Quarter of Oxford's children now living in poverty

Sarah Darby, joint manager of the Barton Advice Centre       Pictures: Jon Lewis Buy this photo » Sarah Darby, joint manager of the Barton Advice Centre Pictures: Jon Lewis

THE number of children classed as living in poverty has risen to a quarter of all youngsters in Oxford, new research shows.

The study by the Campaign to End Child Poverty found 8,345 children in the city were living in poverty.

It showed poverty rates in the city had increased by three percentage points, from 22 per cent in 2011 to 25 per cent in 2012.

The figure is higher than the national average of 20.2 per cent.

Staff at advice centres said that the findings were not surprising, but reacted with disappointment.

Carole Roberts, of Rose Hill and Donnington Advice Centre, said: “Things are just getting worse at the moment. It is absolutely disgusting in a city like Oxford that one child in four is living below the poverty line.

“We are having more and more families visiting us with debt problems. It is getting to be a nightmare.

“It is about time that people in this city told the Government that enough is enough. We will be getting soup kitchens next because food banks won’t be able to cope with it all.”

Sarah Darby, joint manager of Barton Advice Centre, agreed, saying: “We have definitely experienced an increase in families visiting and that will only get worse over the next few months. But I am surprised the figure is that high.”

Related links

Suzy Drohan, fellow joint manager of Barton Advice Centre, added: “This could make the situation worse, especially when the level of support to children is not being increased.

“In an affluent city like Oxford, for a quarter of children to be identified as in poverty is outrageous.

“The use of food banks has gone from something which was exceptional to something which is fairly average.

“It is the squeeze on working-age people that is unfortunately making child poverty increase.”

The research was published by the Campaign to End Child Poverty, a group of more than 100 charities which tackles the issue across the UK.

Cowley-based Oxfam is among the charities which support the campaign. Those classed as living below the poverty line belong to two groups.

The first is defined as children in households with below 60 per cent of the median national income of £26,500 before housing costs. That means households who are working, but earning less than £16,000 a year before housing.

The second group is those whose parents do not work and are in a family which is in receipt of out-of-work benefits.

To calculate the percentage figure, the two groups are added together and divided by the total number of children in the area to work out the average.

The city is split – with 27 per cent of children in the Oxford East constituency living in poverty compared to only 12 per cent in Oxford West and Abingdon.

Meanwhile, though child poverty in general across Oxfordshire is below the national average, it is on the increase in every district (see graphic).

More than 16,000 children in the county are defined as living in poverty according to the report.

Comments(12)

Myron Blatz says...
9:33am Thu 21 Feb 13

It's ironic - leading Oxford City Councillors are well-know for making a public 'song and dance' and spending huge amounts of public money on getting the City 'greener' and more 'eco-friendly' to reduce its financially liability on waste and to make the 'City of dreaming spires' more attractive for tourism, but precious-little about rhe homeless, and disgusting levels of child poverty and deprivation across the City. Spending money on 'showcase' playgrounds on the big Council Estates might look good in the newspapers and the PR blurb whuch the City spends money in, but fails to address the problems. Child poverty and deprivation won't go away by simply brushinv it under the carpet of political 'feel-good spin' - and it's no use Labour-controlled City Council trying to blame 'Coalition cut-backs' because deprivation figures have been growing for years before the Tory/LibDems came to power, and have got worse since Labour took control in Oxford.

zimmer, Wolvecote. says...
1:12pm Thu 21 Feb 13

Myron, surely you know that £200,000 greenie buses charging £3 a ride are far more important than poor people that are forced to live on Estates far from the "dreaming spires". If only the tourists could get a look at the REAL Oxford. Whenever I am enjoying a relaxing afternoon in Christchurch meadow in the summer, and tourists start chatting to me, when it comes to the inevitable "what a lovely city you have here" I always tell them to pop up St Aldates and get on the No 1 or 5 bus, look out of the window on your journey, and have lunch in The Blackbird, and then make your own conclusion.

bart-on simpson says...
1:19pm Thu 21 Feb 13

Excellent Myron.

Anyone think the definition of "poverty" is a bit wide-of-the mark? £16K before housing costs.

