NATIONAL ANTI-POVERTY STRATEGY: A SOCIETY BASED ON SOLIDARITY? Helen Johnston Director Combat Poverty Agency

STRUCTURE OF TALK Economic & Social Context Evolution of National Anti-Poverty Strategy Lessons & Challenges

ECONOMIC CONTEXT Celtic tiger - economic boom in late 1990s Increase in employment at 4.7% per year Falls in unemployment –15.9% (1993)  4.9% (2003) –long-term unemployment 8.9%  1.4% Since 2000 economic slowdown Inflation 3%

SOCIAL CONTEXT Income support –social insurance - contributions –social assistance - means-tested –universal - child benefit Education –high attainment, but high drop out Health –30% free health –47% private health insurance Housing/Accommodation –home ownership 82% –social housing residual

CONSISTENT POVERTY When a person has less than 70% median income + does not have basic items (food, clothing, heating)

INCOME POVERTY 60% median income incomes increasing in economic boom increase in low incomes but less than population generally increasing income inequality increase in depth of poverty

POVERTY RISK GROUPS Unemployed Working in the home/adults living alone older people, especially women Ill/disabled 4 or more children Lone parents Travelling community & other ethnic groups

LIVED EXPERIENCE OF POVERTY In-depth study of low income families 30 families: 50 adults; 28 children Broad spectrum of circumstance –Rural/urban; one/two parents; small/large families; working/not working Very low average income - €124 pw (2000) Money on food, households bills & children’s basic needs

LIVED EXPERIENCE OF POVERTY Money carefully managed Lives dominated by shortage of money Widespread borrowing + indebtedness Bypassed by Celtic Tiger Poor health – adults & children Strong correlation between low income and ill health

LIVED EXPERIENCE OF POVERTY Limited education Unemployment or insecure jobs Poor local environment Importance of family relationships

LIVED EXPERIENCE OF POVERTY 28 children interviewed Children valued their families Peer pressure Importance of brand names School a place of danger

IRISH NATIONAL ANTI-POVERTY STRATEGY (NAPS) Conceived UN world summit 1995 Launch of Strategy 1997 –agreed definition of poverty –analysis of causes and those at risk –global target for poverty reduction –5 themes: education, employment, income, disadvantaged urban areas, rural poverty –structures for implementation –equality & participation principles –10 year time frame

POVERTY DEFINITION People are living in poverty if their income and resources (material, cultural and social) are so inadequate as to preclude them from having a standard of living which is regarded as acceptable by Irish society generally. As a result of inadequate income and resources people may be excluded and marginalised from participating in the activities which are considered the norm for other people in society

POVERTY PROOFING The process by which government departments, local authorities and state agencies assess policies and programmes at design and review stages in relation to the likely impact they will have or have had on poverty and on inequalities which are likely to lead to poverty, with a view of poverty reduction

BROADER POLICY CONTEXT National Development Plan –promoting social inclusion a key objective –substantial financial resources (€19B) 3 year social partnership agreements –substantive social inclusion element –P2000 contained commitment to review NAPS

BUILDING AN INCLUSIVE SOCIETY Retention of definition of poverty 36 targets in total –Themes: income; employment; education; health; housing/accommodation –Groups: women; children & young people; older people; Travellers; people with disabilities; ethnic minorities; urban & rural dwellers Stronger institutional framework Data & research strategy

KEY ELEMENTS 3 legged stool employment social welfare services Key targets eliminate consistent poverty (reduce to 2%) eliminate long-term unemployment increase social welfare rates to €150 pw by 2007

INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK Cabinet Sub-Committee on Social Inclusion National Office for Social Inclusion Social Inclusion Units in Govt Depts & Local Authorities Social Inclusion Consultative Group Social Inclusion Forum Combat Poverty Agency

POLICY APPROACH

EUROPE 15% of population in poverty –Sweden 9%; Ireland 18%; Portugal & Greece 21% 9% of population in persistent poverty (>3 yrs) –Denmark, Finland, Netherlands 5%; Ireland 12%; Portugal 14% Structural inequalities –importance of employment & education Income inequalities related to high poverty risk –importance of social transfers

COMMON OBJECTIVES NATIONAL ACTION PLANS 1. To facilitate participation in employment & access to resources, rights, good & services for all 2. To prevent the risks of exclusion 3. To help the most vulnerable 4. To mobilise all relevant bodies

STRUCTURE OF NATIONAL ACTION PLANS Trends and challenges Strategic approach, main objectives & key targets Policy Measures Institutional Arrangements Good practice

NATIONAL ACTION PLANS AGAINST POVERTY & SOCIAL EXCLUSION (NAPsincl) : Initial Plans Joint Report on Social Inclusion 2002 Social Indicators - 18 primary : Current Plans

IRISH CONSULTATION REPORT economic context rights-based approach dedicated resources regional context gender mainstreaming vulnerable groups public services social indicators

IRISH NAPinclusion Endorsement of NAPS targets To monitor relative income levels Policy measures specified 2 year time-frame

CRITIQUES Relevance to broader political & societal context Rights-based approach Need for implementation & local delivery Need for ongoing involvement Need for monitoring and evaluation

LESSONS (1) Positive relationship between economic development, employment & social inclusion Political acceptance & commitment Vision Agreement on key issues to be addressed Mainstreaming social inclusion

LESSONS (2) National to Local Universal & Targeted Approaches Participation & Partnership Monitoring Progress European Dimension

CHALLENGES Dominant ideology Turn plans into reality Collaboration and integration Economic and social complementarity Active citizenship

CONCLUSION NAPS - a society based on solidarity? Not yet - but has potential.