The pattern Allison Roche describes is wholly consistent with the growth in
the geographical inequalities in the distribution of unemployment in all
other parts of the country. Inner London may be distinguished by higher
levels of inward migration. But the other side of the coin is outward
migration to relatively affluent areas. Inequality between areas is
maintained and can be expected to have increased.
Does the GLA or Southwark recognise growing such inequality? Are there
policies designed to reduced inequalities?
We can be fairly confident that the unemployment rate is the best single
indicator of income inequalities. Even the proportion of single parents is
closely related to the level of unemployment, as David Webster has
demonstrated. The higher the level of unemployment the fewer the number of
marriageable men.
There is nothing surprising in the persistence of areas of low incomes.
Danny Dorling has shown that such patterns of persistence go back to the
19th century. Nor is it surprising in term of the availability of
statistical information at least as far as unemployment is concerned.
Geographical inequality can now be well illustrated on the basis of ILO
statistics for 2003. Newly available claimant unemployment statistics show
the growth of inequality from 1996 extending up to the current months data
in 2005.
But what is surprising is the lack of use of statistics relating to the
'inner city problem' by government and the lack of any coherent policies
that might ameliorate this form of growing inequality.
Ray Thomas
35 Passmore, Tinkers Bridge, Milton Keynes MK6 3DY
Email: [log in to unmask]
Tel/Fax 01908 679081
***********************************
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roche, Allison" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 5:23 PM
Subject: FW: Fw: UK health inequalities - Guardian report
-----Original Message-----
From: Roche, Allison
Sent: 13 September 2005 17:17
To: 'R.Thomas'; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Fw: UK health inequalities - Guardian report
Overall the unemployment rate is falling and the employment rate is moving
up and down dependent on the migration moving into the area in inner London
. The employment rate as a measure of progress against Worklessness and the
specific disadvantaged groups is not a good measure of progress because
there is no fixed relationship between the % of the rate and the employment
level (numbers of people working) because of the varied population base
(which is calculated monthly using a variety of population indicators and is
always changing). Look at the example below for Southwark:
Employment rate and level*
Southwark 2001 2002 2003 2004
2005
Employment Rate 65.0% 65.8% 65.0% 64.4%
61.3%
Employment level 102,000 102,000 107,000 109,000
97,000
(*LFS 2005 – using May as the annual baseline)
What the LDA and other London Boroughs have realised is that some boroughs
have had a lot of rapid inward migration which have increased the population
base but these new migrants may not be working and so the employment rate
falls. This is a trend in London and so no comparison with the UK employment
rate can be valid as the population has not increased as rapidly as in
London.
The collection of data for Southwark is beginning to show a falling
employment rate but relatively stable Income support and JSA rate. This
hints that a) new migrants are young students and probably living in
Southwark (cheap London housing and close to central centre) to go to
college etc. The age group of 16 - 24 = 17% and 20 - 34 = 30% of the working
age population. There is also a large significant 45+ (27%)to retirement
group who are moving out of employment into Incapacity and Disability
Benefits or economically inactive.
Targeting disadvantaged groups is essential in Inner City London but more
important is collecting Local data to tell the whole story and target
programmes towards these groups appropriately.
So the employment rate is not a good indicator measuring progress for a
variety of reasons and in Southwark we have had to develop a set of other
targets to understand our local population change and churns.
Allison Roche
Research Officer for Southwark Alliance
Economic Development & Strategic Partnerships
Regeneration Department
Southwark Council
Council Offices
Chiltern, Portland Street
London SE17 2ES
Tel: 0207 525 5531
Fax:0207 525 5510
-----Original Message-----
From: Social-Policy is run by SPA for all social policy specialists
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of R.Thomas
Sent: 13 September 2005 16:45
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Fw: UK health inequalities - Guardian report
Increasing the employment rate may be a worthy target. But one of the
effects of this emphasis has been to increase part-time employment among
women. Remember that the ONS counts all paid work of an hour or more a
week as employment!
Increasing the employment rate for disadvantaged groups (lone parents, low
qualifications, etc) may also be a worthy target. But it does not tackle
the problem directly. Disadvantaged groups are largely concentrated in
'inner city' type areas.
Every major town and city has its concentrations of high unemployment, for
example, and there are very few concentrations of high unemployment that
are not in towns or cities. The focus on disadvantaged groups does not
take good account of this growing scale of spatial segregation.
Inequality under Labour is increasing manifesting itself in the geographical
distribution of the population.
I don't know how the Government measures wards with the "poorest initial
market position". I don't think that the government has any such useful
measures or that there is consistency in governmental measures in this kind
of area. How might such measures take account of the fact that most areas
of high unemployment are close to town and city centres that are daily
importers of labour from suburban and exurban locations?
