Latest news with #CPAG
Daily Mirror
6 days ago
- General
- Daily Mirror
'I don't know how I'm going to put food on table let alone days out in summer holidays'
Almost half of parents (48%) are more worried about being able to afford things for their children this summer holiday compared to last year, grim research shows Almost half of parents (48%) are more worried about being able to afford things for their children this summer holiday compared to last year, grim research shows. This rises to 69% for lone parents, a survey by the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) found. Some 45% of parents say the cost of childcare is a challenge over the summer and 29% say they have to borrow money or go into debt to cover these costs, the study found. Parents said they will struggle to pay for food and snacks and other basics for their children, such as sun cream, as well as fun activities like sports clubs, a trip to the beach or small treats like an ice cream. Some 44% of parents said they will likely use a foodbank this summer holiday and two in five families (39%) said they would likely use a clothing bank. And more than half of parents (52%) said they were worried about the continued pressure on living standards taking a toll on their children's mental health this summer, while 48% said they were worried about their child's physical health. One parent told the survey: 'I don't know how I'm going to put food on table let alone days out.' One mum, speaking about their son, said: 'The money is just enough to pay the bills and buy essentials. I do feel for him because as a family we can't enjoy outings or short breaks during the summer holidays (which were fun at one time).' Another parent added: 'It [the summer holiday] should be a happy time, but for many people, it's just another mountain to climb. I wish there was more low-cost or free help for families during the holidays. We do our best, but it doesn't always feel like it's enough.' Head of education policy at CPAG Kate Anstey called for the two-child benefit limit to be scrapped. CPAG research estimates that ditching the Tory-era policy, which restricts claims for Child Tax Credit and Universal Credit to the first two children, would lift 350,000 children out of poverty and mean 700,000 children are in less deep poverty. Ms Anstey said: 'This research shows there will be more worry than wonder this summer for millions of desperate families who can't make ends meet. Ministers have promised better living standards and opportunity for all but with children facing another summer cut off from fun and friends - much more action is clearly needed. 'Government's autumn child poverty strategy must restore investment in support for families – including abolition of the two-child limit – otherwise a generation of children will be left behind.' A government spokesman said: 'We recognise the school holidays can be a pressurised time for parents, which is why this government is putting pounds back in parents' pockets both during the holidays and in term time. 'We are also continuing to fund free holiday clubs through the Holiday Activities and Food programme which provides six weeks of activities and meals for any child from a low-income family who needs it.' ::: Survation surveyed 1,580 UK parents on income-related benefits with at least one child aged 4-18 years for CPAG between July 10-17.
Scoop
20-07-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
Inflation Numbers Expose Govt's Economic Failure
Today's inflation numbers reveal more than rising prices; they expose a government failing by its own standards while our most vulnerable pay the price. 'While Christopher Luxon talks about growth at all costs, New Zealanders across the country are being forced to choose between heating their home or feeding their families,' says Green Party Co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick. 'We can build an economy that works for people and planet, but that requires decisions that prioritise the wellbeing of all, instead of lining the pockets of those at the top. 'Luxon's Government is cutting investment and creating the conditions for severe unemployment, shredding the social safety net, pushing thousands into poverty, and then punishing them for it. 'A report this morning from the Child Poverty Action Group showed that rent, food, and utilities now swallow 62 – 98 per cent of disposable income for beneficiary families and over 60 per cent for full-time minimum-wage workers. 'A Green Government will do things differently. Instead of taxpayer subsidies for new gas fields in the middle of the climate crisis and slashing investment in our communities - we would rapidly reduce emissions, reduce the cost of living, and improve New Zealanders' quality of life. 'Christopher Luxon shows people who he works for in his actions every day. While telling regular people there's 'no magic money tree,' he's found billions for military spending, fossil fuel, tobacco, and landlord tax cuts. 'Luxon's Government now has the gall to blame Local Government, who have had their credit ratings downgraded because Luxon's Government pulled the rug out on fixing our water infrastructure. 'A better world is possible, and it starts with the sun setting on this one term Government,' says Chlöe Swarbrick. Notes: CPAG released a report today which found that 'Between 2018 and 2024, policy changes slowly reduced the number of households in weekly shortfall. From 2024 to 2025, the trend reverses." The CPAG report also found that "Rent, food, and utilities now swallow 62 – 98 per cent of disposable income for beneficiary families and over 60% for full-time minimum-wage workers"
Scoop
20-07-2025
- General
- Scoop
Families Below The Income Floor Face Growing Crisis
Many low income households across Aotearoa are now living below the income floor, with increasingly fewer households able to cover the bare essentials, according to new research released today by Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG). The research builds on modelling by the Welfare Expert Advisory Group (WEAG) and extends it to cover varying levels of income and expenses across 39 different household types over eight years, revealing that the vast majority remain in persistent and growing deficits. These deficits mean incomes are failing to meet both core living costs and the costs needed to meaningfully participate in society, placing thousands of children at risk of entrenched hardship. "This modelling shows that our society is seriously failing children who live in low-income households. Families continue to be locked in poverty and unable to break through the constraints of the income floor", said CPAG Research and Programmes Officer Dr Harry Yu Shi. The project tracked single adults, couples and sole parents on income support or in low-wage work from 2018 to 2026. Despite periodic increases to benefits and wages, the research finds that income support and the minimum wage have not kept pace with rising living costs. Key findings include: Minimum wage no longer guarantees adequacy: Couples with two children working 40 hours on minimum wage are already in deficit in 2025. By 2026, even a combined total of 60 hours of work will not be enough to lift them above the income floor. Sole parents facing severe shortfalls: Sole parents with three children in private rentals are $170 short each week of meeting basic costs, leaving them far below the income floor regardless of whether they receive Best Start support or not. Rising hardship over time: While incomes improved modestly between 2021 and 2024, the research shows the households we modelled are now universally worse off from 2025 onwards. Housing costs pushing families deeper into deficit: Couples on Jobseeker Support with two children and average rental costs are more than $300 per week short. Single adults not spared: Those on Jobseeker or Supported Living Payment are nearly $100 per week below the income floor needed for basic necessities. "The evidence is clear: even working full time or combining wages with benefits is no longer enough to enable families to break free of the constraints of poverty," said Dr Harry Yu Shi. "The income floor is rising and families are being pushed under it by increasing rents, food costs and stagnant supports. Without urgent action, more children will grow up locked out of the opportunities every New Zealander deserves." The research also highlights that improvements achieved following the 2021 Wellbeing Budget have been reversed. All 39 households modelled are on a trajectory of worsening deficits by 2026, regardless of income type or household size. CPAG is calling for immediate increases to core benefit rates, stronger indexing to living costs and policies to lift working incomes. "We cannot accept a system where our children are unable to flourish because the powerful currents of our economy force families to live below the income floor," said CPAG Research and Programmes Officer Dr Harry Yu Shi. The next stage of this research projects aims to use Integrated Data Infrastructure (IDI) to establish how many real households fit into each category, and therefore, the true scale of this issue. Notes: - Based on the Welfare Expert Advisory Group's 2019 principles, the income floor refers to the minimum level of income needed for individuals and families to meet their basic needs and participate meaningfully in their communities. This level must also be maintained over time to keep pace with rising costs. - Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) is launching a campaign to raise awareness of the 'income floor' - the minimum income needed to live and belong - and how many households in Aotearoa are now falling below it.
The Guardian
18-07-2025
- The Guardian
Women who conceived in abusive relationships lose legal challenge over benefits ‘rape clause'
Two women who conceived their eldest children while they were in violent and controlling relationships have lost a legal challenge to the rules around the two-child benefit cap. A high court judge said the accounts of the abuse the women faced when they were 'vulnerable girls barely out of childhood' were 'chilling'. But in a judgment delivered on Friday, Justice Collins Rice said it was for politicians to settle the matter, not the courts. The women, and campaigners who support them, said they were disappointed but would fight on to have universal credit rules changed. The two mothers, identified only as LMN and EFG, launched a challenge to the rules around the so-called rape clause in universal credit claims at a court in Leeds in June. The two-child cap for universal credit claims has exceptions to cover a limited number of circumstances, including if a child is conceived nonconsensually. But the court heard how this only applies to third or subsequent children, leaving some women unable to utilise this exception if, for example, their first two children are conceived after rape but they have further children in consensual relationships. The women, whose claim was against the Department for Work and Pensions. were supported by the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), which describes the benefit rules as 'inhumane'. The judge said the two women endured abusive relationships that included rape. 'They are chilling accounts of appalling domestic abuse,' she said. 'Vulnerable girls barely out of childhood themselves caught in toxic relationships, or repeating cycles of such relationships, in which their personal, reproductive and family autonomy is acutely compromised by the physical, sexual and emotional violence of controlling perpetrators.' She said the women were 'among the most harmed and vulnerable' members of society while as mothers they were 'making an important and valuable' contribution to it. The judge said CPAG had brought a legal challenge to the two-child cap before. 'That made its way to the supreme court, which, in 2021, firmly returned the matter to the political realm.' She said she had reached the same place as the supreme court did before, saying it was 'a policy question dealing in social, economic, moral and ethical subject matter' and a 'political law-reform question'. The judge added: 'The law does not compel a government, or a parliament, to provide the answer the claimants seek. This claim is dismissed accordingly.' In a statement after the ruling, the mother named EFG said: 'All of my choices were taken away from me for years by my abuser before I fled. I've fought hard to get on with my life for me and my kids. But the two-child limit makes it more difficult. 'The government says that the exceptions are to protect people who – like me – didn't have a choice about the number of kids in their family, but the rape clause doesn't do that. The rules need to change to protect families like mine. The result today is disappointing but I will keep going and fight this to the end.' The other mother, LMN, said: 'I want to keep going with the case as I feel like it's against my human rights. When my oldest came back to live with me from care and before I got the exception for my youngest, we had to survive on less money. That stopped me doing things with the children – I never planned on having the children but that's not their fault.' Claire Hall, a solicitor at CPAG who represented the women, said they would look at appealing against the decision, but in the meantime, 'all eyes are on the government which has the chance to do the right thing and abolish the inhumane two-child limit in the autumn child poverty strategy'. Hall added: 'Our clients have provided their children with safe and loving home environments but the rules have failed to protect them and their children from the impacts of the two-child limit.'
