Child poverty

CPOver 30% of children in Harrow live in poverty where child poverty is rising to 40% in some wards – but there seems to be no urgency to solve poverty either by public or the authorities.
Harrow council report,  Child Poverty And Life Chances, reports that the poverty rises in some of the more deprived areas of the borough:  Roxbourne has the highest percentage of child poverty levels with 28.5% (before housing costs) rising to 42% after housing cost. Wealdstone, Marlborough, Greenhill, West Harrow, Queensbury and Roxeth have the next highest child poverty levels in the borough.
Harrow is a part of the system where there are 151 billionaires in the UK and 14 million people in poverty, including 4.1 million children in 2017-18 (Commons Briefing papers SN07096 and Child Poverty).
Children from Black and minority ethnic groups are more likely to be in poverty: 45 per cent are now in poverty, compared with 26 per cent of children in White British families, Child Poverty reported.
The Resolution Foundation’s projections suggest child poverty will rise within the next five years, and will be 6 percentage points higher in 2023/24 than in 2016/17: equivalent to an extra 1 million children in poverty, informs the Commons briefing report. This is bound to reflect in the Harrow profile as more and more social housing is provided in the borough.
The Child Poverty Act 2010 required local authorities and their partners to cooperate to tackle child poverty in their local areas but child poverty has never been high on the agenda in Harrow since the Act came into force because Harrow isn’t comparatively deprived at a borough average level.
Although the council budgetary situation does not help to allow to make valuable local connections across services and adequately focus on early intervention and prevention, Harrow has a child poverty action plan based on five priorities [including health and well being of children, support for families with housing, and tackling financial exclusion like debt management, financial literacy, affordable credit and maximise benefit take up].
However, the structure and programme to implement the plan is not impressive.
The Plan has no stated success criteria; for example, in terms of health and educational outcomes.  Actions and progress towards achieving unspecified outcomes is seemingly monitored by the child poverty task group (?) which reports into the health and wellbeing board who seems to have ultimate responsibility for owning the child poverty strategy and action plan.
Many say that the board gives sense of being a talk-shop which mostly notes reports rather than commanding improvement in the services.
Very odd that having identified strong connection between child poverty and child welfare, child poverty is not treated as a safeguarding issue and addressed within the Harrow structure of safeguarding children.