Login Register
 °

Lincoln has 'one of the worst levels of child poverty in East Midlands'

By Lincolnshire Echo  |  Posted: February 25, 2013

Child poverty
Comments (14)

Lincoln has one of the worst levels of child poverty in the East Midlands, according to new figures.

A report published this month shows 22 per cent of children in the City of Lincoln Council area are affected – the same proportion as Derby.

It means more than 4,000 children are in poverty in the city, with some households having as little as £13 per person per day to spend.

Only the City of Nottingham – 32 per cent – and the City of Leicester – 29 per cent – have higher levels than Lincoln.

However, the figure is an improvement on the 25 per cent reported in a City of Lincoln Council survey in 2011.

Lincoln MP Karl McCartney said: "Child poverty is one of the biggest issues facing our country.

"But I feel the debate concerning child poverty, and poverty more generally, needs to be better understood."

Published on Wednesday, February 20, the Child Poverty Map of the UK revealed shocking levels in some parts of the country.

The figures were taken in mid-2012 for the Campaign to End Child Poverty.

In Lincolnshire, East Lindsey was second to Lincoln with 19 per cent, followed by Boston at 16 per cent, West Lindsey and South Holland both at 13 per cent and North Kesteven at 8 per cent.

Lucy Rigby, the Labour parliamentary candidate for Lincoln, said: "The figures are quite concerning and should be concerning for everybody in Lincoln.

"But for me the worrying thing is it's going to get worse. The Institute for Fiscal Studies recently said it expects the number of children in poverty to rise to 200,000 in the next year."

Read more from Lincolnshire Echo

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters

14 comments

  • Bolshie  |  February 25 2013, 5:41PM

    I agree with a lot of what has already been said in the comments - too much is taken from those hard working folk to support those who won't ( as distinct from can't) work. I also think the EU rules enabling migrant workers are what have flooded the job market here creating the situation whereby employers have abundant competition for manual labour and they can afford to pay the absolute minimum wage. That of course is exacerbated by a benefit system that encourages continued idleness amongst the workshy and much worse turns them into baby factories - thereby perpetuating the problem and increasing the incidence of child poverty. What I find most distressing though is Mr McCartney's statement - if child poverty is indeed one of the biggest issues affecting our country; and the debate about it needs to be better understood you might expect that he'd have raised the issue of Lincoln's child poverty situation in Parliament or taken steps himself to make his constituents aware of the core tenets of the debate. I follow his parliamentary work via theyworkforyou.com, I subscribe to his own email newslwetters and check his website regularly. He has uttered not one single word on the matter to date in any forum I am aware of - which leads me to question what exactly he is doing if he's doing nothing about one of the biggest issues facing the country. Or - most likely - he spouted a few non-specific vacuous words when asked for a comment and immediately cast his 'care' aside.

    |   8
  • gordonio  |  February 25 2013, 3:18PM

    On the High Street today I heard more foreign languages spoken than English. To cap it all I was stopped by two foreign speaking men, who asked in broken English, how to get to Newland, I wonder where on earth they could be headed for? Answers on a postcard please.

    |   2
  • InsideStory  |  February 25 2013, 12:52PM

    people on benefits are already working for forced labour with some of our profitable companies for free so your idea is nothing new.And as far as i living in the real word i have been for many a year and i have never claimed unemployment benefits but i don't for one minute blame anyone for not wanting to work for nothing and nor should anyone while high paid company directors and such live off the hard work of employees.Sorry i don't go for the sob story that employers cant afford to pay respectable livable wages ,if they invested in their employees they would harvest the results in having contented productive staff who would work harder and treat customers and clients with more enthusiasm and the employer gaining more revenue from the customer care.With out workers a business as nothing their employees are their business.

    |   12
  • InsideStory  |  February 25 2013, 12:36PM

    Gresh47 People on benefits are already working for forced labour with some of our profitable companies for free so your idea is nothing new.And as far as i living in the real word i have been for many a year and i have never claimed unemployment benefits but i don't for one minute blame anyone for not wanting to work for nothing and nor should anyone while high paid company directors and such live off the hard work of employees.

    |   11
  • paper  |  February 25 2013, 11:33AM

    When you put it like that 'Bicksy' what you're saying makes total sense.

    |   6
  • paper  |  February 25 2013, 11:07AM

    'InsideStory' Hear Hear!

    |   1
  • Bicksy  |  February 25 2013, 11:06AM

    @Insidestory I take your point and certainly not here to "generalise everyone" in such a bracket, however I'm being more specific to a 'certain breed' as I mentioned who fit this stereotype. I don't particularly like working the hours I do, only to see almost two weeks of my salary being taken from me every month, part of which is to pay for their white lightening on a daily basis. As you don't fit into that bracket, naturally I'm not referring to you who is out working, in very much the same as the sick and needy who're unable to work.

    |   5
  • paper  |  February 25 2013, 11:02AM

    'InsideStory' Hear Hear!

    |   1
  • FreedomSpeech  |  February 25 2013, 10:53AM

    The problem as I see it is not just child poverty, but the definition of child poverty.

    |   -1
  • Gresh47  |  February 25 2013, 9:41AM

    InsideStory, You need to join the rest of us in the real world. It's a peculiar attitude that employers are to blame for the poverty in LIncoln. Employers can only pay what they can afford and this is dictated by competition. To me the problem is largely that over the years successive governments have allowed the benefits to rise to such an extent that some people feel they can't afford to work. Anyone receiving jobseekers allowance should have to work in the volunteer sector so many hours a week, that way the country as a whole would get the 'benefit'.

      YOUR COMMENTS AWAITING MODERATION

       
       
       

      MORE NEWS HEADLINES