 69,000. The Programme for Government’s target of 50% is to allow for the inclusion of a stable statement. Figures that are based on better information will be published in due course, but 50% currently means 67,000 children.

1873. Mr Molloy: It has been mentioned that fuel costs and the cost of housing are rising. What influence does OFMDFM have over the Department for Social Development with regard to heating systems that are installed by the Housing Executive? Some say that those systems drive people into poverty at a dramatic speed.

1874. Dr Mulligan: The influence of OFMDFM is exercised through Executive arrangements. The Executive discuss cross-cutting issues and will take decisions to address problems that arise. Ministers do not have the legal authority to direct another Minister to implement such a specific measure, but under the ministerial code, those issues can be discussed and agreed at Executive level.

1875. Mr Molloy: If your Department has the responsibility to eradicate child poverty, surely somebody should have the authority to order other Departments to stop what they are doing, so that the problem is not made worse.

1876. Dr Mulligan: As with other cross-cutting issues, OFMDFM has the lead role and responsibility for the targets, but that does not hold only our Department’s feet to the fire — it implicates those other Departments whose programmes are essential to delivering on those targets. Poverty cannot be considered only in the context of income — it must be considered in the context of general child well-being, including health and education issues. Treasury policy is also an important factor. Those targets are influenced by — and therefore have to be part-owned by — the Treasury.

1877. Mr Molloy: Clearly, if children are in a home that has no heating for five days a week, but only at weekends, that is deprivation. That is a dramatic example of child poverty that would not have existed five or 10 years ago.

1878. Dr Mulligan: The Department for Social Development takes the lead policy role on the issue of fuel poverty. I am sure that that Department is engaged in addressing that matter and will wish to bring it to the Executive as part of its contribution to tackling child poverty.

1879. OFMDFM suggests that it would be too narrow an approach to consider poverty only in relation to income. However, household income is critical because it determines how much food one can buy and how much fuel one can afford.

1880. All of the services that Government provide are important in insulating people against poverty. Those services also prevent people from falling into poverty. That is a collective effort, which our Department certainly leads, but other Departments are key contributors.

1881. Mr McElduff: I would like a restatement of the definition of absolute income versus relative income. Has absolute low income been measured in recent times? If so, how have absolute low income levels changed in recent years?

1882. Dr Mulligan: I invite Dr Donnelly to comment on those areas.

1883. Dr Donnelly: Absolute low income is defined as the income of the poorest families, and whether their real incomes increase faster than the rate of inflation. OFMDFM has measured that, and results indicate a very positive trend — people who are on absolute low incomes are better off today, in real terms, than they were three or four years ago.

1884. Since 2003, the levels of relative income poverty have levelled off for working households and those with children, and they have increased to a certain extent for pensioner households. As a whole, poverty levels in Northern Ireland seem to have plateaued, but the absolute poverty levels are decreasing over time.

1885. Mr Spratt: I find that difficult to understand, given the discussion that we had a short time ago about how fuel prices, etc, are rising.

1886. The Chairperson: Five minutes later, and we are all better off.

1887. Mr Spratt: That does not square. If costs are rising dramatically, how can you say that people are better off with no income? I understand that benefits have increased, but, frankly, they have not increased at the same dramatic level of inflation. I am concerned that there is something wrong with that statement and with the figures because I cannot see that being the current position. That needs to be taken into consideration.

1888. Dr Donnelly: I understand the perception is that absolute incomes are in decline, but there is a complex inter-relationship among salaries, wages, taxes, benefits, household structures, and how money is distributed within a household. Northern Ireland has very high benefit rates that are, paradoxically, driving down poverty levels. One of the reasons for that, according to research undertaken a few years ago by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, is that people on incapacity benefit are brought above poverty levels when their partner’s earnings bring money into the household.

1889. Mr Spratt: The fuel benefits that elderly people receive has been mentioned. Three or four years ago, that would buy 900 litres of oil. If they are lucky, today that would buy 400 litres. I cannot square those two factors, and that is why I am asking the question.

