Guest blog: Food banks are feeding families - the government needs to face its responsibilities

[KateMumsnet]

Food banks were in the news earlier this week, after Work and Pensions minister Lord Freud claimed that the recent hike in the number of families resorting to food handouts was not necessarily linked to growing poverty.

Mumsnet blogger Jack Monroe - whose blog A Girl Called Jack charts her family's life on the breadline and who recently gave evidence to parliament on poverty and hunger - says the government is shirking its responsibilities.

"Half a million people are reportedly reliant on the distribution of emergency food from food banks - but the Government seems intent on blaming feckless parenting and a 'scrounger mentality' for the rise of food poverty in Britain.

First, Lord Freud commented in the House of Lords that there was no link between the recent welfare cuts and the rise in demand for food banks.

Despite the evidence from the Trussell Trust that food bank use has soared 170% in the past year - with many referrals for help coming directly from the Department for Work and Pensions - Lord Freud insists that people don't really need the help.

In a gross slur against desperate families, he claimed that people were turning up just because there was 'free food', and not out of necessity - which simply isn't true. Surveys show that many people suffering from food insecurity wouldn't consider turning to a food bank for help: they find the stigma attached to 'asking for food' too humiliating.

And on Tuesday Michael Gove blamed child poverty and hunger on reckless, irresponsible parenting. In doing so, he denies the reality that most people using food banks do so as a result of benefit delays, sanctions, low income and unemployment. Other factors such as illness and domestic abuse certainly play a part - but these are the key causes, cited time and time again by food bank users.

Many parents tell of going hungry themselves in order to feed their children, as biting austerity measures cut deeper and deeper into family incomes, or lack thereof - hardly the picture of 'feckless parenting' painted by the Education Secretary.

I was a food bank user myself for six months, while unemployed, seeking work, and surviving on just £10 a week for food for myself and my son.

He didn't go hungry during that period - but I did, frequently, sobbing in bed at night in a freezing cold flat, suicidal, desperate, and alone - but adamantly clinging on, for the sake of the then two year old boy fast asleep in his bed.

If food banks become a permanent fixture, the responsibility for feeding the poor and vulnerable will have shifted from the shoulders of the Government, to the shoulders of charities and not for profit sector. Although it's admirable that these organisations are coming together to meet a real and desperate need, they should be seen as a temporary sticking plaster - not a license for the Government to shirk its civic duties towards its citizens.

In terms of feckless parenting, it is this Government, and not the casualties of the shrinking welfare state that are shirking their duties - and sending its children, its citizens, to school, to work, and to bed hungry. Gove, Freud et al need once and for all to look child poverty and hunger in its hideous face, and commit to tackling the underpinning root causes, instead of casting around to see who else can be blamed.

The Government ought to be taking steps towards investigating and tackling poverty, rather than tossing the blame around from Labour to the Tories, from those rogue charities handing out free food, to the feckless parents squandering it on God only knows what. It's easy to say 'it's not my fault'. It's more difficult to come up with solutions.

Or is it? Because I came up with fourteen off the top of my head in Parliament last month, and I'm sure there's more if I think hard enough.

Increasing social housing. Paying housing benefit monthly instead of four weekly to align with rent and mortgage payments and assist with cash flow problems. Payment of benefits quickly upon application, especially with the death of the Crisis Loan earlier this year. A commitment to a living wage would mean more families paying tax, less claimed in benefits, and a better living standard for all.

We need to stop just pulling people out of the river.

It's time to go upstream, and find out why they're falling in."

Jack Monroe
Twitter: @MsJackMonroe

Or maybe not imposing sanctions for being late to sign on as your bus broke down and you could not walk the 5 miles to the job centre?

but if the bus breaks down, I would still walk 5 miles to work and have done during the London Underground strikes. anyone of working age, without a disability, can walk 5 miles to sign on or for any other purpose.

But you'd be late and so sanctioned.

if they are that unreasonable, then I would always be early.

I've been turned away from the jobcentre because I was late (I'd left my book at hime so went back to get it). I was drenched from the rain but was told to ring for a be appointment on Monday. I rode my bike there. if I'd taken the bus that would have been another £4.40 to find.

you can be of working age and not classified as having a disability but still be unable to walk one mile, let alone five.

If I was unemployed I would take any work, even agency work, to pay the bills. You then try to get a different job while employed.

However the current system is not working. Benefits are paid late to people who have no savings because they didn't earn much when in work. They have no safety net and their friends may not be in a position to loan them money. So I buy something for the food bank every time I shop.

if they are that unreasonable, then I would always be early.

I'm sure public transport would accommodate that. Except rural areas, small towns...oh wait that's quite a big area.

Dropping the kids off at school an hour early would be fine too.

The advisor gave DP the wrong time on the appointment card. He was 1 hour late according to their system. He lost 4 weeks money.

We are 15 miles from the JC. There is 1 bus a week. We did not choose to live here, we had to take the offer from the council or be homeless.

We were so close to food bank vouchers but I borrowed and got creative in the kitchen. How the hell we are going to make it through the next month I don't know.

Anyway, I'm sure DP can walk there, be ritually humiliated, walk back and doff his cap to the generous government.

Do excuse me while I pop out to feed the goat some caviar.

Doesn't he enjoy the humiliation then, Luis? Surely it's worth it for the good living you have though, eh?

There just aren't jobs to be had anymore. 5 years ago I worked in London as a banker on a very good salary. Today I work as a cleaner, on minimum wage with a zero hours contract. I haven't had a day off in months because to say I'm exhausted and need a break would mean they would cut my shifts right down. I see it happen all the time. We have to beg for shifts or we don't get them. We get no company benefits, no holidays (paid or unpaid) because of the zero hour contract we don't count when it comes to employment law. This is 2013!!

