0200 Hrs GMT London Tuesday 10 January 2012. By © Muhammad Haque. For over 50 years I have been witnessing the poverty-creation programme as it is carried out in Tower Hamlets. in fact, my observation of Tower Hamlets began even before this name was created. Even before Tower Hamlets existed. It was just after the start of 1961 that I began to do the paperwork for the then young underemployed villagers in Seelot [Sylhet in English is actually Seelot in the Seelotee language] who had desperately needed to escape. I was a one man campaign to implement that escape. Fifty years later, I am still doing it. Observing the state of poverty. And today, Tuesday 10 January 2012 the news is the same. For me the most important item in the news is the confession that Tower Hamlets is blighted by the UK’s worst “chid poverty”.
I don’t agree with the phrase. But this is a point of detail. The main collective issue is that “Child poverty” is within the facts of poverty. And the fact that this aspect of poverty is admittedly in its worst form in the current Tower Hamlets population is proof once again that the “elected” postholders in the name of the people of and in Tower Hamlets have been participating in various miniature projects of lying. They do not admit that the borough is so blighted.
In fact their lie is carried out by exhibiting the fantasy that Tower Hamlets is doing very well. So poverty in Tower Hamlets is not limited to just material poverty. It is spiritual poverty as well as moral, ethical and democratic poverty. [To be continued]
from the web site of the London DAILY MIRROR
“
Child poverty gap widening between Tory areas and the inner cities
Inner-city estate
A map of child poverty out today shows a widening gulf between youngsters in rural Tory and Lib Dem constituencies and inner-city areas.
A charity blamed the Coalition’s cuts for its failure to continue Labour’s work, which got 900,000 children out of poverty in 12 years.
The Campaign to End Child Poverty’s annual report called the Government’s approach worse than “unimpressive”.
It added: “Too much time has been spent on rhetorical debate and delays.”
David Cameron’s safe seat in Witney, Oxon, has just 7% child poverty, while Bethnal Green and Bow in East London has most, at 51%.
Manchester Central was worst in the North with 49% but Deputy PM Nick Clegg’s seat in Sheffield Hallam has 5% – the lowest in the UK.
The Campaign to End Child Poverty named Tower Hamlets in London as the local authority worst affected, with more than half (52%) of children there living in poverty, compared with the UK average of one in five.
London features heavily among the UK’s most deprived areas, with Islington, Hackney, Westminster and Camden all making the top 10 compilation of local authority areas enduring the biggest proportions of child poverty.
At least four in 10 children are in poverty in 19 parliamentary constituencies, the report found, while “serious concentrations” of deprivation were revealed at an even more local level, with between 50-70% of children facing poverty in 100 local wards.
Bethnal Green and Bow was named as the worst parliamentary constituency for child poverty.
The report said 89 constituencies already meet the Government’s headline target for 2020 by having child poverty rates of 10% or lower.
But it warned that tax and benefit changes outlined in the recent Autumn Statement showed the greater burden was being placed on the poorest, which “not only puts children’s wellbeing at risk, it carries economic risks too.
“Child poverty already costs the UK economy around £25 billion a year; any rise in child poverty will push up this cost.”
Campaign executive director Alison Garnham said: “The child poverty map paints a stark picture of a socially segregated Britain where the life chances of millions of children are damaged by poverty and inequality.
“But it also gives us reason for hope. The child poverty target has already been met in the Prime Minister’s constituency and nearly a hundred others, so never let it be said that the targets are impossible to meet. If we can do it in Witney today, we can do it in Hackney tomorrow.”
Ms Garnham continued: “Child poverty costs us billions picking up the pieces of damaged lives and unrealised potential, so it’s a false economy if we don’t prioritise looking after children today.
“Targeting cuts on families will prove both an economic and a social disaster, with businesses losing billions of pounds of demand and families struggling to keep their kids clothed, fed and warm.”
The Institute for Fiscal Studies recently warned that a couple with two children will be £1,250 a year worse off by 2015 as families “shoulder the burden of austerity”.
It has been predicted that the number of children in poverty before housing costs are taken into account could rise from 2.5 million in 2010/11 to 3.3 million by 2020/21.
The Child Poverty Map of the UK report said: “While it is fully accepted that the nation now faces incredible challenges reducing the deficit, this cannot excuse the regressive nature of the path the coalition has chosen.
“It is a political choice whether the cost of balancing the budget falls most heavily on the poorest or the wealthiest.”
The report used tax credit data to examine the proportion of children living in low income homes, also taking into account recent unemployment to estimate changes in the number of children who are sinking into poverty because their parents have lost their jobs.
Children were classed as in poverty if their family’s income fell below 60% of the median average income.
At below 60% of the average, families struggle to meet basic needs like food, heating, transport, clothing, school equipment and trips.
The report said: “The poverty line means that, after housing costs, all the household bills and family’s spending needs will need to be met by around £12 or less per family member per day.
“For many families, especially those reliant on out of work benefits, it can be substantially less.”
Here are the parliamentary constituencies with the highest levels of child poverty across the UK and the percentage of children in poverty in 2011 according to the report:
1. Bethnal Green and Bow, 51%
2. Manchester Central, 49%
3. Poplar and Canning Town, 48%
=4. Belfast West, 46%
=4. Birmingham, Ladywood, 46%
=4. Liverpool, Riverside, 46%
=4. Islington South and Finsbury, 46%
=8. Hackney South and Shoreditch, 45%
=8. Birmingham, Sparkbrook and Small Heath, 45%
10. Regent’s Park and North Kensington, 44%
And here are the local authorities with the highest levels of child poverty in the UK:
1. Tower Hamlets, 52%
2. Islington, 43%
3. Manchester, 40%
4. Hackney, 39%
5. Westminster, 38%
=7. Newham, 37%
=7. Camden, 37%
8. Derry, 36%
=9. Nottingham, 35%
=9. Belfast, 35%
Here are the parliamentary constituencies with the lowest levels of child poverty:
=1. Buckingham, 5%
=1. Sheffield Hallam, 5%
=3. Henley, 6%
=3. Haltemprice and Howden, 6%
=3. Vale of York, 6%
=3. North East Hampshire, 6%
=3. West Aberdeenshire and Kincardine, 6%
=3. Chesham and Amersham, 6%
=3. Wokingham, 6%
=3. Ribble Valley, 6%
=3. Mole Valley, 6%
=4. Woodspring, 7%
=4. Witney, 7%
=4. South West Surrey, 7%
=4. Winchester, 7%
=4. Horsham, 7%
=4. Gordon, 7%
=4. East Dunbartonshire, 7%
=4. Skipton and Ripon, 7%
=4. South West Devon, 7%
Here are the local authorities with the lowest levels of child poverty:
1. Isles of Scilly, 3%
=2. Hart, 5%
=2. Wokingham, 5%
=4. Ribble Valley, 6%
=4. South Northamptonshire, 6%
=4. Chiltern, 6%
=7. Mole Valley, 7%
=7. Waverley, 7%
=7. West Oxfordshire, 7%
=7. South Oxfordshire, 7%