1890. The Committee Clerk: That is an issue that we have discussed previously, and some research has been carried out. Am I right in suggesting that income-based measures may not take into account rising costs, and therefore material deprivation would also need to be taken into account? The figures that we have on income would not have taken into account recent fuel-cost rises, which fall under an assessment of deprivation, and therefore would be more likely to be taken into account. Is that correct?

1891. Dr Donnelly: The problem is that our figures are about a year out of date and much of the upward pressure that will undoubtedly push up poverty levels has not been reflected in the statistics yet.

1892. The Chairperson: It is important that those current projections be applied.

1893. Dr Mulligan: That is a key point, Chairman. We are dealing with a delay of perhaps a year between the survey and the estimate of the poverty level. In the meantime, there are significant increases on factors that influence household income.

1894. Mr Spratt: Surely that creates a problem, and is bound to have an impact on the target figures that we are indicating for 2010. We must take that into consideration.

1895. Dr Mulligan: To return to the earlier suggestion, we would like to carry out a sensitivity analysis that considers the potential impact on poorer households of various assumptions about inflation and key prices such as fuel and food. The expenditure and food survey will provide detail on the levels of families’ income and outgoings. Therefore, it should be possible to provide that information.

1896. The Chairman: We shall move on to a matter that we have touched on already, namely the issue of strategic plans concerning child poverty. There is an issue as to how OFMDFM will ensure that individual Departments deliver on the commitments that they make on tackling child poverty. Will incentives be offered to encourage Departments to prioritise policies and programmes? Will sanctions be applied if Departments fail to meet targets that are designed specifically to tackle child poverty?

1897. Dr Mulligan: As a lead Department on an issue such as poverty, we have available to us a number of levers. In general, we see our lead role as requiring us to promote, to challenge and to advise other Departments — that has, generally, been the role of OFMDFM.

1898. The Chairperson: Is it all carrot and no stick?

1899. Dr Mulligan: The stick is very limited. The only stick that we have is that which is provided through legislation or through the procedural rules that govern the working of the Executive. There is an important part of the process that requires that the First Minister and deputy First Minster be satisfied with papers before they go to the Executive for consideration. They must be satisfied that the papers address issues in a way that is relevant to the Department’s view of the policy. That gives the First Minister and deputy First Minister a gate-keeping role, and provides some incentive — whether one calls it a carrot or a stick — to ensure that policies are properly poverty-proofed. I suggest that such a process involves both carrot and stick.

1900. The Chairperson: Is legislation needed to improve the stick?

1901. Dr Mulligan: The Executive currently work to section 28E of the Northern Ireland Act 1998, which require the Executive to adopt a strategy to tackle poverty based on objective need. The Executive must be assured that their strategy and approach address objective need. That is the legislation that is in place at present, and I do not believe that strengthening it would provide a better outcome.

1902. Mr Molloy: How will the Executive judge that they have achieved their targets of reducing child poverty by 50% by 2010, and are successfully working towards its elimination by 2020? How will progress be measured, and what targets will be used? Is there any indication that poverty-proofing policies will be introduced so that when, for example, a Department produces a policy, it can be assessed for not only its equality impact, but for its likely impact on poverty?

1903. Dr Mulligan: Poverty-proofing has always been a feature of the Department’s role. As papers come to the Executive for consideration, the Department examines them through a poverty perspective. Other Departments will be interested in other issues, such as rural-proofing. There are a series of lenses that have to be applied to particular policies. Therefore, OFMDFM selects those policies that potentially have the most significant impact on poverty. Water charging or rates, for example, are policies which, because they have a direct impact on income, are of clear interest to OFMDFM, and we would look at their potential impact on targets. Poverty-proofing is an important part of the Department’s work in developing its own policies, as well as in looking at the policies of other Departments.

1904. Mr Molloy: How will you judge whether you have achieved your targets by 2010?

1905. Dr Mulligan: The family resources survey will be a key measuring tool. We will report regularly on the measures that we use and on the progress that is being made towards overall targets. We expect to provide annual reports on targets.