Is not child poverty to do with the parent's poverty first and foremost, and that largely relates to being in work or not, so why does Oxfam object to the 60 jobs that come with the Audi car dealership on the Oxford Business Park?

jamiek says...
1:53pm Thu 21 Feb 13

People's idea of child poverty is them not having the latest42ins plasma tv or latest Xbox games its funny how most of these parents can still find money for fags booze and latest iPhones and Chav designer clothes

zimmer, Wolvecote. says...
2:32pm Thu 21 Feb 13

jamiek wrote:
People's idea of child poverty is them not having the latest42ins plasma tv or latest Xbox games its funny how most of these parents can still find money for fags booze and latest iPhones and Chav designer clothes
Because Jamiek, in our perverted city, they look North of Cornmarket and see people with £million houses, £70k Jags, Mercs, and BMW's, spending £100+ on a meal out, and think that is how normal hard working people should be able to live. But the irony IS, that is their hard work that pays for those luxuries of their bosses, and they can have not even a taste of it, because the same bosses pay them minimum wage to keep both sets in the same position. It is a good old British tradition dating back to the middle ages, just a modern version of Serfdom really

Andrew:Oxford says...
5:36pm Thu 21 Feb 13

zimmer, Wolvecote. wrote:
jamiek wrote:
People's idea of child poverty is them not having the latest42ins plasma tv or latest Xbox games its funny how most of these parents can still find money for fags booze and latest iPhones and Chav designer clothes
Because Jamiek, in our perverted city, they look North of Cornmarket and see people with £million houses, £70k Jags, Mercs, and BMW's, spending £100+ on a meal out, and think that is how normal hard working people should be able to live. But the irony IS, that is their hard work that pays for those luxuries of their bosses, and they can have not even a taste of it, because the same bosses pay them minimum wage to keep both sets in the same position. It is a good old British tradition dating back to the middle ages, just a modern version of Serfdom really
It must have been a while since you visited East Oxford...

It's full of BMWs - all leased through the employee scheme of a local major employer. Brand new car every 6 months at a very keen rate inclusive of insurance.

Oflife says...
6:10pm Thu 21 Feb 13

Having lived and worked in both liberal and conservative value based cities world-wide, you only get this sort of thing in liberal areas. Why? Because there is no culture of help yourself, and we'll help you. If Oxford was more friendly to business, (IE, lower business rates), they could hire more people and in turn help feed kids, if not employing those old enough to work or help out 'behind the counter'. Travel to any ultra left wing area of the planet (North Korea anyone?) and you get poverty. Jobs are the only cure for poverty, state intervention only delays or even encourages the inevitable. Yes, short term help during gaps in work, but not long term. "Teach a man to fish..." etc.

Tom Cranmer says...
11:44pm Thu 21 Feb 13

Business Rates are set by a section of HMRC - the Valuation Office Agency, not by local government authorities, so local governments are not in a position to offer tax breaks. The local authority collects the business rates on behalf of central government, who then determine how much of the business rate income is paid back to the authority. Oxford is almost certainly on a net deficit regarding business rates; it probably receives 10-15% of what it collects as it is distributed throughout the country. The mechanism is changing from this April, and a proportion will be divied up between the state, county and city/district/boroug
h councils. However, any receipts above the baseline will be weighted in favour of the collecting authority, which should encourage growth. However, the only way authorities can really encourage business investment is through infrastructure development and new business parks etc. In Oxford, we're running out of space for development.

Tom Cranmer says...
11:57pm Thu 21 Feb 13

When the chairman of the company who operate Wonga.com is the sponsor of the Oxford Academy school, you know we have problems. As a nation, we need to address payday loans and companies such as Brighthouse.

gymrat34 says...
4:03am Fri 22 Feb 13

jamiek has it right, poverty is not being able to afford food, clothes and a roof over your head. I suspect the figure of 25% is made up largely of single Mum's living on benefits - that's what needs addressing. Young adults doing things properly and not shunning responsibility.

Isawyoucoming says...
12:48pm Fri 22 Feb 13

come april the cuts will really take effect and make the situation worse

Lord Palmerstone says...
2:21pm Fri 22 Feb 13

Isawyoucoming wrote:
come april the cuts will really take effect and make the situation worse
Cuts, what cuts? Have you not noticed the government is borrowing more than ever and we are in mega-debt? "Cuts"=not cuts. "Poverty"= someone on Rodeo Drive Beverley Hills earning less than $250,000 a year-why? Because old Lefty Humpty Dumpty says it is so.
Of course poverty is a real word. It means not having a roof over your head; not knowing when you'll next eat. Believe me, we would not be being swamped by immigrants in our city if we had poverty. The immigrants come from places where a quarter of children are living in actual poverty, not "poverty"

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree