The 1980s and early 90s saw an alarming growth in the gaps between rich and poor in the UK, yet for most of that time poverty was not on the political agenda and the rhetoric of social justice had all but disappeared from political debate. The rise of New Labour brought a new perspective on these issues, adopting the language (borrowed from continental Europe) of social inclusion. The issue of poverty appears to have made its way back into mainstream political discourse; Iain Duncan Smith, on a visit to Easterhouse, described child poverty as one of the "five giants" today, and in one interview, Tony Blair appeared to advocate the redistribution of wealth. In Scotland, the Executive began from 2000 to speak much more of social justice, though that term appears only once in Labour's 2003 manifesto, and tackling poverty appears fairly marginal to an election debate that focuses much more on what are seen as the "people's priorities" of crime and public services.

This briefing looks at what has been done in Scotland towards social justice, and in particular tackling poverty, and assesses that from the perspectives which the churches (and others) have offered over the past four years.

A recent report on Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion in Scotland by the New Policy Institute (funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation), found ten "key statistics" of Scotland today:

• 1,200,000 people of all ages living in low income households (2000/01)
• 340,000 working age people claiming benefits for 2+ years (2001)
• 310,000 children living in low income households (2000/01)
• 210,000 working age households without work for 3+ years (2002)
• 130,000 households in the poorest fifth lacking any bank account, etc. (2000/01)
• 34,000 households deemed to be homeless (1999/00)
• 13,000 19-year-olds with no qualification better than an SVQ2 or equivalent (2002)
• 5,000 school leavers with no more than Standard Grade 5/6 (2000/01)
• 1,300 low birth-weight babies (2001)
• 120 young adult suicides (2001)

Scotland suffers from a greater concentration of poverty, with long-term unemployment more prevalent, and levels of long-term sick and disabled a third higher than the rest of the UK; and young children are the group most likely to be poor and remain poor over long periods.

Martin Barnes, Director of the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), says poverty is an issue on which it isn’t possible to be politically neutral. The problems are undeniable, but the solutions are complex; even the ways in which poverty and inequality are measured are hotly disputed.

Measuring poverty is no straightforward task. "Absolute poverty" relates to the minimum income for survival, while "relative poverty" is calculated in relation to current standards of living, and so measures levels of inequality; "asset poverty" refers to lack of basic resources such as property, savings, skills and education.

Social exclusion is the way that people in poverty are excluded from participating in society; the EU defines social exclusion as occurring when people are prevented from full participation in society due to "the denial of civil, political, social, economic and cultural rights".

It is argued that the language of social exclusion can be used to blame the poor for their own position, masking the need for redistribution of wealth; in fact, social exclusion can cut both ways, when the wealthy exclude themselves by buying private services such as health and education. Morag Gillespie of the Scottish Poverty Information Unit argues that poverty is about income, first and foremost; anything else deflects concern from that basic fact. As the "Faith in the City" report put it, "Poverty is not only about a shortage of money. It is about rights and relationships; about how people are treated and how they regard themselves; about powerlessness, exclusion and loss of dignity. Yet the lack of an adequate income is at its heart." Poverty, then, is a problem of income and the social exclusion that accompanies and exacerbates it.

One positive outcome of devolution combined with a renewed focus on poverty is a programme seeking to ensure adequate statistical evidence for future policy development. No single indicator gives a clear picture of the overall levels of poverty and this is why the Scottish Executive uses both absolute and relative measures, and poverty groups choose a variety of indicators. It isn’t simply that the measure we use to define poverty can be misleading, but also that national average figures on poverty often obscure local problems.

If we have learned to distrust figures (especially in the hands of politicians), painful realities are reflected in too many people's lives, as Church Action on Poverty's hearings have powerfully shown.

The commitments made at Westminster and Holyrood to a raft of targets and milestones in tackling poverty represented a decisive shift of agenda and emphasis, which was welcomed by the churches. The Scottish Churches Social Inclusion Network responded to the aim of "a Scotland where everyone matters" by saying "The commitment to putting social justice at the heart of Executive policies represents a welcome change of climate, and one for which the churches amongst others have been calling for some time. Having previously expressed concern that the language of social inclusion might dilute the commitment to social justice and to tackling poverty, we are wholehearted in welcoming the return to the (Biblical) language of justice, as well as the general emphasis and commitment expressed by these documents".