1906. Mr Molloy: The targets are probably already out of date. How will they be reviewed?

1907. Dr Mulligan: We are not saying that the targets are out of date.

1908. Mr Molloy: Perhaps the Committee is saying that they are out of date, and that poverty is more widespread than the figures suggest.

1909. Dr Mulligan: The fact that a target becomes more difficult to achieve should not, of itself, mean that the goal posts need to be changed. If targets are not met, we should explore what more needs to be done, rather than simply adjusting departmental targets.

1910. I do not see any evidence of a desire to change the targets of the Department for Work and Pensions in Scotland or other jurisdictions where they continue to adopt those targets. However, there may be mitigating circumstances that mean that targets are not achieved to the extent to which one would have liked.

1911. Mr Molloy: Would it not be better to change the actions taken in order to achieve your targets now?

1912. Dr Mulligan: I think that that is the role of monitoring. We need to consider not just the headline target of poverty, but the other relevant supporting targets in relation to employment, education and health. When the Executive get together to look at the issue in a focused way, they will be looking at a wide range of indicators for success, including relative and absolute income poverty.

1913. Mr Moutray: The Committee has heard evidence that a number of the policies which are likely to have the greatest impact on poverty levels, particularly in the short term, are either not devolved or are governed by parity obligations. Has any assessment been made of the number of children that would be lifted from poverty or severe poverty by measures that are under the control of the Executive?

1914. Dr Mulligan: That is a good question. Poverty is influenced by both fiscal and service-provision policies. The view of the Department is that the fiscal policies set by the Treasury have an effect of lifting children from poverty in an incremental way. In other words, if tax credits were increased, a certain benefit would be derived — a sustained benefit, not one that would be continuously improving.

1915. The assumption, therefore, is that as Government continues to provide financial assistance, that will have a series of stepwise impacts on poverty. The long-term goal is more likely to be addressed through the improvement of services such as education, health, and employment policies — areas that are within the gift of the devolved Administration. Long term, that concerns service improvements; short term, it concerns financial policy.

1916. Mr Shannon: OFMDM has a very clear understanding of the issue of child poverty, and has made it one of the key priorities in the current Programme for Government and beyond. If OFMDFM has made that issue a priority, it becomes a priority for the Executive, and each Department — be it Education, Health, DCAL, etc — should, in turn, make it one of their priorities. Is my interpretation of that correct? If I am correct, surely the onus then falls on the Minister responsible for the relevant Department to ensure that child poverty issues are at the top of the tree?

1917. Dr Mulligan: The public-expenditure planning process allows for the Department of Finance and Personnel to issue guidance to Departments when making bids and defending departmental baselines. One of the requirements in the past has certainly been that Departments indicate the effect that their budgets have on tackling poverty and disadvantage. That is a very significant requirement for Departments in the setting of priorities. Departments are also aware that, when making bids for additional resources, those that are supported by information that demonstrates a positive impact on poverty are more likely to be successful.

1918. Public-expenditure priorities clearly influence the process set by the Department of Finance and Personnel. That process will continue to attach significance to any bid or baseline addressing poverty as a priority.

1919. Mr McElduff: To take children out of poverty, we must try to get the parents of those children into employment. The Programme for Government states that public-procurement policies will pursue social objectives. How is that being advanced? What are the potential figures for job creation at the Maze/Long Kesh site, and how many children would that take out of poverty?

1920. The Chairperson: The Maze/Long Kesh issue was neatly inserted into that question. [Laughter.]

1921. Mr McElduff: If it was got off the ground, and 10,000 jobs were created, it would have a significant effect.

1922. Dr Mulligan: A cross-departmental group has been compiling detailed guidance on how to maximise the social benefits from the significant level of public procurement, particularly that which is tied up in the investment strategy for the coming years. It is right to examine how the most disadvantaged people can benefit from that. As that guidance has not been sent to the Executive, I cannot speak to its detail. That is important work, which has been carried out for a long time and is about to conclude.

