Report highlights child poverty

Download article in original language : FR0403105FFR.DOC

According to a report published in February 2004 by the Council for Employment, Income and Social Cohesion (CERC), some 1 million children in France live below the poverty threshold. The report finds that this phenomenon particularly affects lone-parent and large families, and studies its causes, such as the parents’ weak employment status (low wages, poor conditions or unemployment) and difficulty combining work with childcare. To break away from 'the poverty cycle', CERC suggests moving towards a more redistributive system of social transfers.

On 17 February 2004, the Council for Employment, Income and Social Cohesion (Conseil de l’emploi, des revenus et de la cohésion sociale, CERC), chaired by Jacques Delors and reporting to the Prime Minister, published a report on 'Child poverty in France' (Les enfants pauvres en France, CERC, La documentation française, Paris, 2004). This study finds that around 8% of under-18s, ie 1 million children, were living below the financial poverty threshold in 1999-2000, this threshold standing at the figure of EUR 560 per month used by the National Institute for Statistics and Economic Research (Institut national de la statistique et des études économiques, INSEE). It is even likely that some tens of thousands of children in poverty do not figure in the statistics, due to not including in the research France's overseas territories and départements, homeless people and those living in collective accommodation. The study confirms prior research, and the situation it reveals is not unknown by experts and voluntary organisations in the field

Aspects of child poverty

Although France occupies an average position in terms of European levels of general poverty, the rate of child poverty is above average for the EU. 'Setting ourselves the goal of significantly reducing child poverty would satisfy a social justice objective and in the longer term, the republican aim of improving equality of opportunity,' the authors of the CERC report stress.

Child poverty emerges from the research as being tightly linked to the weak employment status of the parents. According to the CERC, 'poverty in households whose members are within the age range of the active population stems less from low hourly wages … than from weak structural employment position and conditions. Therefore, child poverty is first and foremost a consequence of the parents’ employment problems.'

Child poverty particularly affects children in lone-parent families (23% of poor children are in this situation) and in families of four or more children as well as families headed by immigrants. The rate of child poverty is thus clearly higher for children whose parents are not EU nationals, standing at 25.9%. The report notes that 'if the head of family is educated to baccalauréat level, the risk of poverty [is] six times higher for immigrants from non-EU countries, than if that person is French or an EU national.'

Risk of 'reproduction'

Poverty is found to be tied to 'the inadequacy of all transfers related to the presence of a child'. Although policy on child benefits enables family income to be raised, it fails 'significantly to reduce the rate of child poverty'.

The report clearly highlights the risk of 'reproduction' of child poverty, ie of being locked into a condition of poverty. Being born into a poor household often exposes a child to the danger of remaining poor in adult life. Indeed, by subjecting children to related dangers (health risks, educational failure etc), the accumulated effect of these factors increases the risks of experiencing problems in adulthood.

Such a threat of reproducing poverty is exacerbated by the high level of educational failure among low-income families. At the age of 17, 18% of children in families with the lowest standard of living have left school, compared with only 1% for those in the most advantaged category.

If the distinguishing feature of a child is to be 'a developing person', poverty undergone in childhood weighs heavily over a child’s fate by preventing him or her from accruing the intellectual, cultural, and health-related assets required in adult life, the report states. This situation, imposed upon children, has long-term consequences that contribute to successive generations of the same families being consigned to poverty. This is why the situation is said to deserve greater attention than it has hitherto been afforded. In the opinion of Martin Hirsch, the chair of the charity Emmaüs France: 'these figures show that the social escalator has broken down. These are the children of poor workers and the unemployed, and at an early age they find themselves caught in the spiral of exclusion' (quoted in Aujourd’hui en France on 18 February 2004).

The report’s recommendations

The report’s analysis of child poverty concludes with policy recommendations comprising a 'national anti-child poverty programme', in which some areas for priority action are set out:

• an improvement of the employment situation may be achieved by enabling parents to find a balance between their working life and their parental responsibilities. The report emphasises that measures concerning parental leave and greater accessibility to forms of childcare could usefully alleviate difficulties faced by some families. It also suggests that a 'genuine locally-based public service covering early childhood and the initial years of schooling' should be created. The lone parent benefit (allocation de parent isolé, API) should systematically go hand-in-hand with individual job-seeking assistance - such as training, help in finding childcare arrangements and addressing problems on an individual basis - to avoid the current situation whereby many API recipients slide into drawing the 'minimum integration income' (revenu minimum d’insertion, RMI) (FR0007174N), the effect of which is to keep children in poverty for extended periods;

• an improvement in the lot of children in families receiving minimum benefits could be achieved by establishing child benefit from the birth of the first child and setting the 'employment bonus' to favour poor workers with children. Moreover, the CERC floats the idea of a significant rise in child-related benefits, and a greater degree of income redistribution;

• to combat negative effects on children’s development directly, the report stresses the need for early action, respect for 'the primary responsibility of parents', continuity of action and the coordination of bodies and staff involved in the actions. The report calls for particular actions to be developed in the fight against educational failure by targeting children experiencing difficulties from the outset of their school careers; and

• it is emphasised that the actions targeted on children in families headed by immigrants must be coordinated with anti-discrimination policy focusing on employment, and with housing policy.

Commentary

Echoing the report’s authors, who note that 'the goal of reducing child poverty scarcely figures on the political agenda', Marie-Aleth Grard, head of the children’s section of Aide à toute détresse Quart Monde (Fourth World Assistance, a charity working with the very poor) expressed a fear that 'a report like the CERC’s will not lead to widespread action ... Two years ago, the State Children’s Advocate, Claire Brisset, presented a report on child poverty identical in an number of places to CERC’s. Unfortunately, that did not get us anywhere. There is a real need for people to get organised and get the politicians and the government moving' (quoted in France Soir on 18 February 2004). However, although the report has provoked little response in political circles, the broad coverage it has received in the press and responses from the non-governmental organisations active in the field of social solidarity may mean that it will help put this issue on the agenda. (Yves Lochard, IRES)