United Kingdom
(Last updated April 2008) |
|||||||||||||||||
Introduction and OverviewDespite its early pioneering role as a welfare state, Britain is clearly a social policy laggard with regard to responses to the gender role and other family changes of the latter part of the 20th century. In its earlier move toward economic liberalism in the Thatcher era, and its stress on means-tested rather than universal benefits, it demonstrated its membership in what have been called the Anglo-American "family of nations" (Castles, 1993; Ringen, S., et al., 1997; Kamerman and Kahn, 1997). Following the US. in recent years Britain moved to increase its labor flexibility, deregulate wages, contain social spending, increase privatization, and reduce its unemployment rate almost to the OECD average. The privacy of the family is a traditional and well-established core value in British culture. The assumption continues that government should keep its role limited with regard to families, intervening only in situations of crisis or dysfunction. A report on family policy in Britain begins with the not uncommon statement that "Britain does not have and has never had, an explicitly formulated policy with regard to families and children. Over time, however, British governments have adopted a range of measures directly or indirectly targeted at families that have had a significant impact on their standard of living. Mothers and children constitute a major group of welfare beneficiaries (HM-Treasury, 1999). Moreover, there has been no coherent or consistent policy regarding children or families with children; and children's needs have rarely been the predominant factor in decision-making. Many would insist, furthermore, that child policy in Britain has focused on poor children far more than it has on children in general, and on dependent, handicapped and troubled children even more than it has on poor children. Britain's implicit family policy is largely an antipoverty policy, stressing social assistance and means-tested benefits as its primary strategy. Defining those in poverty as households with income less than half the national average after housing costs, the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) says that Britain has one of the highest rates of child poverty in the western world (BBC Fact Sheet, 5/31/01). In the mid-1990s, Britain had the highest child poverty rate among the European Union countries (Bradbury & Jantii, 1999). Its poverty rate among children was only exceeded by the U.S. and Russia; and it had the highest rate among those countries in which child poverty rates were higher than poverty rates among the elderly (Roberts, 1999). In 2000, Britain’s child poverty rate was 16.2 percent, placing it second from the bottom in a ranking of 23 countries (UNICEF, 2007). Nonetheless, the number of children living in households below sixty percent of median income has significantly declined, by 25 percent, since the Labour government committed itself in 1989-99 to eliminating child poverty by the year 2020. The government’s goals have been extended in recent years, as family issues grew in political importance under the Labour government. Among the major concerns now are: income inequality which has emerged as the seventh highest of the EU countries (Eurostat, 2007); the social exclusion of children and families; the prevention of juvenile delinquency and youth crime; the promotion of better parenting; and a relatively recent focus on encouraging work by lone mothers and in reducing the caseload of Britain's social assistance program ("Income Support"). The Labor government has made the eradication of child poverty by 2020 (halving child poverty by 2010) one of its central objectives. It is focusing on reducing child poverty through support to low-income families, and an emphasis on work and work-related benefits. Current multidimensional strategies tackle child poverty through education, targeted interventions to support families with young children, and by supporting innovation and good practices in the voluntary sector. Britain has begun to implement a series of policies that reform the tax and benefit system in its efforts to reduce child poverty and to increase employment by making work pay. The government's strategy includes:
Reform efforts began in the late 1990s with increases to the universal Child Benefit and the introduction of the Working Families' Tax Credit (WFTC). The WFTC targeted the largest gains on families with children, and was similar to, but more generous than, the U.S. Earned Income Tax Credit. Following this, the Children's Tax Credit was enacted in 2001, which targeted lower and middle income families and more than doubled married couple tax allowances. The next step in the reform was the introduction in 2003 of an integrated child tax credit, which brought together the different strands of support for children in the universal Child Benefit, Working Families' Tax Credit, Income Support/Jobseeker's Allowance and the Children's Tax Credit, to create a seamless system of financial support for children. Subsequently, an employment tax credit was adopted that complements the new child tax credit. The employment tax credit is payable through the wage packet, and is available to low paid working people, with or without children, as in the WFTC. According to the British national expert member of the European Observatory on Family Matters, Ceridwen Roberts (2000), among the family policy issues causing most political or public concern now are:
Social benefits spent on family and children in 2005 were lower than the EU average, 6.3 percent (est.) compared to 8.0 percent (est.), and lower than in 1998 (8.8 percent). Family research has increased in the UK. The dominant focus in the 1990s was on family change and diversity. Currently, the needs of young men and support for fathers are gaining attention; and there have been recent holistic studies of children and child well being (Kamerman et al., 2003) such as the National Child Development Study and the Millennium Cohort Study. |
