Midlands areas named among child poverty hotspots
A number of Midlands areas have been named among the UK's child poverty hotspots.
A total of 4.5 million children were living in poverty in the year ending March 2024 - the last full year under the Conservative Government - according to the latest figures from the DWP.
A new interactive map (below) allows people to check rates in their postcode. Areas coloured in darker purple have higher deprivation levels.
READ MORE: Five-word text message landing on phones could empty your bank account
Get our local newsletters like Black Country News, MySolihull and MySuttonColdfield straight to your inbox
The Birmingham areas of Bordesley Green and Heartlands were third and fourth on the national list, with seven in 10 kids living in poverty.
Figures showed more evidence of the north/south divide, with the 20 worst affected areas all in the north of England and Birmingham.
Taking a closer look at the map, a number of the worst-hit areas can be seen in east and south east Birmingham, as well as Aston.
Struggling areas include Ward End; Tyseley and Hay Mills; and Bromford and Hodge Hill.
Parts of Walsall, Sandwell and Wolverhampton also have around half of children living in poverty.
It comes amid the continued row over the two-child benefit cap, labelled by critics as "cruel" amid claims it is responsible for deepening child poverty.
Under the cap, parents can only claim Universal Credit and tax credits for their first two children.
As poorer families tend to be bigger, this policy hits those struggling the most.
Pressure is continuing on the Labour Government to scrap the cap.
Joseph Howes, CEO of Buttle UK and chair of the End Child Poverty Coalition, said: 'Scrapping the two-child limit is a crucial first step to address rising child poverty across the UK.
'By doing this the Government could also see a boost to local economies, targeting some of the most deprived areas of the country.
'We don't want to see another year of families suffering as a result of the two-child limit.
"The Government must scrap this policy as part of their soon to be published strategy to tackle child poverty."
A Government spokesperson said: 'No child should be in poverty – that's why our ministerial taskforce is developing an ambitious strategy to give every child the best start in life as part of our Plan for Change.
'Alongside delivering on our Get Britain Working reforms to support people into good jobs and make everyone better off, we have increased the Living Wage, uprated benefits and are supporting 700,000 of the poorest families by introducing a Fair Repayment Rate on Universal Credit deductions to help low-income households.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Verge
31 minutes ago
- The Verge
Anthropic launches new Claude service for military and intelligence use
Anthropic on Thursday announced Claude Gov, its product designed specifically for U.S. defense and intelligence agencies. The AI models have looser guardrails for government use and are trained to better analyze classified information. The company said the models it's announcing 'are already deployed by agencies at the highest level of U.S. national security,' and that access to those models will be limited to government agencies handling classified information. The company did not confirm how long they had been in use. Claude Gov models are specifically designed to uniquely handle government needs, like threat assessment and intelligence analysis, per Anthropic's blog post. And although the company said they 'underwent the same rigorous safety testing as all of our Claude models,' the models have certain specifications for national security work. For example, they 'refuse less when engaging with classified information' that's fed into them, something consumer-facing Claude is trained to flag and avoid. Claude Gov's models also have greater understanding of documents and context within defense and intelligence, according to Anthropic, and better proficiency in languages and dialects relevant to national security. Use of AI by government agencies has long been scrutinized because of its potential harms and ripple effects for minorities and vulnerable communities. There's been a long list of wrongful arrests across multiple U.S. states due to police use of facial recognition, documented evidence of bias in predictive policing, and discrimination in government algorithms that assess welfare aid. For years, there's also been an industry-wide controversy over large tech companies like Microsoft, Google and Amazon allowing the military — particularly in Israel — to use their AI products, with campaigns and public protests under the No Tech for Apartheid movement. Anthropic's usage policy specifically dictates that any user must 'Not Create or Facilitate the Exchange of Illegal or Highly Regulated Weapons or Goods,' including using Anthropic's products or services to 'produce, modify, design, market, or distribute weapons, explosives, dangerous materials or other systems designed to cause harm to or loss of human life.' At least eleven months ago, the company said it created a set of contractual exceptions to its usage policy that are 'carefully calibrated to enable beneficial uses by carefully selected government agencies.' Certain restrictions — such as disinformation campaigns, the design or use of weapons, the construction of censorship systems, and malicious cyber operations — would remain prohibited. But Anthropic can decide to 'tailor use restrictions to the mission and legal authorities of a government entity,' although it will aim to 'balance enabling beneficial uses of our products and services with mitigating potential harms.' Claude Gov is Anthropic's answer to ChatGPT Gov, OpenAI's product for U.S. government agencies, which it launched in January. It's also part of a broader trend of AI giants and startups alike looking to bolster their businesses with government agencies, especially in an uncertain regulatory landscape. When OpenAI announced ChatGPT Gov, the company said that within the past year, more than 90,000 employees of federal, state, and local governments had used its technology to translate documents, generate summaries, draft policy memos, write code, build applications, and more. Anthropic declined to share numbers or use cases of the same sort, but the company is part of Palantir's FedStart program, a SaaS offering for companies who want to deploy federal government-facing software. Scale AI, the AI giant that provides training data to industry leaders like OpenAI, Google, Microsoft, and Meta, signed a deal with the Department of Defense in March for a first-of-its-kind AI agent program for U.S. military planning. And since then, it's expanded its business to world governments, recently inking a five-year deal with Qatar to provide automation tools for civil service, healthcare, transportation, and more.