Of the 29 social justice milestones set by the Scottish Executive, some measure inequality, some measure "absolute" poverty and others deal more with opportunities. They range through the stages of life and across areas like health and education, from reducing the proportion of children living in low income households to ending the need for rough sleeping, from increasing internet access to reducing the fear of crime amongst older people (see SCPO Briefings 2/6 and 3/3 for full details).

Of course, while setting targets is a welcome step, it does not achieve anything of itself. There is also a commitment to producing an annual report on progress towards the milestones. There have now been three of these, and the latest (2002) claimed that progress was being made on 16 of the milestones, 7 were broadly constant, 2 were moving in the wrong direction and for the remaining 4 there was insufficient data; the Minister for Social Justice, Margaret Curran, conceded that while there have been improvements in many areas, the inequality gap remains a major problem.

Sadly, the production of these annual reports and the ensuing Parliamentary debate attract little media interest – and with some justification, as they seem a predictable mixture of Executive defensiveness and Opposition carping, degenerating into quibbles about statistics. Some way of securing a credibly independent assessment of progress, free of the suspicion that goalposts are adjusted to produce better scores, would perhaps underline the seriousness of the Executive's commitment.

The Rowntree report referred to above has gone some way towards that; as well as snapshot figures, it examines trends over a period; of 34 indicators, the report finds 7 improving, 6 worsening, 15 steady and 6 with insufficient data. Key trends include these

• At 30% (equivalent to some 310,000 children in 2000/1), the proportion of children living in relative low-income households barely altered over the period 1997/8 to 2000/1.
• Over the same period, the proportion of people in Scotland with relative low incomes rose slightly, to around 1.2m people in 2000/1; taking a longer view back to 1994/5, the overall sense is one of no change in this number. (This proportion, over the UK, increased from 13% in 1979 – 7m people – to 24% in 1990 – 13.5m people; it has remained fairly steady since then.)
• In spring 2002, nearly 210,000 working-age households had been without work for three years or more, the highest number for at least a decade.
• Fewer of those on relative low income are now unemployed, while more are working.

The authors conclude "Up to 2000/01, there was no sign of a fall in the number of people on relative low income, but beneath the surface there is change, with unemployment falling and low income in work becoming more prevalent … and with benefits, though rising in real terms, still leaving people solely reliant on them far short of the relative low income threshold; and there remain some deep-seated and long-standing problems where progress is slow or non-existent. There are signs of progress within the education system but the gap in attainment remains considerable, with only slight improvements at the bottom … Scotland is making progress in cutting its high rates of premature death, but the (health) inequalities within Scotland remain substantial … The halving in just four years of the number of homes without central heating is very positive, but homelessness remains a persistent and growing problem Finally, particular groups face disproportionate problems, including some that are long-standing, well-known and the subject of official attention (eg people without access to basic banking facilities)."

The researches draw two general conclusions from their analysis: "The first is the stubborn refusal of so many of the key measures of poverty and exclusion in Scotland to show any signs of movement. Second, a strategy to reduce poverty that is built on getting people into work faces a serious challenge when 40% of the working age poor are actually already in work."

That "stubborn refusal" represents a major challenge to the policies that attempt to translate targets into reality.

The most obvious difficulty for any Scottish Executive in tackling these issues is that most of the key economic levers remain with Westminster – the tax and benefit system, macro-economic policy, etc. However, there are still many key powers held in Scotland with which an impact can be made, from child care provision to university tuition fees, from homelessness strategy to reducing health inequalities and community regeneration – without getting into the possible use of the power to vary income tax.

Executive strategy is that, rather than having specific social justice policies, the commitment runs across all their policy-making. They claim (with some justification) that improving public services is central (since the poorest depend most on these services), and that crime impacts most heavily on deprived communities. Last year, they published Closing the Opportunity Gap, in which the total Scottish budget is presented in terms of plans to "tackle poverty, build strong, safe communities and create a fair, equal Scotland".