|||||||||||||||||
HighlightsClick here to view or print country highlights in PDF format. |
|||||||||||||||||
Government AgenciesAccording to a report by the British member of the European Family Observatory, the government confronted the problem of policy fragmentation across multiple agencies by establishing a Ministerial Group on the Family in 1998, chaired at a senior level by the Home Secretary, on which ministers from all relevant Departments sat. This was an effort at addressing family policy issues holistically. This Committee led to the publication of the first ever consultation document on family policy, "Supporting Families", published in November 1998 and stimulating extensive public interest. The document contained a record of the government's main initiatives for families since taking office and identified areas for further work. On June 8, 2001 a new Department for Work and Pensions (DfW)P) was formed through the merger of the former Department of Social Security (DSS) with the employment side of the Department for Education and Employment (DfEE). (The Education side was transferred to the new Department for Education and Skills (DfES)). The new DfWP was responsible for employment, equality, benefits, pensions, and child support. Its priorities were to link employment services and Income Support benefits (social assistance) and to support equality and social inclusion for all. Responsibility for Child Benefit (child allowance) (CB) was transferred to the Department of Inland Revenue (Treasury/Tax). Most recently, the Brown Government announced in June 2007 the formation of a new Department for Children, Schools and Families (DfCSF), which will have responsibility for “leading the Government’s strategy on family policy – including parenting – and, working with the department for Works and Pension . . . and HM Treasury, will take forward the Government’s strategy for ending child poverty” (Prime Minister, 2007). The new Department has assumed pre-19 education policy responsibilities from DfES, now dissolved, and will work closely with a newly-created Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DfIUS), and will be responsible with the Department of Health (DH) for promoting the health of all children and youth (Prime Minister, 2007). A joint Poverty Unit operating as part of DfCSF and DfWP was established the same year. Responsibility for coordinating the government’s social exclusion agenda has been assigned to a cabinet-level taskforce created the preceding year. Planning for the next decade is set forth in the document, “The Children’s Plan: Building Brighter Futures” (DfCSF, 2007). Among the commitments are the adoption in 2008 of an action plan to tackle overcrowded housing for children and of national standards concerning child health and play. The government has also pledged to increase free ECEC for 2-year-olds in the most disadvantaged communities, and has set a goal for 2020 of at least 90 percent of children developing well across all areas of the Early Years Foundation Stage profile by age 5. |
|||||||||||||||||
Demographic and Other Social TrendsThe UK is among the large European countries, with a population of 60 million in 2005, close in size to France and Italy, but significantly smaller than Germany (OECD, 2007a). Britain is an aging society, with 16 percent of its population aged 65 and older in 2005, while children under 15 accounted for 18 percent. The British family is following the same pattern as that of the other advanced industrialized countries: smaller families, fewer marriages, more divorces, more cohabitation, declining birthrates, more out-of-wedlock births, later age at first birth, and more working mothers. The British fertility rate in 2004 was 1.74. Marriage and childbearing are increasingly separate, with the illegitimacy rate increasing dramatically from 12 percent in 1980 to about 33 percent in 1996 and about 42 percent in 2005 (OfNS, 2007 (provisional data)).. Two-thirds of all extra-marital births in 2006 were to women under 30 years of age (data for England and Wales). However, both parents register most of these births. Very young children are increasingly likely to be living with cohabiting rather than legally married parents. Although Britain's teen non-marital birth rate is much lower than that of the U.S., it is the highest in the EU, by far. Lone parents constitute about 25 percent of families with children, 90 percent headed by women. Never-married mothers are the largest and most rapidly growing group constituting, 50 percent of all lone mothers in 2002 (OfNS, 2004). Ethnic and racial minorities, although still a relatively small proportion of the population, are becoming more significant. In 2005, 72 percent of married or cohabiting mothers were in the labor force, but approximately 60 percent of these worked part time. Labor force participation of lone mothers was lower, at 55 percent, but up from 41 percent in 1997. In 2005, the employment rate of women with a child under age 5 was 56 percent while the rate for mothers with older children was over 70 percent (OECD, 2007b); 39 percent of women with dependent children worked part-time (OfNS, 2005). The British government's strategy towards single parents is to halve the rate of conceptions among the under 18 year olds by 2010 and to reduce the risk of long term social exclusion by getting more teen parents into education, training, and employment (MISSOC, 2002). Using the international relative definition of income poverty, below 60 percent of median income, 27 percent of children are living in poor families. In 1997, the UK had the highest child poverty rate in the EU (30 percent) but by 2001 the rate had declined by about 25 percent and the UK ranked 11th among the EU 15. The goal is to eliminate child poverty by 2020. Most families have 1.5 earners, the father working full-time and the mothers part-time. |
