Official government statistics show that one child in five (2.6 million children) lives in poverty (See BBC Article: Children's commissioners warn on child poverty).
Where do these children come from? The answer is shockingly simple. According to the House of Commons. Work and Pensions Committee: Child Poverty in the UK 25% of children in the UK lived in homes with a single parent in 2003 and according to the Office of National Statistics 25.1% of children in the UK were born to immigrants (See Births in England and Wales by parents’ country of birth, 2010).
The UNICEF Working paper:THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN IN IMMIGRANT FAMILIES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM makes it clear that immigration is a major cause of childhood poverty and suggests that about 50% of child poverty in the UK is due to immigration. The appropriate section is quoted in full below:
"Between 1979 and 1997, the incidence of child poverty rose threefold in the United Kingdom. One child in three now grows up in poverty, the highest rate in Europe (Phung 2008). There is evidence that child poverty is more common among children in immigrant families than among children in native-born families. According to Heath and Cheung (2006), higher unemployment rates and lower employment rates and wage levels among ethnic minority populations, as well as the ethnic penalty, underpin much of the difference in
child poverty among ethnic groups relative to Whites. Government figures show that children with ethnic minority backgrounds are more likely to live in low-income households than are White children; the respective shares are 38 and 18 per cent (DCSF 2005a).
There are variations in child poverty by ethnic group. Poverty rates are especially high among children in the Bangladeshi group (72 per cent), the Black African group (56 per cent) and the Pakistani group (60 per cent), compared with the rate among White children (25 per cent). A government report on ethnic minorities in the labour market shows that the Bangladeshi, Black Caribbean and Pakistani groups experience significantly higher average unemployment rates and lower earnings than Whites. The same disadvantage exists in household incomes.While a quarter of White households have incomes at or below the national average, the corresponding share among the Bangladeshi group is four fifths (Cabinet Office 2003). The links between disadvantage and immigration are clear in London, where 51 per cent of workless households with children are headed by first-generation immigrants (Spence 2005).
There is an association between ethnicity and a range of factors known to contribute to poverty among children, including large household size, the ethnic penalty linked with the labour market and other forms of discrimination. Indeed, Platt (2007a, 2007b) suggests that it is important to consider employment and income at the household level, but also other household characteristics the incidence of which may vary by ethnic group, including, for example, the number of dependants and the number of sick and disabled in households with children and the extent to which older children remain in post-compulsory education. Farrant and Sriskandarajah (2006) point out that households in the Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani groups tend to have higher fertility rates and thus larger families. This means that nearly a third of the families in the Bangladeshi group have three or more children, compared with only about a fifth (18 per cent) of White families. In 2002, a third of all children in the United Kingdom were living in families with three or more children, but half of all children in poverty were in these larger families. Farrant and Sriskandarajah (2006) hold that an important issue may be an apparent bias in the child support system towards the first child in a family and towards smaller families."
With poverty rates of 60% or more amongst the children of immigrants some 10% of children will be poor children of immigrants (See note below). This accounts for 50% of child poverty in the UK (20% of children are poor and half of these are children of immigrants). Most of the remaining child poverty (50% of child poverty) would be due to family breakdown. This child poverty is costing everyone a fortune.
What is fascinating about the discussion of Child Poverty (see the BBC article) is that it is couched entirely in terms of how much extra the tax payer should donate and how the Government is failing the poor and needy. There is no mention of immigration and family breakdown.
We are not being governed badly, it is worse than that. We can never get our heads above water if our social services and best efforts are being drowned by the free movement of labour. We can never have happy children if there are no efforts to ensure happy marriages. Worst of all we cannot have a working democracy when journalists are so ignorant and Machiavellian and hide the truth from the people.
Incidentally, if you are anti-immigration you have a democratic tool, just never vote Labour again, Labour set up the current mass migration in 1997 - just look at the migration graphs.
The graph above shows the scale of UK immigration. (See Office of National Statistics Figures. Notice how Labour doubled the migration rate as their first policy initiative in 1997 and also the epic scale of UK immigration which accounts for 30% of all EU population growth - equal to the population of Birmingham every 4 years and comparable to the peak immigration rates in the pre 20thC history of the USA).
Where do these children come from? The answer is shockingly simple. According to the House of Commons. Work and Pensions Committee: Child Poverty in the UK 25% of children in the UK lived in homes with a single parent in 2003 and according to the Office of National Statistics 25.1% of children in the UK were born to immigrants (See Births in England and Wales by parents’ country of birth, 2010).
The UNICEF Working paper:THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN IN IMMIGRANT FAMILIES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM makes it clear that immigration is a major cause of childhood poverty and suggests that about 50% of child poverty in the UK is due to immigration. The appropriate section is quoted in full below:
"Between 1979 and 1997, the incidence of child poverty rose threefold in the United Kingdom. One child in three now grows up in poverty, the highest rate in Europe (Phung 2008). There is evidence that child poverty is more common among children in immigrant families than among children in native-born families. According to Heath and Cheung (2006), higher unemployment rates and lower employment rates and wage levels among ethnic minority populations, as well as the ethnic penalty, underpin much of the difference in
child poverty among ethnic groups relative to Whites. Government figures show that children with ethnic minority backgrounds are more likely to live in low-income households than are White children; the respective shares are 38 and 18 per cent (DCSF 2005a).
There are variations in child poverty by ethnic group. Poverty rates are especially high among children in the Bangladeshi group (72 per cent), the Black African group (56 per cent) and the Pakistani group (60 per cent), compared with the rate among White children (25 per cent). A government report on ethnic minorities in the labour market shows that the Bangladeshi, Black Caribbean and Pakistani groups experience significantly higher average unemployment rates and lower earnings than Whites. The same disadvantage exists in household incomes.While a quarter of White households have incomes at or below the national average, the corresponding share among the Bangladeshi group is four fifths (Cabinet Office 2003). The links between disadvantage and immigration are clear in London, where 51 per cent of workless households with children are headed by first-generation immigrants (Spence 2005).
There is an association between ethnicity and a range of factors known to contribute to poverty among children, including large household size, the ethnic penalty linked with the labour market and other forms of discrimination. Indeed, Platt (2007a, 2007b) suggests that it is important to consider employment and income at the household level, but also other household characteristics the incidence of which may vary by ethnic group, including, for example, the number of dependants and the number of sick and disabled in households with children and the extent to which older children remain in post-compulsory education. Farrant and Sriskandarajah (2006) point out that households in the Bangladeshi, Indian and Pakistani groups tend to have higher fertility rates and thus larger families. This means that nearly a third of the families in the Bangladeshi group have three or more children, compared with only about a fifth (18 per cent) of White families. In 2002, a third of all children in the United Kingdom were living in families with three or more children, but half of all children in poverty were in these larger families. Farrant and Sriskandarajah (2006) hold that an important issue may be an apparent bias in the child support system towards the first child in a family and towards smaller families."
With poverty rates of 60% or more amongst the children of immigrants some 10% of children will be poor children of immigrants (See note below). This accounts for 50% of child poverty in the UK (20% of children are poor and half of these are children of immigrants). Most of the remaining child poverty (50% of child poverty) would be due to family breakdown. This child poverty is costing everyone a fortune.
What is fascinating about the discussion of Child Poverty (see the BBC article) is that it is couched entirely in terms of how much extra the tax payer should donate and how the Government is failing the poor and needy. There is no mention of immigration and family breakdown.
We are not being governed badly, it is worse than that. We can never get our heads above water if our social services and best efforts are being drowned by the free movement of labour. We can never have happy children if there are no efforts to ensure happy marriages. Worst of all we cannot have a working democracy when journalists are so ignorant and Machiavellian and hide the truth from the people.
Incidentally, if you are anti-immigration you have a democratic tool, just never vote Labour again, Labour set up the current mass migration in 1997 - just look at the migration graphs.
The graph above shows the scale of UK immigration. (See Office of National Statistics Figures. Notice how Labour doubled the migration rate as their first policy initiative in 1997 and also the epic scale of UK immigration which accounts for 30% of all EU population growth - equal to the population of Birmingham every 4 years and comparable to the peak immigration rates in the pre 20thC history of the USA).
13/12/2011
See
Illiteracy in England
Immigration, house prices and boom economics
The London riots and the mediocracy
Is the pro-immigration lobby racist..?
The predicted population of the UK
The devastating effects of immigration on the economy and society of the UK
Further reading:
Regional characteristics of foreign-born people living in the United Kingdom http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/regional-trends/regional-trends/no--43--2011-edition/regional-characteristics-of-foreign-born-people-living-in-the-united-kingdom.pdf
Note: 60% of immigrant's children are poor and 25% of children are immigrant's children, so 15% of children are poor immigrant children by UN estimates, however, the UK estimates child poverty at 20% whilst UN estimates of UK child poverty are 30% so only 10% of children are poor immigrant children on the basis used by the UK government, which is half of the total.
UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre Innocenti Working Paper THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN IN IMMIGRANT FAMILIES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM Heaven Crawley Special Series on Children in Immigrant Families in Affluent Societies IWP-2009-18 http://www.childmigration.net/files/iwp_2009_18.pdf October 2009
Illiteracy in England
Immigration, house prices and boom economics
The London riots and the mediocracy
Is the pro-immigration lobby racist..?
The predicted population of the UK
The devastating effects of immigration on the economy and society of the UK
Further reading:
Regional characteristics of foreign-born people living in the United Kingdom http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/regional-trends/regional-trends/no--43--2011-edition/regional-characteristics-of-foreign-born-people-living-in-the-united-kingdom.pdf
Note: 60% of immigrant's children are poor and 25% of children are immigrant's children, so 15% of children are poor immigrant children by UN estimates, however, the UK estimates child poverty at 20% whilst UN estimates of UK child poverty are 30% so only 10% of children are poor immigrant children on the basis used by the UK government, which is half of the total.
UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre Innocenti Working Paper THE SITUATION OF CHILDREN IN IMMIGRANT FAMILIES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM Heaven Crawley Special Series on Children in Immigrant Families in Affluent Societies IWP-2009-18 http://www.childmigration.net/files/iwp_2009_18.pdf October 2009
Comments