Teenage kicks

The coverage in the mainstream media of this week’s Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development report on child welfare does not paint a pretty picture of young people in Britain.

Some of the statistics on Britain’s young people are indeed shocking. The proportion of young people not in education, training or employment – the so-called Neets – now exceeds that found in Turkey or Mexico. Underage drinking is worse than in any of the 30 other countries surveyed and we come fourth in the tally of country’s with high teenage pregnancy rates.

But away from the gloomy headlines, the report does highlight some good news for children being raised in Britain: children are materially well-off, bullying rates are low and children report high levels of satisfaction with school life. It’s important that these positives aren’t overlooked.

Castigating all British teenagers seems to be a favoured pastime each time the latest research on childhood is published but it doesn’t do society any favours. Stigmatising all young people as drunkards and unruly troublemakers will hardly help to change their behaviour for the better.

The papers have also picked up on the report’s claim that high levels of investment on child welfare and education have failed to produce results in many areas. Some commentators have seized on this as an opportunity to condemn Labour for lavishing huge sums on children and to call for a slash in welfare spending. But this would miss the point. It is countries which spend the most – notably Scandinavia – that top many of the tables in the report.

And, as the OECD’s secretary-general, Angel Gurria, warns, belt-tightening during the recession should not leave children’s budgets short. "Any short-term savings on spending on children’s education and health would have major long-term costs for society,” he warns.

Continued investment in the early years - an ethos long supported by the Labour government – and better targeting of funds aimed at older children is what is needed, the report says. Not kneejerk reactions to headline figures on teenage pregnancies. The Labour government – and the Tories – would do well to take note.

Working to order

Currently wending its way before Parliament is the Government’s welfare reform bill which incorporates many controversial measures in its bid to reduce Britain’s hefty benefit bill.
Not least of these are the proposals concerning lone parents. Introduced to Parliament last December, the White Paper has been informed by Paul Gregg’s report which veers distinctly towards the Daily Mail approach to benefit reform: all stick and no carrot.

The Bill requires lone parents with children as young as three to undertake work-related activity or face sanctions. Organisations representing lone parents are justifiably concerned. Underlying sanctions is the assumption that benefit claimants can find suitable work and if they don’t, well, that’s their fault and they should be penalised.

Getting lone parents working is an admirable aim and many single mothers – for it is almost always mothers – are keen to secure a job. But the rudimentaries of the bill ignore the realities of modern life as a lone parent. Jobs that fit in around the school calendar – both on a daily basis and during the holidays – are very difficult to find, particularly in a faltering economy. And despite advancements in the provision of childcare, the reality remains that it is both difficult to source and expensive to fund. Personally, I know of many nurseries in London that have waiting lists of well over a year.

Single parent charity, Gingerbread, has pointed out that the Government would do better to raise the income levels that lone parents could earn before losing their benefits, thus acting as a financial incentive which would enable more to take up part-time work.

Some organisations are now hoping that the arrival of Yvette Cooper at the helm of the Department for Work and Pensions may herald a softer approach to welfare reform. Time will tell whether their hopes are misplaced.