|||||||||||||||||
Social ProtectionThe full flowering of the British welfare state was left for World War II and the development of the Beveridge Plan. The Plan proposed an integrated, contributory, flat-rate and universal social insurance system covering old age, retirement, disability, unemployment, sickness, and family allowances in addition to a national health service and full employment policies. Although the full proposal was never implemented, a significant part was. It shaped the British welfare state from that time on and left its mark on present British social policy. Britain spent about 20.6 percent of GDP on social protection in 2003, below the EU 15 average (23.9 percent). Of this, 6.9 percent was spent on family benefits, a little below the EU average (8.0 percent (estimated)). Britain spent about 3.0 percent of GDP on its family benefits and services that same year (OECD, 2007a). Britain has by far the highest rate of social assistance use among the European 15, according to a 2004 comparison (Neubourg, 2007) . A minimum wage (a new policy for Britain) is set at a level similar to the US minimum. Of all British social policies, family (child) benefits have varied the most in British income transfer policies. The value of child benefits has never been as high as when they were first established. The economic situation of children deteriorated especially in the 1980s and 1990s. Family benefits never had the financial, popular, political support given pensions or the National Health Service. Only starting with the Blair administration has there been a significant effort at announcing a child policy agenda, and even then there has been concern about the declining support for lone mothers. One out of five children receive Income Support (social assistance) benefits. In short, as LSE economist and social policy scholar Howard Glennerster (1997) writes, "Distinctively less generous than the Scandinavian or continental European countries, the UK system of welfare is much more dependent on the market and income tested benefits but keeps its highly developed national minimum safety net and national responsibilities for health and education. It may be called "a hard core welfare state" (Barnes, et al., 2000). |
|||||||||||||||||
Child, Youth and Family Policy RegimesMaternity, Paternity, Parental, and Family LeavesParental leave and family leave to care for dependents were established in Britain in 1999, with adoption and paternity leave, and the right to request to work flexibly, following four years later. By April 2003, there was an ordinary paid job protected maternity leave of 26 weeks (beginning in the 11th week before the baby is due, if the woman wishes), and an additional unpaid maternity leave of 26 weeks. In 2006, the pay period of statutory maternity and adoption pay was extended to 39 weeks, to take effect for children expected to be born or placed for adoption or after April 1, 2007. The first 6 weeks of leave are available at 90 percent of prior pay, and then the remaining 33 weeks at up to a flat rate (£112.75 per week). Paternity leave of 1-2 weeks is granted employees with 26 weeks of prior work, at £100 per week. British maternity pay is worth substantively less than the EU average. In the case of adoptive parents, one parent is eligible for the 52-week leave, the first 39 weeks at the flat rate payment, the remainder unpaid. An adoptive parent not taking adoption leave may take paid maternity leave. The Government has announced its intention to seek the extension of the pay period to a full year and a right for fathers to take as additional leave during the child’s first year up to 6 months of any unused maternity leave should the mother return to work that year. This additional leave would be payable to the extent of the unused portion of maternity pay (O’Brien and Moss, 2007). In 2002, 68 percent of employers supplemented the statutory benefit and duration. In 2002, 57 percent of employers with 10 or more employees provided fully paid maternity leave and almost the same percentage provided fully paid, or discretionary, paternity leave. Approximately one-half of mothers in 2005 took 7 months’ leave, and about one-quarter took more than 9 months (O’Brien and Moss, 2007). Parental leaves were established December 15, 1999, as a result of an EU directive and supplement to the maternity leave policy. Either parent having or adopting a baby and having at least one year's qualifying service with his or her employer, is entitled to an unpaid, job-protected leave which can last up to 13 weeks per parent, per child. The leave can be taken at any time within the first five years of the child's life, with a maximum of 4 weeks’ leave in any single calendar year. Variations are provided for reasons such as the poor health of mother or child and lone parenthood. Family Leave: Also in 2003, a new right to "Time Off for Dependents" was introduced, to permit employees to take unpaid “reasonable” time off for family emergencies (e.g. an ill child or spouse) and to make necessary long-term arrangements. A complementary right to request flexible working time was created for parents responsible for a child under 6 or for a disabled child under 18. That right was extended in 2007 to employees who care for an adult (O’Brien and Moss, 2007). The Government plans to expand the right to apply to parents of older children. |
|||||||||||||||||
Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC)In Britain (like the U.S.), infant schools stressing education were established in the early 19th century, expanded rapidly, and then largely disappeared to be replaced later by part-day kindergartens. They provided an "inferior" form of care and education to the children of poor working women and covered 20 percent of three-year-olds and 40 percent of 4 year olds in 1851 and 43 percent of 2-5 year olds by 1901. They constituted a voluntary but free educational service for all young children from the age of 2 or 3, if parents chose to avail themselves of it (Family Policy Studies Centre, 2000a). In contrast, middle and upper class children were cared for at-home by "nannies" or their equivalent, supplemented increasingly, beginning in the last quarter of the 19th century, by kindergartens organized on the model of the German, Friedrich Froebel (as occurred in the Nordic countries, the U.S., Canada, and several other European countries). The failure to improve the quality of infant schools for children of the working class, or to integrate these programs with the new educational philosophy of the kindergarten, and the inclusion of 5 year olds in primary schools, contributed to the decline in the popularity of nursery education in 20th century England. One other result was the continuity of a pattern of fragmentation between early education as an enrichment program and day care as a "protective" service. It took almost another century for there to be significant increase in coverage and a renewed effort at integrating the two parallel streams. The British ECEC system has now been integrated under education but still suffers from fragmentation as to program, and diversification regarding philosophy, curriculum, and program focus. The system has been very inadequate as to supply and of mixed quality at best. Significant progress, however, has been made since an OECD review in 2000. There has been an administrative shift in auspice from social welfare to education and funding shifts by the central government to the local authorities. The government is proceeding to merge education and child care. In 2006, the first legislation to deal solely with the early years and child care was enacted; it granted parents a statutory right to child care, integrated with early education for younger children, and out-of-school hours care for older children. By 2010, all 3 and 4-year-olds will receive 20 hours weekly of free education for 38 weeks and, over the long term, an additional 20 hours of free out-of-school care (OECD, 2006). Administratively, ECEC is lodged in the Sure Start Unit of the Department for Children, Schools and Families and works across government and closely with Local Authorities. Preschool has come to be viewed as a program of enrichment, preparing all children for school from the age of 2½ or 3, and day care programs, once thought of as serving children in need: poor, deprived, immigrant, neglected, abused and disabled children, are now more broadly viewed as supporting working parents and family life generally. Compulsory school begins at age 5 and almost all four-year-olds are already in school. There is little discussion, however, regarding the expansion of programs for children under 3. The compensatory and integrated early childhood program ("Sure Start") that some compare with the U.S. Headstart-or Early Headstart-program is being significantly expanded: every community is due to have a Sure Start Centre established by 2010. Although a significant proportion of the 3-year-olds are in preschool programs now, most are part-day and part-week programs. A small group or children who are "at risk" or have problems of various sorts are in social welfare day care. Only a small proportion of the under 3s are in out-of-home care and they are largely in playgroups or cared for by childminders (family day care providers). Approximately 96 percent of 3-year-olds are enrolled in early education, and of these, half, were placed in the private and voluntary sector. Ninety-eight percent of 4 year olds are in early education and ¾ are in public provisions (OECD, 2006). Child care coverage rates are high also for under 3s with working mothers. There is also interest in raising math and English achievement levels for 7 year olds. The Labor Government has also established a new child care tax credit, which is described below. |
|||||||||||||||||
Family and Child AllowancesChild Benefit (CB) is a universal (non-income-tested), monthly tax-free cash benefit provided for each child in a family, including the first. The benefit is available until a child is age 16 (or 19 if at school or in approved training) and for up to 4 months for the 16/17 year old youth who have left school or training and are looking for a job, education, or training. The benefit is financed out of general revenue, and, since 1992, has been indexed to wages. However, its value, as a percentage of social benefits or average wages has not been maintained since first established at the end of World War II. Since 1991 CB has been paid at a higher rate for the first child, and at the same rate for all others. The CB package in the early 1990s, provided to a single mother with two children, was worth about 8 percent of average male wages and 13.4 percent of average female wages. CB for a two-child, two-parent family was worth about 6.5 percent of average male earnings in 1992. It compares well with the other European countries with regard to small families (those with one or two children) but poorly with regard to larger families. In two-parent families, the benefit is paid to the mother, thus becoming (at least in the UK discussion) a kind of "mothers wage." Current reforms seek to unify child and family supports by building upon the universal Child Benefit, tying additional government benefits to parental employment, and stressing tax benefits more. |
|||||||||||||||||