Washington Post
an hour ago
- Washington Post
Trump tax bill would add $550 billion in interest payments to national debt
President Donald Trump's massive tax and immigration proposal would lead the federal government to spend hundreds of billions of dollars extra paying new interest on the soaring national debt, congressional bookkeepers reported Thursday, as lawmakers come to grips with the gargantuan cost of the GOP's policy agenda. The Congressional Budget Office projected that new borrowing the legislation would force the government to make would also lead to $550 billion more in interest payments. That would raise the overall price tag of the measure, titled the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, to $3 trillion over the next decade.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
MP: Grenfell-style mistakes could be repeated over battery storage regulation
The Government risks repeating the mistakes of Grenfell unless safety regulations on battery storage units are brought forward, an MP has warned. Liberal Democrat John Milne said there were 'alarming parallels' with the systemic failure which led to the west London tower block fire. Currently there are no laws which specifically govern the safety of battery energy storage systems (Bess), according to the House of Commons library. However, individual batteries could be subject to product safety regulations. Speaking in the Commons, Mr Milne accused the Government of being 'too complacent' as he called for enforceable regulations for the design and construction of the storage systems. The MP for Horsham said: 'The Grenfell disaster was the end result of many failings by both individuals and companies, but at its heart it was a failure of regulation. 'The rules left things wide open for exploitation by cost-cutting developers, and that is exactly what happened. 'Just as with lithium-ion batteries, a new technology, in this case cladding, was being used at scale for the first time without proper understanding of the risks. The time to act is now.' He continued: 'The Government itself has responded to all questions from myself and others to say that it considers the present regulatory regime to be robust. I am tempted to say pride comes before a fall. 'In the last few weeks a Department for Energy Security and Net Zero spokesman has stated that battery fires at storage sites are rare in the UK, we already have high standards in place that require manufacturers and industry to ensure batteries are safe throughout their lifespan. 'This is just too complacent. 'Fires as a result of cladding were also incredibly rare, but that did not save 72 lives at Grenfell.' Mr Milne said the industry would benefit from clear guidance, before adding: 'Any guidance needs to cover-off a number of areas, including transport of batteries to the site, design and construction, fire-fighting, ongoing inspection and decommissioning. 'In the short term, if the Government is for any reason still reluctant to regulate, perhaps it could issue clear national guidelines which are capable of being updated annually. 'Enforcement might then take place through the insurance industry, who would be likely to insist that any new applications followed such guidelines, as no project can go ahead without insurance, it is enforcement by the back door. 'Grenfell was a wholly predictable tragedy. A similar fire at Lakanal House in Camberwell, which killed six people, should have made us understand the risk, but the warning wasn't heeded and history took its course. 'We can't go back in time to stop Grenfell, but we can act now to avoid making the same mistake again with battery energy storage systems.' Elsewhere in the debate, Conservative MP for Mid Buckinghamshire Greg Smith said there should be minimum distances between battery storage sites and housing. Mr Smith said: 'This is not a debate about the principle of energy storage, although I am in principle opposed to such schemes taking agricultural land and challenging our food security, but today's debate, which is deeply concerning, and what this House must urgently address, are the real, growing, and too often overlooked safety implications of these installations, particularly when placed in close proximity to villages, and rural road networks ill-equipped to support them.' He added: 'At the very least the Government should introduce clear national guidelines on the siting of Bess installations, including minimum separation distances from residential properties, fire resilience standards, mandatory site-specific risk assessments and restrictions on placing these facilities on, or near, rural roads.' SNP MP for Aberdeen North, Kirsty Blackman, said developers should pay towards fire mitigation measures. She said: 'If we're saying to those organisations that are creating the battery storage sites, you will need to pay for the fire safety assessment, you will need to consult the local fire and you will need to pay for the training of those local fire teams in tackling fires at battery energy storage sites, I think that would be the most reasonable way forward. 'Ask them to pay for that training, because it's them that are going to be making a huge profit off it.' Energy minister Miatta Fahnbulleh said: 'It is often claimed that there is no regulation in this sector because there is no specific law addressing battery safety. This is simply untrue. 'The safety and standards of batteries are assured throughout their life cycle. The Government is therefore confident that the safety risks posed by grid-scale batteries are relatively small and well managed.' She added there is 'scope to strengthen' the planning process.
