How, therefore, are young people from deprived communities supposed to learn the value of their local community if, from a young age, the basic unit of society – the family – is denied them, because their parents are partaking in a hopeless battle to compete with the salaries of the bestoff? The deck being stacked firmly in the favour of socio-economic elites is surely a strong factor in the LSE’ s Reading the Riot’ s study which found that 29 % of rioters disagreed with the statement,“ life is full of opportunities”, compared with 13 % of the population at large.
' 29 % of rioters disagreed with the statement,“ life is full of opportunities”, compared with 13 % of the population at large '
Moreover, one does not just receive emotional support from one’ s family- discipline is also taught. Camila Batmanghelidjh goes onto say, in her Independent article,“ for years [ the rioters ] have experienced themselves cut adrift from civil society ' s legitimate structures.” Being cut adrift from one’ s family, because of dire and worsening economic inequality, denies those affected of the discipline that all children not only need, but desire.
Early intervention
Therefore, we need to ensure parents have the time to bring up their children and teach them discipline and respect for the communities in which they live- as well as instil ambition. As Andrea Leadsom, Conservative MP for South Northamptonshire said, as part of the Northamptonshire Parent Infant Project( NORPIP),“ It all boils down to the earliest relationships... The experiences of a new baby are literally hard wired into his or her brain by the age of two... Where a baby is loved and nurtured, he will grow up with the expectation that the world is generally a good place”.
The State should employ parents, living in deprived areas, to be parents. One parent in each family, which meets the criteria, would be paid the minimum wage of £ 12,000 per year. It would be a full time position, ceasing when a child reaches the age of four, rather than two, as each child ' s rate of cognitive development varies. Like other jobs, though, performance indicators would have to be met. For example, parents would have to use the time constructively, visiting attractions to aid their child’ s / children’ s cognitive and social development, and their salary would be docked if their child / children partook in criminal activity.
This would be a radical departure from the contemporary Welfare State because it would be the first time the State employed members of the public to fulfil a duty many think should remain strictly private and out of reach of government. It would not be on this basis, though, that I expect most opposition would be built on. Most opposition, would stem from the huge cost such a scheme would entail.
The cost
Barnardos states that four million children in the United Kingdom live in poverty. Divide this by the average number of children per family which is 1.7, going by the latest figures, and one finds that there are approximately 2.4 million families living in poverty. Under my plans, 2.4 million parents would, therefore, be entitled to benefit from the scheme – one parent from each family. This would result in a cost to the taxpayer of £ 28.8 billion which in today’ s straightened economic times is patently unaffordable, so there are ways this cost could be dramatically reduced.
Family-related benefits account for around 18.1 % of DWP spending, which is £ 21.2 billion. I would suggest scrapping all spending on these existing family-related benefits( bar £ 500 million of the £ 1.19 billion Child Benefit bill, protecting 1,530,000 of the most disadvantaged claimants not covered by the scheme I suggest), saving £ 20.7 billion in the process. revolutionise. it 18