Spending cuts 'will see rise in absolute child poverty' | Politics | The Guardian

If we were genuinely all 'in this together' our government would not be enacting policies that will push more and more children into both absolute and relative poverty. Those who 'have the broadest shoulders' as the Coalition Govt have put it are supposed to be 'taking the biggest load' - clearly they aren't! See this Guardian report on an authoritative study by the Institute for Fiscal Studies,

The government's radical programme to slash spending will see the first rise in absolute child poverty for 15 years, with almost 200,000 children pushed into penury, according to an analysis by the Institute of Fiscal Studies.

Tax changes introduced by the coalition government will, the leading independent fiscal thinktank finds, increase absolute poverty by 200,000 children and 200,000 working-age adults in 2012-13.

Cuts to housing benefit alone will force a further 100,000 children into poverty.
In the next three years the IFS says average incomes are forecast to stagnate and this, coupled with deep cuts in welfare, will see a rise in relative poverty for children and working-age adults of 800,000 and a rise in absolute poverty for the same group of 900,000.

The institute directly challenges the government's claim that the impact of the budget would have no effect on child poverty...

Spending cuts 'will see rise in absolute child poverty' Politics The Guardian

When Fairness sticks in your throat (Jonathon Porritt)

When Fairness sticks in your throat (Jonathon Porritt)

...So how does Nick Clegg deal with this? Predictably, he sets out to shoot the messenger, attacking the Institute of Fiscal Studies for getting it all wrong with their “distorted” methodology. “Complete nonsense”, he claims. All very embarrassing when you think that the IFS was one of the Lib Dems’ favourite independent think-tanks before power corrupted their judgement...

Poor suffer most from spending review cuts

Deputy PM Nick Clegg is very unwise and unmeasured indeed to launch such an outspoken attack on the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) - using words like 'frightening people' and 'airbrushing' - because it is very widely respected for its expertise, independence and authority. This is not good leadership and in fact both Nick Clegg and Chancellor George Osbourne praised the IFS highly during the summer general election! Take a look at why the IFS regard the spending review as on the whole affecting poorer people more than richer people here. For me it makes very good sense to conclude that the poor will suffer most because they are the ones most reliant on the public services and benefits that have been savagely cut - and even the government's own figures (see image), calculated in their own way, show that the bottom 10% are hit hard. Government attempts at making the cuts 'fair' are far too small.

Spending review: Clegg attacks "nonsense" IFS warning - Channel4 News

More on this issue from:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11598234

http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/6397563/ifs-the-spending-review-was-regressive-sorta.thtml

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9113000/9113265.stm

http://www.jrf.org.uk/blog/2010/10/spending-review-progressive-or-regressive