Parents typically need to find at least £39 per week for a child’s secondary school education and £19 for a primary-aged child, research for Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) finds.
A social tariff that reduces the cost of fuel for low-income households could, in principle, more than halve the fuel poverty rate. Read a new briefing from academics at the University of York.
Who is experiencing fuel poverty? What is the relationship between fuel poverty and income? And what is the impact of the mitigations put in place to support people with rising energy costs?
Our response to the Budget: Some of the Chancellor’s plans are welcome but some are worrying. Many of the childcare changes announced are a big step forward but the stringent job-search requirements for parents on universal credit (UC) are concerning and overall the package is far short of what struggling families needed from the Chancellor as they face another year of high inflation.
This is an important moment for the government to demonstrate how it will support families on a low income. Investing in social security protects those who need it most. This investment is highly cost-effective – reducing child poverty immediately and leading to improved education, employment and health outcomes, including life expectancy.
Just over a third (34%) of people on universal credit who are subject to the benefit cap – which the Government claims incentivises work – are assessed by the DWP as not required to look for a job because they are caring for very young children, new FOI data for Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) shows. A further 18% are already in work but don’t earn enough to reach the threshold for the cap to be lifted.
Who is experiencing fuel poverty? What is the relationship between fuel poverty and income? And what is the impact of the mitigations put in place to support people with rising energy costs?
Data we obtained via a freedom of information request reveals that a third (34 per cent) of people subject to the benefit cap, which the government claims is a work incentive, are not expected to seek employment because their circumstances prevent them from working. Rather than being a work incentive, it is pushing children deeper into poverty.
Several government ministers have churned out a line about work being the best route out of poverty, but does it hold any truth? The evidence submitted to the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Poverty for its report suggests that this is far from the case.
