There has been a surge in the number of UK families turning to baby banks to support their babies. It underscores yet again that charity is a sign the Labour government is failing. 3.5 million items, including cots, clothes, prams and nappies, were handed out in 2024. That’s a 143% increase on the previous year.
Labour austerity is exacerbating child poverty
Unfortunately, this comes as no surprise when Labour’s maintenance of the Tories’ two child benefit cap plunges 100 children into poverty per day. Rather than tackling this head on and announcing measures such as ending the cap (which can only punish children for being born), Labour has delayed its child poverty strategy to autumn at the earliest.
There are 4.5 million children living in poverty in the UK, at an increase of 200,000 from 2023 to 2024. And Labour are making it worse – by their own estimation. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) admitted on 26 March that its own figures show that fresh government austerity will push 250,000 people, including 50,000 more children into poverty by 2029/30. That’s because of cuts to welfare including support for disabled people. The impact assessment found that 3.2m families will lose an average of £1,720 per year.
The reality and a solution
The two child benefit cap strips benefits such as universal credit from a third child. It’s worth noting that two thirds of households impacted by the cap have at least one working parent. And that the amount of unemployed people in the country vastly outpaces the number of jobs, by ten million if you include the ‘economically inactive’. In fact, neoliberal managers sometimes consider unemployment a good thing because they believe it keeps workers competitive and eager for any job they can get. This is complete nonsense: as long as wages and job benefits are fair, people will appreciate their job even if it was guaranteed (within reason). Labour could be bold and undertake a training and jobs programme in support of the public and private sector, including job sharing to address the fact some are on benefits while others work 40 hour weeks.
Labour’s baby bank scandal
Baby banks in the UK supported 219,637 families in 2024 – a 35% increase on the year before. One of them was single parent Adam Coggins who told the Independent:
I was so uncomfortable going there, because I’ve never had to ask for help before. I felt like a failure; that was hard. [But] without these people, we would be in trouble. They’ve saved a lot of people – [and] especially when you’ve got two young kids, you need that help. That could be the difference between getting a couple of meals for them. Getting two packs of nappies saves you money to get food for them.
This is no surprise when you consider research from the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG). It found that a lone parent working full time on the minimum wage can only meet 69% of costs. And even two parents working full time fall short of a basic standard of living for them and their children, according to CPAG.
Meanwhile, a report from the Education Policy Institute (EPI) has highlighted that a quarter of households with children under four are experiencing food poverty. The EPI also found that children under five are 25% more likely to experience food poverty than other children.
The figures on baby banks come from the Baby Bank Alliance (BBA), which also found that demand is well beyond their supply. 65% of the more than 400 baby banks that are BBA members reported in a survey that they had more requests for help than they could deliver.
Clive Lewis, the Labour MP for Norwich South, hit the nail on the head, saying:
That baby banks even exist in one of the richest countries on Earth is an indictment of our political choices. The fact they’ve now seen a 35 per cent surge in demand speaks to a crisis not of resources, but of priorities. If we can afford tax breaks for the wealthy, we can afford dignity for children. Ending child poverty is a political decision. This government is choosing not to make it.
Featured image via the Canary