Child and Family Tax BenefitsThe filing unit for income taxes is the individual, with husbands and wives being taxed independently. In April 2003, the Working Families' Tax Credit, Disabled Person's Tax Credit, Job-Seekers' Allowance, and Children's Tax Credit were replaced by two new tax credits that are administered, along with Child Benefit, through the Department of Inland Revenue. The aims of these new tax credits are to make work pay and reduce child poverty in workless households. Child Benefit is received by almost all families with children (97 percent) (Barnes & Willits, 2004). The new tax credits are called Child Tax Credit (CTC) and Working Tax Credit (WTC) and provide support to a wider range of people through a single framework. Child Tax Credit is a means-tested allowance for families with at least one child. It is paid at a higher rate to families with at least one child under the age of one (known as the baby element); and to families whose child has a severe disability. The credit is paid in weekly direct deposits, or every four weeks. The Working Tax Credit, paid in monthly direct deposits, is for low paid persons who are single; a married couple living together; or cohabitating. The level of the credit varies according to household status, presence of children, number of hours worked, child care costs, and if either resident parent is disabled. By 2004, about 90 percent of families with children were expected to be entitled to the child tax credit. The childcare component of the Working Tax Credit, the Childcare Tax Credit, offsets up to 80 percent of childcare costs for couples or lone parents. For more detail, see Mike Brewer, The New Tax Credits, April 2003 http://www.ifs.org.uk/taxben/bn35.pdf. Increases to the Child Tax Credit and the threshold for the higher level of Working Tax Credit will take effect in April 2008. |
|||||||||||||||||
Child SupportChild support (child maintenance) is the payment of financial support for a child by the non-custodial parent. Britain was late among the major industrialized countries in enacting policies designed to strengthen child support provisions. A recent report stresses the importance of child support and of the debates and proposed reform. . "The original motivation for reform in both the UK and the US came from the growing number of lone parents and their increasing reliance on welfare payments…In the UK, widespread discontent with the way in which earlier reforms in 1993 have worked has renewed pressure for further change" (Barnes et al., 2000). One of the main concerns was the low proportion of welfare recipients who were receiving child support (30 percent) and the low level of support paid by those who paid any. The 1993 legislation established the Child Support Agency (CSA), required that those receiving welfare payments use the Agency for the collection of support, and permitted others to do so if they wished. The vast majority of the CSA caseload consists of those claiming benefits. Substantial amendments to the original legislation were introduced in 1995 and again in 2000, following "a huge public outcry about the effects of the Act, partly from lone parents and their organizations, but mainly from non-resident parents affected by the policy" (Family Studies Policy Center, 2000a). The basic structure for the government's reform scheme was established in the Child Support, Pensions and Social Security Act of 2000. Under this Act, non-resident parents whose income is £200 per week or more, are required to contribute: 15 percent of net income for one child; 20 percent of net income for two children; 25 percent of net income for three or more children. Those with income of less than £200 per week pay reduced rates of maintenance. Non-resident parents with net income of £100 a week or less, and those on specified benefits (including income-based Jobseeker's Allowance and Income Support), pay a flat rate of £5 per week. The calculation takes account of all children in a non-resident parent's current family, including stepchildren. The net income used to calculate maintenance is reduced by 15 percent for one child in the current family, 20 percent for two children and 25 percent for three or more children. At the end of 2006, the Government issued a White Paper in which it proposed a redesign of the child support system to correct administrative weaknesses and to implement policy shifts to better tackle child poverty and promote parental responsibility DWP, 2006). It has been predicted that, under the new system, the number of children receiving maintenance will increase from 1.1 million to 1.75 million (Henshaw, 2006). The accompanying legislation, which is pending, would replace the CSA with a non-departmental Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission. There would be a move toward voluntary maintenance arrangements, buttressed by increased government collection and enforcement methods. Receipt of, or applying for, welfare would no longer be treated as applying for maintenance. Calculations of maintenance would be computed on gross income, a more graduated rate scale would be established, and the lowest rate raised. The Government plans over time to increase significantly the amount of maintenance payments parents on welfare may keep before it affects the level of benefits which they may receive. |
|||||||||||||||||
Other Child Conditioned Income TransfersChildren are entitled to receive certain standard income transfers, including: dependents' benefits for the children of old age pensioners; dependent's benefits for the children of a disabled worker; special benefits for a disabled child; survivor's benefits for the guardian of a minor child. Of particular importance, however, is the Income Support benefit, a cash, means-tested benefit designed to support low-income individuals (both elderly and young) and families when earnings are absent or social insurance benefits are low. Its roots are in British Poor Law and it was first established as a national public assistance scheme in 1948. It is available regardless of marital or family status to low-income individuals aged 18 or older (or 16 if pregnant or if they have a child). It offers a national, uniform minimum income worth almost half an average female wage, which makes it especially important for lone-mother families. The Blair administration focused on encouraging poor lone mothers with children aged 5 and older to take jobs rather than claim welfare, but did not require that they do this. The Brown administration is proposing to require lone parents who have older children and who are claiming Income Support to actively seek work. The policy would be phased in over 2 years, starting in October 2008; it would apply initially to lone parents with a youngest child aged 12 or older and ultimately to those with a youngest child aged 7 or older (DfWP, 2007). Since 1999, Sure Start Maternity Grants of 500 pounds (about $750 - USD have been available to help with the extra costs of a new baby for low income persons. The grant is conditioned on having obtained advice on child and maternal health and welfare. As part of the government’s strategy for strengthening the savings habit of future generations and spreading the benefits of asset ownership to all, the Child Trust Fund was created in 2005. The Government makes payments into this universal, tax-exempt long-term savings and investment account for children born from September 2002. The payment is 250 pounds, (about $500 USD), double that amount for families entitled to the full Child Tax Credit. As of March 2006, a second payment, in the same amount as the first, is made at age seven. Children may access their accounts at age eighteen. |
|||||||||||||||||
Child and Adolescent HealthBritain emphasizes child health policies in the context of its overall National Health Services and provides an exemplary home health visiting service that is targeted on young children and their families (along with the elderly and the handicapped). Child Health services in England and Wales are delivered largely through the National Health Service (NHS), which has responsibility for general practitioners, community health, and hospital services, and the DWP, where income transfers for children and their families play a critical role in supporting child health. NHS services are universal, available to the whole population regardless of income, and delivered for the most part to all children below the age of 16 (or 19 if in full time school). Since its inception, the NHS has improved the quantity and quality of child health services significantly. Child health care has remained divided between community care and hospital care, and between prevention and treatment. Children gain access to the health care system when they are born, through automatic notification of their birth to the local health visitor (HV) who is responsible for the geographic area where the family lives. HVs are registered nurses with additional public health training and are the key individuals in health care for very young children, providing health education and preventive care, visiting new mothers and babies at home usually within 10 days of the birth, and then at frequent intervals during their early years. It has recently begun to target its longer term services on higher risk family situations. In addition, responding to cultural diversity is becoming more important as well as working with ethnically, racially, and religiously diverse families with very young children. Health visiting has been and continues to be at the heart of the British child health service. The Government plans to expand and strengthen health visitors’ services to families and children. The goal is that they play a key role in preventing social exclusion; reducing inequality; responding to public health concerns such as obesity and substance abuse; promoting infant, child, and family mental health; and supporting the capacity for better parenting. With respect to the last, the government wishes to concentrate greater efforts in engaging and supporting fathers (DH, 2007). In a related move, the government has initiated 10 pilot Nurse Family Partnership projects, based on the US program, which will provide intensive home visiting to disadvantaged mothers from pregnancy through the first two years of the child’s life. The government has stated that its child health promotion program must evolve from being perceived as a “minimum universal core” to “progressive universalism,” where those with higher levels of need receive more intensive support (DH, 2007). |
|||||||||||||||||
School-Aged Children: Policies and ProgramsDespite the emphasis on mother's employment, after-school child care in Britain remains a fragmented and under-developed program. The government made major strides in recent years - the number of out-of-school clubs increased to 4,900 in 2001, an 11 percent increase from 2000 alone. This increase reflects the government's pledge in 2000 to create an additional 600,000 childcare places as part of a campaign to encourage more lone parents back to work. The extra places are due to come on stream by 2004 and are supported with increased funding for out-of-school clubs and child minders. As part of its 10-year strategy for childcare, the government has additionally pledged that, by 2010, all families will have access to year round affordable school-based childcare for children aged 5-11. For children aged 11-14, when schools are in session, all secondary schools will be open on weekdays year round from 8 am to 6 pm (HMT, DfES, and DfWP, 2004). There has also been a similar increase in the number of holiday schemes for children, which provide care for school-aged children during school holidays. In 2001 there were 12,900 holiday programs, a 10 percent increase from the previous year. The government’s 10-year strategy includes weekday childcare during the school holidays. |
