UK Parliament / Open data

Child Poverty Bill

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hollis of Heigham (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 9 March 2010. It occurred during Debate on bills on Child Poverty Bill.
My Lords, I do not feel very strongly about this amendment, but I wonder whether it is necessary. In an earlier amendment—I am not sure if it was moved by the noble Baroness, Lady Thomas, or the noble Lord, Lord Kirkwood—the noble Lord, Lord Freud, like me, made a distinction between information and targets. The information he seeks for those, not just below 60 per cent but below 50 per cent, is indeed already well publicised in Households Below Average Income. For example, page 40 gives the percentage below 50 per cent of the whole population; page 72 the percentage for children. On the 2007-08 figures, this is 12 per cent compared with 23 per cent below the 60 per cent line. That information, therefore, is already there and well known. We raised a similar issue when we were debating whether it was before or after housing costs. It is essentially the same issue. We have the information there. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Freud, that the figures for below 40 per cent are entirely suspect. People may be in the black economy or the cash economy, they may be self-employed, they may be shopkeepers or living off lodgers, and that income is not necessarily always declared. We do not know. He is, however right to say that the standard of living reported does not reflect the income as reported. The numbers are in any case very small. It is very hard to pick that up unless one does some sort of focus group or qualitative survey of those you can pick out. For the rest, however, we have the figures for those below 60 per cent median income and those below 50 per cent; we already have the information. I do not see what is added by building it into the vocabulary of targets. It is perfectly reasonable to ask the commission to see whether those below 50 per cent median income are distinctive from those below 60 per cent and whether there is any particular driver there that Government have a lever on that can help. That is perfectly reasonable. I am puzzled, however, if the information is in the public domain already, why the noble Lord thinks this amendment is necessary.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
718 c229 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Back to top