Ah yes the old "If I can do it so can anyone else" routine. Well Jolly good faster stronger, I am so glad you will never have any kind of unexpected event in your life. I am also pleased that you can control the weather so it never snows or floods.

The point is you and Xenia and Scottish (Still waiting for the identikit btw SG) believe that the vast majority of people CHOOSE to play the system and so they need to be punished for not obeying to the letter of the law exactly what the rules say. Further more people should be grateful and thankful that they receive less than they actually need and should show how grateful they are by setting aside their individuality and humanity, after all they cannot afford either eh.

Yes Waffly. Only yesterday I commented over my glass of champers how lucky we are to have ALL THAT MONEY to buy TVs and shit.

It's just amazing how you can make your fillet of beef last a WHOLE DAY.

The parish and the poor house owners could never understand why people were not grateful to them either. Funny that, it seems the underclass must be incapable of showing proper respect huh?

I don't think most people play the system. I have never said that at all. There is a huge problem in finding work at present particularly for young people. I also said above that the lack of food comes about due to benefit mistakes and sanctions (but that the benefits themselves if paid on time do allow enough money for people to eat).

I suppose having to turn up on time is good practice for a job. If you keep being late you lose your job. Plenty of us will cycle for an hnour if the tubes are down in London or end up 1.5 hours early for things sometimes because of fears of transport being late or walk if transport is not available for work things.

In terms of advice to people save save save if you are lucky enough to be in work and have even a few pounds over each week, to cover future problems. Be frugal. You never know when those savings may be needed although of course too many savings preclude you from claiming any benefits which is another difficulty with the system.

Xenia if I got any more frugal, I'd be living for free. Do you have any idea how condescending you sound? Good practice for a job?

Did you read my earlier post? That despite benefits being paid on time, expenses outweigh income? No matter how well you budget?

If you want to save a few bob I can give you some advice. I'm an expert by now. Bit like you maybe?

My son tried to sign on a year ago. He attended filled forms in and was supposed to get a phone call for an interview. He still hasn't managed to sign on or get a job. I need him to get some help as he is depressed but it seems like the job centre is not set up to help people.

Telling people to budget is easy to do, but how can you budget on £71 per week?

I'm lucky enough to be on a decent wage (at the moment, although I shall look up tips on what sauces to serve with my pretty dresses just in case I'm made redundant) but I rarely eat meals that cost more than 40p or 50p. However, that's because I have enough money to go to the supermarket and stock up on special offers as well as buying in bulk so I can batch cook. I think nothing of spending £100 or more on a huge trolley full of veg and other basics that will feed me for a couple of months when cooked and frozen - I think that the likes of Gove and IDS expect people on JSA and other benefits to do this too.

Problem is, and I don't know if these politicians are too uncaring or too stupid to understand - people on JSA etc can not afford this, no matter how well they budget. £71 a week, less, for example, £15 water bill, £8 council tax, £20 gas and/or electricity (the meters still need to be fed, even in summer), £6 broadband/phone (which is essential. If they don't have internet access, their money may be subject to sanctions. Libraries are being closed so they're not an option) leaves £22 per week for food, toiletries and everything else. I hope they're not subject to bedroom tax!

I can go to Tesco and take advantage of an offer for, say, 12 tins of Heinz beans for £4 while someone on JSA has to scrabble together 72p for 2 tins of Basics beans. Or I can afford to buy occasional BOG2F offers that reduce the cost of other premium brands to far below the price of basic ones. Someone on low benefits does not have the opportunity to reduce their long term food bill like I can, because they can only buy what they need day to day, no matter how good their budgeting skills. So conversely, being rich helps you to be frugal while being poor can stop you being frugal.

I am sure that is true. I have never said it's easy being on benefits at all.
You can drink only tap water as I do and that might save a bit of money for those on benefits and it improves your health as most things people drink - caffeine, alcohol, fruit juices, squash, fizzy drinks are bad for you. That is just one idea.

I agree that single person benefits are particularly small compared to what families have.

It certainly pays if you can when you're in work to save up. Don't go part time. Never take long maternity leaves. Keep saving. Most importantly make sure teenage daughters work very hard at school and pick high paid careers.

Spread risk if you can. Several sources of income/jobs (if you can get any at all) is protective. Seeing the weekends as working time too (if you can get a job of any kind) helps too. It is only recently we moved to 2 days off a week. Plenty of us work more than 5 days a week and evenings too and we tend to do a little better than those working just 9 - 5 in the week.

I do agree with many of your points, Xenia. I know I'll encourage my DD to get a good career. For many poorer people though, there's a poverty of opportunity as well - they don't succeed, but not through lack of intelligence or hard work, because there is no chance for them. The top careers are taken up by people like us and there aren't enough of them for everyone! I know; I'm from a WC background in a deprived area and I am so very lucky to have got where I am.

It certainly pays if you can when you're in work to save up. Don't go part time. Never take long maternity leaves. Keep saving. Most importantly make sure teenage daughters work very hard at school and pick high paid careers.

Xenia you are correct. its what you do in the 'good times' that helps with the bad times.

if you run up debts you can afford during employment, they are obviously going to become a problem during unemployment. if a couple chose to have only one earner, household finances are more vulnerable to unemployment.

But if you don't get the "good times," what then? When the only jobs are minimum wage with no prospects and you're lucky to even get one of those? Sadly, that's life for millions of people.

you look at what migrants who come to this country do with no money, maybe little education or English whose children go to university and become lawyers, doctors etc.

They were able to get (steady) jobs, which isn't necessarily going to be the case now with soaring unemployment figures and zero-hours contracts.

unemployment is falling not soaring.

Says who?