The National
18-07-2025
- The National
2 mothers lose legal challenge against DWP over rape clause rules
The mothers had both conceived their eldest children while in abusive relationships. The non-consensual conception exception, also known as the rape clause, allows universal credit (UC) recipients to claim benefits for more than two children – but only if the third or subsequent children have been conceived non-consensually. This leaves some women unable to use this exception if, for example, their first two children are conceived in rape, but they have further children in consensual relationships. READ MORE: John Swinney sets out 3-point plan to achieve Scottish independence The two mothers, identified only as LMN and EFG, brought legal action against the DWP over the rules around the policy, saying they breached their human rights and were 'irrational'. In a ruling published on Friday, Justice Collins Rice dismissed their claim, saying the issue was 'a policy question' and not for a court to decide. A hearing at Leeds Administrative Court in June heard both women were young and vulnerable when they began relationships in their teens and first became pregnant. Karon Monaghan KC, representing the women, said both were subject to regular violence and coercion, with one describing how she was choked to unconsciousness and raped multiple times. EFG conceived her two eldest children through rape and was told she could not claim the benefit for her third and fourth children, both of whom were conceived consensually in a later long-term relationship. She was initially paid the child element of UC for the third child, but this was later rescinded, after the fourth child was born. Mother-of-six LMN was subjected to domestic abuse and violent and coercive behaviour by former partners with whom she had children. READ MORE: Independence campaigners react to new John Swinney referendum plan Monaghan said she had older children in care and two living with her, but then one of the older children returned to her home. She was refused an exception to the two-child limit under these 'ordering provisions'. The Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), which provided the women's legal representation, said that while LMN was eventually granted an exception for her youngest child, 'she went for years without this support, amounting to thousands of pounds which will not be backdated'. Justice Collins Rice said the two women were 'survivors of appalling relationship abuse' which involved 'sustained physical, sexual and psychological violence'. She said their claim was that: 'The UC 'two-child benefit cap' should not apply to them, unless and until they have been afforded the opportunity everyone else takes for granted – if they can, to bring two children into the world as a result of freely chosen intimacy within a freely chosen relationship. 'This is an argument which takes its place in the intensely controversial political debate within which both proponents and opponents of the 'two-child benefit cap' have advanced their views over the years, in which CPAG has played an active and tireless role, and which continues to the present day. 'To the extent that it is conducted in the political arena and in the forum of public opinion, that is where the argument will ultimately be resolved.' The judge concluded: 'There is no legal analysis, or standards, by which a court can decide whether or not UC recipients who are mothers of two non-consensually conceived children should receive additional financial support from the state by excepting them from the 'two-child benefit cap' and paying the child element of UC for a further one or two consensually conceived children. 'It is a policy question dealing in social, economic, moral, and ethical subject matter. It is also a question with potential resonances in family law more generally. It is a political law reform question.' Responding to the judgment, the woman known as EFG said the decision was 'disappointing' but that she would 'keep going and fight this to the end'. The woman said: 'All of my choices were taken away from me for years by my abuser before I fled. I've fought hard to get on with my life for me and my kids. 'But the two-child limit makes it more difficult. The Government says that the exceptions are to protect people who – like me – didn't have a choice about the number of kids in their family, but the rape clause doesn't do that. "The rules need to change to protect families like mine.' The woman known as LMN added: 'I want to keep going with the case as I feel like it's against my human rights. READ MORE: Unionists accuse John Swinney of pressing 'panic independence button' 'When my oldest came back to live with me from care and before I got the exception for my youngest, we had to survive on less money. That stopped me doing things with the children – I never planned on having the children but that's not their fault.' Claire Hall, solicitor at CPAG who represented the women, said: 'Our clients are obviously disappointed with today's decision but are determined to keep going with their cases. 'We will look at appealing today's decision but in the meantime all eyes are on the government which has the chance to do the right thing and abolish the inhumane two-child limit in the autumn child poverty strategy.' A DWP spokesperson said: 'Violence against women and girls is a national emergency – and our mission is to halve it within a decade. 'Victims of rape and coercion should be treated with dignity and respect. 'This court decision is about whether a policy – designed by the previous government – was being implemented lawfully. 'This policy will be considered along with all other levers including Social Security reform by the Child Poverty Taskforce, the group will publish the Child Poverty Strategy in the autumn.'
