Letter of the week: The politics of poverty

New Statesman​

04-06-2025

Photo byI wholeheartedly support Gordon Brown's urgent call to action on child poverty in your recent special edition. The sad but undeniable truth is that child poverty is not just a statistic, but a defining fault line in British society today. It is the greatest driver of social division, a scar on our national conscience, and, if left unchecked, a threat to the future prospects of millions of children. As Brown rightly notes, this is not simply a moral emergency; it is an economic and educational crisis.
We cannot talk about fixing Britain without talking about child poverty. Nor can we talk about restoring fairness or social mobility without tackling the structural barriers that trap children in disadvantage. Unless we address the deep-rooted educational inequalities that mirror and reinforce child poverty, from postcode lotteries in provision to the hollowing out of early years and special-needs support, we will fail to give every child a fair start. Millions believe that we are all better off when we care for the worst off. That compassion must now be matched by policy. Because child poverty is not inevitable. It is the result of political choices. And with the right choices, we can lift the next generation out of poverty and into promise.
Mike Ion, Shrewsbury
Food for thought
One of my earliest memories is visiting the clinic with my mum to collect my orange juice and cod-liver oil, provided free by the government to keep me healthy. At my primary school there was free milk for everyone every day. This was about 1946, when the country was virtually bankrupt after fighting the war. Later, at secondary school we all had a midday meal of meat and two veg and pudding, again free. This was not just socialist ideology – nothing was withdrawn by Churchill or Macmillan. It was taken for granted by both parties that children must be properly nourished. Compared to those days the country is now enormously wealthy, but children go hungry. What has happened?
John Lowell, Cheadle Hulme
Brown's bairns
I find it more than curious that in Gordon Brown's guest-edited child poverty issue there is no reflection on the fact that the one part of the UK where levels of child poverty are dropping is where he lives – in Scotland. Why has he not mentioned this?
Child poverty in the UK has risen to 31 per cent while that in Scotland has dropped to 22 per cent. Surely there is a story worth looking at here.
Ernie Watt, London
Relative riches
In 1950 my parents had to give up our modern house in Birmingham because they couldn't make ends meet, and we moved to an old terrace house with an outside toilet and no hot water. The present houses in Ladywood would have seemed lovely. We of course had no phone and no car, and our clothes were hand-me-downs (so was my bike) or were made by my mother. But we had a radio and a cat, I played cricket and football in the street, I could go to the park and to the library, a government scheme enabled us to build a bathroom, I had two parents who loved me and loved each other, and through Mr Tunnicliffe and Miss Swift at Rookery Road Junior School and through the eleven-plus, things changed for my sister and me.
I guess we were poor, though we were typical of our street. After reading the New Statesman issue, I still don't have a very clear picture of what poverty means in 2025. I need stories, and also an impression of how typical they are. And maybe we need to set the problem and the desired actions about poverty alongside the questions Rowan Williams raised about how democracy recovers a grounding in solidarity.
John Goldingay, Oxford
Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe
Lineker's red card
Although Gary Lineker is on the right side in the Gaza debate, it was only proper that he left the BBC for his mistake (Media Notebook, 23 May). Though I do feel he has become a victim of one of the pitfalls of social media. It's so easy to hit share within seconds of seeing content only to notice something sinister moments later when the damage has already been done. So what will happen to the social media outlet that allowed the post in the first place? I'm guessing nothing. Maybe this is another reason we still need the old media Alison Phillips talks about. Some research first, then the story.
Rob Grew, Birmingham
Trump's ties
'Superhuman narcissism' (Neil Kinnock, 23 May) is one but not the only explanation for Trump's behaviour. For example, his failure in months to bring the peace in Ukraine he boasted he'd achieve within hours can be explained, as FBI and congressional investigations have shown, by his loyalty to Vladimir Putin. Former allies of Russia's president have admitted to interfering in US elections. Trump may, therefore, owe a lot to Putin.
Similarly his failure to safeguard the planet boils down to another favour returned. For this election campaign, while he didn't quite receive the $1bn in contributions he reportedly pushed for from oil executives, it was close. So again, he owes them. He's a narcissist, but he won't bite the hands that feed him.
David Murray, Wallington
Rivers of life
Thank you for the interview with Robert Macfarlane (Encounter, 23 May). I hope there will be more articles about the environment in the front pages because, as with the water issue, the environment is political. Flood risks can be reduced at next to no cost by introducing beavers. Carbon can be sequestered without spending billions on carbon capture and storage simply by preserving peatland. You can't chop down old orchards and woodlands and expect the same ecological benefits from compensation planting elsewhere.
Children in poverty can benefit from, among other things, access to nature. Here in Cambridge, there are children from poor households who have never seen the River Cam, even though they live just a mile away. Ecological literacy is important and as long as this Labour government bats away people who care about, well, bats and other wildlife, voters will desert them.
Tim Tam, Cambridge
Write to [e-mail]
We reserve the right to edit letters
[See also: Gary Lineker and the impartiality trap]
Related