1923. On the question about the employment estimates in respect of the Maze/Long Kesh site, I must defer to departmental economists. I do not know the job estimates, but, undoubtedly, some exist. Economists tend to go on job-creation figures; however, I will have to ask those who do know more about that issue for an estimate.

1924. The Chairperson: As Chairperson of the Committee for Culture, Arts and Leisure, Mr McElduff has unique access to all that information.

1925. Mr McElduff: It was during a meeting of this Committee that I heard that up to 10,000 jobs could be created at the Maze/Long Kesh site in the short term.

1926. Mr Spratt: A Scottish firm might get the contract and bring all the workers in from Scotland.

1927. Mr McElduff: Whoever gets the contract will have to employ local apprentices and local people.

1928. Mr McElduff: Jim; you and I will discuss that issue at tomorrow’s DCAL Committee meeting.

1929. Mr Shannon: That is our challenge for tomorrow.

1930. The Chairperson: In its interim report on child poverty, the Committee called for departmental delivery plans to include a shortlist of key changes planned by Departments to contribute to the Programme for Government’s theme of a better future. The Committee recommended that the shortlist include the principal measures that must be undertaken to reduce child poverty. Has OFMDFM been consulted on the delivery plans of other Departments?

1931. Dr Mulligan: OFMDFM has a central role in the co-ordination of the overall delivery plans for the Programme for Government and, therefore, will have sight of the delivery plans of other Departments.

1932. In addition, the aforementioned paper that will arrive with you today states that the Department intends to convene a subgroup of the Executive to identify the key actions that are required to deliver on the commitments in their overall strategy. Undoubtedly, that will have a bearing on short- to medium-term targets and on the delivery plans. Therefore, inasmuch as they can be updated, the delivery plans will have to take account of the actions that are regarded as the most relevant to delivering on the overall targets.

1933. The Chairperson: The final area of questioning concerns policies for tackling child poverty. We have examined the potential for higher rates and rising fuel charges. Are you satisfied that the measures that will be put in place by Departments will minimise such costs to families on low incomes?

1934. Dr Mulligan: We have not as yet made a formal assessment of the impact of policy on fuel and food poverty. I would prefer to have had the opportunity to do that, and the possibility has been mentioned earlier of looking into further analysis. That would give us the opportunity within our respective working groups — Michael has mentioned his membership of the fuel poverty group — to raise concerns if we thought that the targets were being seriously undermined. It is too early to say that we are happy with the implementation of policy. I am happy to come back to the Committee on that issue.

1935. Mr Shannon: I understand that, in England, a very substantial package has been made available for disabled children’s services. Is there any intention to match that or make such provision here? Are you aware of that package?

1936. Dr Mulligan: I am aware of that scheme, and our Ministers are talking to the Finance Minister about potential implications for the Barnett consequentials. Those discussions are ongoing, and I am afraid that I cannot yet say what the outcome may be. There is a significant amount of additional funding — around £300 million as I understand — and there would be Barnett consequentials that would require discussions with the Department of Finance and Personnel. Those discussions are ongoing.

1937. Mr Molloy: Much of the evidence that we have heard has indicated that good-quality, affordable childcare is a very important aspect of taking people, particularly children, out of poverty. Are there any methods that the Department has in mind that would provide for that? There is some concern that the amount of money for childcare facilities has been reduced.

1938. Dr Mulligan: I have mentioned the work that we are doing with lone parents, and we hope to provide the Committee with a report addressing that issue very soon. There is not a clear lead Department in respect of childcare issues at the moment because there are a number of Departments that have a role and an interest in childcare.

1939. There are four Departments who have a key interest in that matter: the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development, which has done some relevant work already; the Department for Employment and Learning, which is particularly interested in barriers on those who are trying to re-enter the labour market; the Department for Social Development, which clearly has an interest in the standards of care; and the Department of Education, which also has a clear interest.

1940. The Chairperson: Surely there is a lead Department, and the onus is on it to sort that out?

1941. Dr Mulligan: I agree that a lead Department should be attempting to agree how best to make progress. We have some specific proposals in respect of our lone parent strategy, which the Committee will see very soon.

