## 

Local authorities working to reduce child poverty 20 January 2009 Hilary McCollum, London Councils, Chair 
Hilary welcomed everyone to London Councils. She highlighted the high levels of child poverty in London and the low level of parental employment levels. This event is to find out what support London boroughs need to reduce child poverty in London, with a view to forming a network and developing a programme of support. 
Kate Green, Chair, London Child Poverty Commission 
y 
Local authorities need to work with key local partners, such as health, JCP and 
be strategic in their approach to delivery; 
y 
Not just about reducing parental employment, also about improving children's life 
chances, better educational attainment for low income children etc; 
y 
The costly option is to deal with the outcomes related to child poverty - more 
worklessness, poorer health etc. London Councils needs to make the case to 
invest now in preventative measures; 
y 
There are complex patterns of poverty across London; also have particularly 
complex issues in London around infrastructure, a competitive labour market, 
lack of social housing and high population churn; 
y 
Local authorities have a key role to play in encouraging employers to adopt more 
flexible working practices. Both by leading by example as large employers 
themselves and engaging local Small and Medium Sized Enterprises (SMEs); 
y 
This is a complex, multi-faceted problem that needs a co-ordinated response 
across different local services; 
y 
The Government is planning to bring in a duty on public bodies, including local 
authorities, to close the gap between the rich and the poor. London boroughs will need to consider what changes are needed to different services to make them 
work for disadvantaged people and families; 
y 
London boroughs also have a key role to play in planning the advice landscape - 
making advice visible and available in accessible settings; 
y 
Strong leadership by the borough is needed to reduce child poverty to improve 
the services that families use regularly. London boroughs should develop a 
strategy at local level; 
y 
There should be a child centric approach and it should be led by Children's Services because of this. 
 
Cllr Shireen Ritchie, RB Kensington and Chelsea 
- 
The approach to child poverty by London boroughs in the past has been sporadic. Boroughs have undertaken a broad range of activities across different services but these often have not been co-ordination. A corporate, cross-cutting 
approach is needed which is challenging. 
- 
Local Area Agreement targets are one way of reducing child poverty - 11 London boroughs have a specific target to reduce child poverty (NI 116); signing up to the London Child Poverty Pledge is another way of getting the Council to 
consider how a range of services can reduce child poverty; 
- 
LB Islington has developed a Framework for Action to reduce child poverty 
through a sub-group of its Local Strategic Partnership (LSP). Activities include a focus on a parent's transition into employment but also providing support across a range of services and professionals. LB Islington is taking an individualized, 
 

## 

child-centred approach but across a range of different services with a corporate 
lead; 
- 
RB Kensington and Chelsea has concentrations of child poverty in small pockets. The Council is developing a range of initiatives - including piloting a life coaching schemes for social housing tenants called 'Launch Pad' that gets individuals to define and achieve goals; getting Children's Centres to work with the Adult and Family Learning Service to reduce poverty and identifying families in the borough that face multiple disadvantages and develop an offer for them across a range of 
services; 
- 
National, regional and local government should not loose their commitment to 
reducing child poverty in times of recession; 
- 
There is a need to be clear about the terminology used around child poverty - 
different people and organizations call it different things; 
- 
There is also a need to improve local data on child poverty. 
 
Shifa Mustafa, LB Waltham Forest 
 
- 
In Waltham Forest there are 16,000 children living in poverty and 22,000 
working age adults who are not in work; 
- 
Waltham Forest has developed a strategy with the aim to lift 3,000 children in 
the borough out of poverty by 2011 and eradicate poverty by 2020; 
- 
Activities build on what has already been developed through the City Strategy 
Pathfinder (CSP) - such as the 32 single points of access in the borough where residents can access advice and help on employment, housing, childcare and 
health issues; 
- 
The five borough Multi-Area Agreement (MAA) will also help deliver activities through joint commissioning and freedom and flexibilities around employment programmes but also looking at how best to invest in new affordable housing, 
considering people's employment in nominations and allocations; 
- 
This is a focused and targeted approach - focusing on both need and opportunities. Outreach is key and for parents, schools are often the first contact 
they might have with local authority services; 
- 
Data sharing across agencies is also important to develop co-ordinated and 
comprehensive support to families;  
- 
The programme is overseen by a Waltham Forest Poverty Board - a multiagency board chaired by the Leader of the Councils; 
- 
Every report going to the Council's Executive now has to identify what impact a 
decision will have on the child poverty aim. 
 
Q&A Session Key points raised included: - 
Local partners are key to delivery, as are Government departments, and these 
should be included as members of any London network as well as London boroughs; 
- 
Health is a particularly important partner - particularly around preventative work 
and early interventions. Health partners often take a more critical approach to evidence. In some areas, the joint strategic needs assessment has led to joint work around child poverty locally; 
- 
There is a need to consider the role that housing plays in child poverty more fully 
- not just in relation to worklessness but also in terms of poor housing conditions and their effects on life chances.