There have, however, also been specific initiatives in a number of key areas, including

1. debt and financial exclusion – Although the impact of abolishing warrant sales was diluted by their replacement, the new debt arrangement scheme, increased advice provision, support for credit unions and work in partnership with the banks in deprived areas have attempted to tackle these problems. Despite this, however, the credit union movement remains in its infancy in Scotland, and many of Scotland’s poor are left with no affordable banking and credit facilities.
2. child poverty – While the debate about free, nutritious school meals was seen by many as a missed opportunity to tackle poverty-related health disadvantages among Scotland’s children, a number of steps in this direction (free fruit, breakfast clubs, etc) have gone along with attempts to ensure children's support services work better together.
3. fuel poverty – The Executive has a statutory pledge to reduce fuel poverty by a third within four years and eliminate it by 2016 through expansion of programmes like Warm Deal and the Central Heating Project for pensioners.
4. homelessness – By legislation and the Rough Sleepers Initiative, the Executive has tried to tackle the most visible of homelessness problems, but more people are seeking local authority help as homeless and affordable housing for rent remains in short supply.
5. community regeneration – Social Inclusion Partnerships (SIPs) were launched in 1999 as community-based partnerships to help regenerate deprived urban areas, not only in terms of bricks and mortar but increasingly in social regeneration, especially tackling unemployment through increasing training and employment opportunities and providing childcare. There are currently 34 area-based SIPs and 14 based on various themes. More recently, a community regeneration statement looked at partnership working across Scotland to renew communities, and spoke about the development of social capital, recognising and developing the resources already present there.
6. active communities – This attempt to stimulate volunteering and community groups has yet to have a significant impact, although the commitment to three-year funding for voluntary sector groups has helped many become sustainable.
7. rural poverty – There has been an increasing awareness that deprivation is not confined to urban areas, and impacts in different ways in rural contexts; the Executive have begun work on recommendations on Integrated Rural Development made by the Parliamentary Committee.

The effectiveness of many of these initiatives (and the adequacy, or otherwise, of resources devoted to them) remain key party political issues, yet there is a fair degree of agreement on broad directions. And there are signs of commitment across the apparatus of government to tackling these problems as central; one senior civil servant recently spoke to the Scottish Churches Social Inclusion Network about "a process of evolution … from milestones to new programmes and now to shaping institutional structures".

The CPAG conclude their "Poverty in Scotland 2002" report by saying that "important steps towards the eradication of poverty have been taken but a great deal more needs to be done". Church Action on Poverty's work with community groups across Scotland found a similar recognition of real advances but also gaps still evident:

• Housing and homelessness are still a major issue in many parts of Scotland.
• The complexities and inadequacies of the benefits system still make the system a nightmare to navigate, and one in which people feel considerably disempowered.
• In spite of government policy it's very clear that getting people into work isn't necessarily going to get them out of poverty
• Indebtedness is both a major consequence and a major cause of poverty.
• There are ongoing concerns about funding local groups in ways that enable them rather than force them into a straitjacket.

In summary, "During this whole process, people were adamant that the inequalities between the poorest in our country and everyone else continue to grow".

As well as assessing the impact of current policies, there are still some more fundamental issues to be raised about the broad approach.

Is there still a reluctance (or lack of political nerve) to face the need for significant redistribution of wealth resources ? Or has that approach to the problems been rightly left behind ?

Does there need to be a more fundamental devolution of power, to local communities, along with the resources to enable them to shape their own futures ?

Is the approach too much from the top down, with the Executive setting targets and priorities, rather than communities determining what they themselves see as the key indicators of social justice, and monitoring progress towards these ?

Does policy focus too much on helping individuals to escape from poverty rather than tackling the multiple problems of deprived communities ?

Is the increasing emphasis on the "opportunity gap" an adequate way forward, or should there be more emphasis on directly redressing present inequalities ?

Should the benefits system start from a recognition of an adequate income required for basic living today ?

Do targeted measures or universal provision best serve the poorest ?