The largest concentration of unemployment in the UK is in inner London.
Hardly an unfavoured area with regard to employment The parliamentary
constituency that has had the highest level of unemployment in the UK for
more than a decade is Ladywood (Clare Short's constituency). Ladywood
includes the thriving central area of Birmingham.
It seems tht the types of job being created by RDAs etc are not of a kind
that match the labour market offerings of those who live in 'inner city'
types of area. And as far as unmployment is concerned geographical
inequalities are being increased.
Ray Thomas, Open University
****************************
-----Original Message-----
From: Social-Policy is run by SPA for all social policy specialists on
behalf of Tim Blackman
Sent: Sun 11/09/2005 12:49
To: [log in to unmask]
Cc:
Subject: Re: Fw: UK health inequalities - Guardian report
The problem is that in conditions of generally improving employment rates,
life
expectancy etc., it is a real challenge to achieve faster improvements in
the
weakest areas - which is necessary to close the gap. There are significant
programmes trying to do this, including the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy
and
Regional Development Agencies. Of course, more could be done.
How does Ray's criticism square with the Government's PSA target for
employment?:
Employment
As part of the wider objective of full employment in every region, over the
three years to Spring 2008, and taking account of the economic cycle:
• demonstrate progress on increasing the employment rate, joint with
HM Treasury;
• increase the employment rates of disadvantaged groups (lone
parents, ethnic
minorities, people aged 50 and over, those with the lowest
qualifications and
those living in the local authority wards with the poorest initial labour
market position); and
• significantly reduce the difference between the employment rates
of the
disadvantaged groups and the overall rate. (PSA4)
Tim Blackman
Quoting "R.Thomas" <[log in to unmask]>:
> It is of course true that unemployment in the UK has been reduced - though
> I
> would say steadily rather than dramatically.
>
> But the inequality in the geographical distribution of unemployment has
> increased. The areas with the highest unemployment rates in 2005 are the
> same as those with the highest rates in 1996. And the rate relative to
> the
> mean has increased in most of these areas.
>
> We know this from the statistics of claimant unemployment that are
> available
> in full detail. But these statistics are derided by the UK Government in
> favour of ILO statistics that are quite inadequate in local detail. The
> growth in the geographical distribution of unemployment is not
> acknowledged
> in Government policies.
>
> New Zealand has an excellent record according to ILO unemployment
> statistics.
> But does it have anything like claimant unemployment statistics? Do
> any
> such statistics show growing inequality?
>
> Ray Thomas, Open University
> *********************************
>
>
> ----Original Message-----
> From: Social-Policy is run by SPA for all social policy specialists on
> behalf
> of Peter Davis (ARTS SOC)
> Sent: Fri 9/9/2005 9:53 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: Fw: UK health inequalities - Guardian report
> Critics of New Labour's record on tackling inequality need to come up
> with specific policies that the government has not to date entertained
> that, if implemented, would make the difference and that are politically
> and practically feasible. To note the intransigence of existing
> inequalities is the easy part; this is a commonplace of sociological
> observation that keeps many colleagues - and the Guardian - happily in
> employment.
>
> But let us note that under the current government there has been, in
> contrast to the previous administration, a dramatic decline in
> unemployment, a significant reduction in child poverty, and a slow, but
> steady and cumulatively marked, redistribution of income. So, this has
> not translated into corresponding reductions in health inequality. Why
> not? The obligation is now surely on the critics - and the rest of us -
> to identify how this relatively beneficent picture of macro social and
> economic policy success might be translated into an equally striking
> improvement in health outcomes.
>
> Peter Davis
> Professor and HoD, Department of Sociology
> University of Auckland
> Private Bag 92019
> Auckland
> NEW ZEALAND
>
> Ph.: +64-9-3737-599, x 85109(City), 89740(Tamaki)
> Fx.: +64-9-3737-439
>
> ,
>
>
**********************************************************************
Southwark Council does not accept liability for loss or damage resulting
from software viruses.
The views expressed in this e-mail may be personal to the sender and should
not be taken as necessarily representing those of Southwark Council.
The information in this e-mail and any attached files is confidential and
may be covered by legal and/or professional privilege or be subject to
privacy legislation. It is intended solely for the individual or entity to
which it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, the
retaining, distribution or other use of any transmitted information is
strictly prohibited.
E-mails are transmitted over a public network and Southwark Council cannot
accept any responsibility for the accuracy of a message that may have
sustained changes in transmission
This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.
www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************
|