|||||||||||||||||
YouthYoung people over 16 may qualify for certain benefits or tax credits if they are on a low income, looking for work, disabled, or caring for a child or older person.. If single and under 25, they may claim housing benefits, and there are varying lower thresholds for free health care and income support. These policies are viewed by some as creating a work disincentive and an incentive to teens to get pregnant. There is strong interest in reducing teen pregnancy and the government has announced a goal of halving the rate by 2010. There is interest in reducing school exclusion and high drop-out rates among 16-18 year olds from low-income families, who are not in education, employment, or training, and in improving participation and achievement in learning. Two new initiatives (ConneXions and Educational Maintenance Allowances) have been established to achieve this by providing financial assistance and other services to these youths. |
|||||||||||||||||
Reconciliation of Work and Family LifeOne major part of the British Employment Relations Act, implemented in October 1999, is a policy package designed to encourage family-friendly employment policies. This package includes regulations designed to eliminate discrimination against part-time employees, make part-time workers eligible for a pro-rated portion of all social, non-wage benefits, and to encourage flexible working time arrangements. There is also an effort to expand eligibility for maternity and parental leaves and to establish a right of employees to reasonable time off for family emergencies. A report issued by the Treasury Department provides some relevant information: Balancing Work and Family Life: Enhancing Choice and Support for Parents (HM Treasury, Department of Trade and Industry, January 2003): INTRODUCTION: 1.1 The government is committed to helping parents to balance their work and family responsibilities. The measures the government is introducing from April this year represent a steep change in both choice and support for parents, and will benefit employers, employees and their children. Key measures include:
1.2 Alongside these changes, the 2002 Spending Review included a more than doubling of resources for childcare, as part of a combined budget for Sure Start, childcare and early years that will rise to £1.5 billion by 2005-2006. This will fund the development of Children’s Centres – bringing together good quality childcare, early years education, family support and health services – and will support the creation of 250,000 new childcare places. This will mean that, between 1997 and 2006, childcare places will have been created to help around 2 million children, 1.25 million after taking into account turnover. 1.3 In addition, the government’s Work-Life Balance Campaign actively encourages business to adopt best practice and offer work-life balance opportunities across the workforce. 1.4 This document sets out the government’s strategy. It builds on the 2000 ‘Work and Parents, Competitiveness and Choice’ Green Paper and the 2002 Work and Parents Taskforce recommendations on flexible working. The document also highlights the possible next steps being considered by the Government, on which it would be interested to hear views. SUMMARY: 1.5 Chapter 2 describes the social, economic and business factors that mean flexible working is now a key issue – for parents and their children, for business and for the economy. The key drivers for change are:
1.6 Chapter 3 summarizes the benefits of helping parents to balance work and family life for families, business and the economy. Enabling parents to better fulfill their family responsibilities, when most need to combine these with work, is central to improving the conditions in which children grow up, achieving greater equality between women and men, and increasing productivity in the workplace. It is therefore key to a number of the Government’s policy objectives, including its commitment to halve child poverty by 2010 and eliminate it within a generation. 1.7 Chapter 4 outlines the Government’s strategy for enabling mothers and fathers to meet their responsibilities as parents:
1.8 The chapter also sets out possible next steps in the Government’s strategy on which it would be interested in hearing views. |
|||||||||||||||||
Housing BenefitsHousing Benefit (HB) is a means-tested, non-taxable benefit (both income and asset-tested), which provides help with paying the rent for private or public housing for people with low incomes. Council Tax Benefit (CB) is a means-tested benefit which provides help towards the tax raised by local government. Council Tax can also be reduced through the Second Adult Rebate, which applies to low-income persons over 18, other than partners, who are sharing the home. For those receiving social assistance (Income Support, or welfare) HB may be the full amount of eligible rent and CB the full amount of the tax. Local Housing Allowance (LHA), a new scheme for deciding rent payments for people receiving HB , was introduced in April 2007 and is being tested in 18 local councils. The scheme applies only to rentals from private landlords and provides for published, flat-rate allowances paid according to household size, rather than to the rent actually paid. Among other objectives, the allowance should enable families to move to larger accommodations, as noted in Tackling overcrowding in England: An action plan (DfCFG, 2007). |
|||||||||||||||||
ReferencesBarnes, H. et al. (2000). Child support reform and low income families. London: Family Policies Studies Centre. Barnes, M., & Willits, M. (2004). Families and Children in Britain: Findings from the 2002 Families and Children Study. UK Department of Work and Pensions. BBC Fact Sheet, 5/31/01. Bradbury, B. & Jantii, M. (1999). Child poverty across industrialized nations. Florence: UNICEF. Bradshaw, J., et al. (1993). Support for children: A comparison of fifteen countries. London, England: HMSO. Bradshaw, J., et al. (1996). Policy and the employment of lone parents in twenty countries. York, England: University of York. Brewer, M. (2003). The New Tax Credits, April 2003, http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn35.pdf. Castles, F. (Ed.) (1993). Families of nations: Patterns of public policy in western democracies. Brookfield, USA: Dartmouth Publishing Company. Davies, B. (1999). From Thatcherism to new labour: A history of the youth service in England, Volume 2: 1979-1999. Leicester: National Youth Agency. Department for Children, Schools and Families (DfCSF) (UK). (2007). The Children’s Plan: Building Brighter Futures. London: TSO. Available at here. Department for Communities and Local Government (DfCLG) (2007). Tackling overcrowding in England: An action plan. London: TSO. Available at www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/10.pdf Department of Health (DH) (2007). The government response to Facing the Future: a review of the role of health visitors. London: TSO. Available at here. Department of Social Security (DSS) (UK). http://www.dss.gov.uk/index.htm Department for Works and Pensions (DfWP) (UK) (2006). A New System of Child Maintenance. London: TSO. Available at www.dwp.gov.uk/childmaintenance/csa_report.pdf Department for Works and Pensions (DfWP) (UK) (2007). In work, better off: next steps to full employment. London: TSO. Available at here. Dex, Shirley (2003). Families and Work in the Twenty-first Century. Joseph Rowntree Foundation and the Policy Press. Eurostat. (2005). Statistics in Focus, Population and Social Conditions, 15/2005, “Population in Europe 2004 – First results.” Paris: Author. Eurostat. (2007). Europe in Figures – Eurostat Yearbook 2006-07. Paris: Author. Eurostat. (2008). European Social Statistics: Social Protection Expenditure and Receipts, Data 1997-2005. Paris: Author. Family Policy Studies Centre. (2000a). Child support reform, Issue Brief 8. London: Author. Family Policy Studies Centre. (2000b). Family change: Guide to the issues, Issue Brief 12. London: Author. Glennerster, H. (1997). United Kingdom's social policy: From an old social contract to a new? London: London School of Economics. Henshaw, D. (2006). Recovering Child Support: Routes to Responsibility. London: TSO. Available at here. Hirsch, D. (2006). What Will It Take to End Child Poverty? Firing on All Cylinders. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. HM-Treasury (HMT) (UK). (1999). Supporting Children through the Tax and Benefit System. Tax and Benefit Modernisation Series, No. 5. London: Public Enquiry Unit, HM-Treasury. HM-Treasury (HMT), Department for Education and Skills (DfES) & Department for Work and Pensions (DfWP) (UK) (2004). Choice for parents: a ten year strategy for childcare. London: TSO. Available at here. Kamerman, S.B. & Kahn, A.J. (1997). Family change and family policies in Great Britain, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Kamerman, S.B. et al (2003). Social Policies, Family Types, and Child Outcomes. Paris, France: OECD occasional paper. Click here for an online version. MISSOC. (2002). Social situation of the member states of the European Union. Luxembourg: European Commission. Neubourg, C. de, Castonguay, J. & Roelen, K. (2007). Social Safety Nets and Targeted Social Assistance: Lessons from the European Experience. SP Discussion Paper No. 0718. Washington: World Bank. Available at http://go.worldbank.org/LE23Y67XHO O’Brien, M. & Moss, P. (2007).United Kingdom. In P. Moss and K. Wall (Eds.), International Review of Leave Policies and Related Research 2007. (pp. 273-282). London: Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform. OECD. (2000). Initial Education to Working Life-Making Transitions Work. Paris: Author. OECD (2001). Starting Strong: Early Childhood Education and Care. Paris: Author. OECD. (2006). Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care. Paris: Author. OECD. (2007a). Babies and Bosses – Reconciling Work and Family Life: A Synthesis of Findings for OECD Countries. Paris: Author. OECD. (2007b). OECD in Figures: Statistics for the Member Countries. Paris: Author. Office for National Statistics (OfNS) (UK). (2004). Living in Britain: Results of the General Household Survey 2002. London: TSO. Available at www.statistics.gov.uk/LIB2002/default.asp Office for National Statistics (OfNS) (UK). (2006). Focus on Gender. London: TSO. Available at www.statistics.gov.uk/focuson Office for National Statistics (OfNS) (UK). (2007). Social Trends 37: 2007 edition. London: TSO. Available at here. Piachaud, D. & Sutherland, H. (2000). How effective is the British Government's attempt to reduce child poverty? CASE Paper 38. London, England: London School of Economics. Prime Minister, Written Ministerial Statement, “Machinery of Government Changes”June 28, 2007. Available at www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page12181.asp Raffe, D, et. al. (1998). Thematic review of the transition from initial education to working life: Background report United Kingdom. Paris: OECD (with permission by the Department for Education and Employment, the Scottish Office and the Welsh 0ffice). Ringen, S., et al. (1997). Family change and family policies: Great Britain. In S. B. Kamerman & A.J. Kahn (Eds.), Family change and family policies in Great Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Roberts, C. (1999). United Kingdom. European Family Observer. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities. UNICEF. (2007). Innocenti Report Card 7. Florence: Innocenti Research Centre. |
|||||||||||||||||
ContactsWashington Embassy
Ministry
Department of Public Policy and Social Work, University of Oxford
|
|||||||||||||||||
|
|