What part do families play in this, and how should that be supported ? Or is that just a convenient escape from the necessary tasks of government ?

Do voluntary groups have a role simply in delivering some of the services that the Executive or councils contract for, or have they a more pro-active contribution to make ?

How can efforts at partnership and "community empowerment" get beyond the usual suspects and loudest voices to enable genuine concerns to translate into policy ?

Should social justice move from the model of "service delivery" to one of "creating public value" (from "committees to communities", and from the managerial debate that has characterised the election to one about values) ?

The Scottish Churches Social Inclusion Network (SCSIN) exists to bring people from the churches working on these issues (both in practice and in analysis) together with the Scottish Parliament and Executive, for an ongoing dialogue that recognises this as a priority for both (as well as an issue on which we all preach better than we practice). Several of the questions raised above emerge from discussions in the Network.

When SCSIN first looked at the Executive social justice targets, their concern at the "top-down" nature of the process and the need for credibly independent monitoring led to an initiative to work with local communities towards setting priorities and assessing progress. That was taken up by Church Action on Poverty, and co-ordinated initially by Kathy Galloway. The experiences of groups in different parts of Scotland were drawn together in a conference and report – "A Scotland Where Everyone Matters" (available from Church Action on Poverty and through SCPO); some of the conclusions are noted above. There has also been fruit of this work in discussions between members of these groups and senior civil servants responsible for the social justice annual report and related policy.

Another important piece of work has been carried out by Glasgow University Urban Studies Department, assessing the significance of churches in building social capital. Although this was carried out for the Church of Scotland and focuses thereon, it is clear that the conclusion – that the association of churches with decline masks an ongoing and very significant community role – goes beyond any one church: "It appears that there is a remarkable synergy between the aims of the Church and the government and an emerging consensus about how these aims are to be achieved. However, supportive rhetoric from policy makers towards faith communities has been less forthcoming in Scotland than elsewhere in the UK".

Most of that impact is through the work of local congregations, often struggling to survive in difficult circumstances. A key sign of the churches' commitment to work together in tackling poverty is the work of the Scottish Churches Community Trust in supporting such local initiatives. Yet there remains much to be done in building the right kind of partnerships with government at all levels; SCSIN hopes to do further work on this after the election.

In a Herald article on the Rowntree report, Alf Young wrote "If this welcome analysis is simply to become another cudgel in the crudest of political games, the remedies will continue to elude us. The poor, so often excluded from this relentless ding-dong, deserve better".

That report's conclusion about the "stubborn resistance" of various indicators of poverty to a range of policies seems a striking echo of the much-quoted words of Jesus about the poor being always with us. Like many a modern sound-bite, these have been much abused, detached from their context, as an excuse to postpone indefinitely action to tackle poverty, or, worse, to accept its inevitability.

Jesus' words are borrowed from a passage in Deuteronomy about Sabbath and Jubilee years as a corrective to deepening inequalities; that passage (Deut 15.1-11) shows a determination, rooted in faith, to eradicate poverty, alongside a recognition that the sin which infects structures as well as individuals will frustrate that aim.

The justice of God therefore demands intervention in a world of growing inequalities, not an acceptance of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. That is reflected in the social legislation of the Old Testament, preaching of the prophets and the practice of the early church. It underpinned the church's resistance to usury, and remains the key Biblical basis for judging nations (and their Parliaments).

As Erik Cramb of Church Action on Poverty put it "Our economic structures do not serve the interests of the poor and that is a sin, probably the sin of our day".

This is a challenge to our practice and our theology. Recent steps in one church to respond to this include last year's Church of Scotland National Mission call for "Sharing the Pain – Holding The Hope" and this year's Church & Nation report on the theology of taxation; there are other, similar initiatives in other churches.

Others, like Danny Phillips of CPAG, recognise that this is a moral as well as an economic and social issue, on which "hearts and minds have to be won". If the poor are less obviously "with us" (in terms of public awareness or debate), might it be the calling of the churches, in responding to the Biblical injunction to open our mouths for those who have no voice, to ensure their presence at the centre of concern and policy-making ?