1942. The Chairperson: You are a man with many carrots. It might do no harm to add a stick.

1943. Dr Mulligan: The Committee will appreciate that OFMDFM does not have programmes that we can deliver, and we do not have the authority to make payments on programmes. That is down to the relevant Departments. Our job is to co-ordinate and lead, and we see the work coming out from the lone-parent strategy as triggering the promotion of childcare issues.

1944. Mr McElduff: My question concerns rural areas and addressing the circumstances of children of migrant workers and ethnic minorities.

1945. What measures are in place to deal with rural areas, where access to services might be difficult, and what is being done to help the children of migrant workers and those from ethnic-minority backgrounds?

1946. Dr Mulligan: I probably cannot do justice to the programmes that other Departments have in place, such as the rural-development programme and the Department of Education’s work with the children of migrant workers. However, I am confident that the Departments are exercised by the need to tackle the disadvantage that children in rural areas face. Barry will recall that a specific part of the children’s programme examined the disadvantage suffered by children in rural areas. The rural-development programme will undoubtedly continue to take an interest in that matter. However, I cannot do justice to the detail.

1947. The Department of Education has devoted significant resources to integrating into classrooms and mainstreaming children from ethnic-minority backgrounds, particularly in cases where there is a language problem, as is the case with the children of some migrant workers. That Department has devoted significant resources to employing peripatetic teachers, who help to integrate children into the classroom.

1948. Given that I cannot do justice to individual Departments’ work in those areas, I would prefer to come back to the Committee with further information on those matters, if that would be helpful.

1949. Mr McElduff: Perhaps you could write to the Committee about that matter. Thank you.

1950. Mr Molloy: In the light of what the delegation has said about having no authority to implement certain policies, should OFMDFM be given more authority to ensure that they are implemented?

1951. Dr Mulligan: As I said earlier, we have significant leverage in our gate-keeping role, which, if exercised responsibly, will ensure the required response from Departments. We co-operate with Departments in developing policy. Many of the policies that I mentioned with regard to disability and lone parents are the result of persuasion and research, rather than of wielding a stick. We prefer to operate in that way, rather than through exercising legislative clout with Departments.

1952. The Chairperson: You prefer the carrot to the stick?

1953. Dr Mulligan: Yes. We prefer carrots.

1954. Mr Shannon: You referred earlier to a sensitivity analysis, but what will that entail? We have all been vexed about the question of child poverty and the ever-increasing number of people who are falling into that trap. What will the sensitivity analysis achieve?

1955. Dr Mulligan: The expenditure and food survey will show what households typically spend on certain items. On the basis of that survey, we can create models and increase the percentages of expenditure on those items. We can then examine the effect that that would have on families with different incomes. Through such modelling, we can increase the costs to give us an indication of what effect expenditure increases of 2%, 5% or 10% would have on poorer households, for example.

1956. Mr Shannon: If you carry out that modelling on the cost of food, it will give you a picture very quickly. For example, the price of beef has increased by 30p a pound, bacon has gone up by 25p a pound, and a loaf of bread has increased by 15p. Those are basic foodstuffs. The last thing that I want to do is become a vegetarian. I, like many people, enjoy eating those foods. Those are only three examples of large increases in price. I am not necessarily talking about the cost of steak; the increases apply to mince as well.

1957. Dr Mulligan: The benefit of the expenditure and food survey — and Stephen Donnelly will correct me, if I am wrong — is that it goes into great detail. It itemises the types of goods that households typically spend money on.

1958. The survey reflects current patterns of expenditure. It is a reflection of what people here are doing and how they spend their money. That is why it may be used to model accurately the effects of hypothetical increases in expenditure on certain items. The figures can be adjusted. One can consider a 2% increase, but one can also consider the potential effects of further increases.

1959. The Chairperson: Mr Shannon and Mr Wells are divided over the issue of carrots versus mince, as opposed to carrots versus sticks.

1960. That completes the question-and-answer session. I thank the witnesses for their attendance. We welcome and accept your offer to provide additional information. If additional queries arise, we will forward them to you. Thank you, and good afternoon.