Emergency food aid a sorry symbol of rising hunger in rich UK
Record numbers of people unable to afford life's basic essentials are turning to food banks to survive, says Trussell Trust
FOOD banks are a conundrum in modern Britain.
They simply should not exist. That they do testifies to ordinary Britons' unwillingness to abandon their fellow citizens to starvation.
There's some hope in that, no doubt, but it comes with inference that the UK Government – and behind it, powerful bodies such as the Bank of England (BoE) – are quite content to leave growing numbers of people hungry, cold, and eventually homeless.
The cost of living crisis continues to squeeze incomes. Wage stagnation adds its own twopenn'orth. A cruel, stingy and capricious benefits system plumbs the depths of poverty, rather than offer a safety net.
Meanwhile, the BoE has recently raised interest rates – again – piling on the misery. Millions consequently face the prospect of their mortgages becoming unaffordable; knock-on effects ripple through the private rental market, threatening homelessness as rents rise ever further.
The situation is grim; no mistake.
Breaking bread and butter
Those food banks don't just offer succour to someone in dire straits: in a way they track the misery unfolding across the country.
The rising tide of demand for their services begs the question: how long can they carry the burden of worsening poverty? How long before this emergency civil society responses itself breaks?
In April, the Trussell Trust reported it had smashed all previous records on emergency food aid distributed to hard-up families, with almost three million parcels given out in the preceding 12 months. That's more than double the amount for the same period five years ago, it said.
“We are experiencing an unprecedented rise in the number of people coming to the food bank, particularly employed people who are no longer able to balance a low income against rising living costs,” said Brian Thomas, the chief executive of a foodbank in South Tyneside, in the North East of England.
“We’re also seeing a really high number of families needing support as people struggle to afford the essentials. Food donation levels are not keeping up with the significant increase in need and this is putting us under a lot of strain, it’s a real pressure cooker situation for food banks.”
The Trussell Trust is a charity that operates a network of around 1,300 food banks around the country. The organisation isn't alone in operating such charitable facilities, but it has perhaps come to symbolise leading the charge.
In its latest annual statistics, the organisation revealed that between April 2022 and March 2023, its network provided 2.9 million emergency food parcels to people facing hardship. More than a million of these were provided for children.
This is the most the charity's network has ever distributed in single year, it says, and represents a 37% rise in demand compared to the previous year.
More than 760,000 people used a food bank for the first time; a figure greater than the population of a major city like Sheffield, South Yorkshire, the charity points out. This marks a 38% rise on the previous year of people needing support for the first time.
“These new statistics are extremely concerning and show that an increasing number of people are being left with no option but to turn to charitable, volunteer-run organisations to get by, and this is not right,” said Emma Revie, the Trussell Trust's chief executive.
The Covid-19 pandemic, the economic ripple-effects of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and the explosion in the cost-of-living over the last couple of years are factors commonly cited, but the hunger crisis is largely home-grown, rooted in government policy.
Food banks were scarce before 2010, the year Conservatives returned to government, with the support of Liberal Democrat coalition partners.
Then Prime Minister David Cameron, and his Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, embarked on a programme of austerity and welfare reform that hollowed out public services, and gutted social security.
Over the ensuing years, poverty and hardship has risen as more and more people struggle to make ends meet; a situation not helped by a chronic and worsening housing affordability crisis throughout this period.
Little wonder, then, that Revie (among others) takes aim at the parlous state of Britain's threadbare system of social security. Charity, it must be said, is no substitute for the coordinated capabilities of the State. Indeed, the Welfare State was – at least in part – created in recognition of that.
“The continued increase in parcel numbers over the last five years indicates that it is ongoing low levels of income and a social security system that isn’t fit for purpose that are forcing more people to need food banks, rather than just the recent cost of living crisis or the Covid-19 pandemic,” Revie added.
“Food banks were set up to provide short-term support to people in an emergency, they are not a lasting solution to hunger and poverty, and more than three quarters of the UK population agree with us that they should not need to exist.
“The staff and volunteers in our network are working tirelessly to ensure help continues to be available, but the current situation is not one they can solve alone.
“For too long people have been going without because social security payments do not reflect life’s essential costs and people are being pushed deeper into hardship as a result.
“If we are to stop this continued growth and end the need for food banks then the UK Government must ensure that the standard allowance of Universal Credit is always enough to cover essential costs.”
Food banks are no solution
The causes of this sorry saga may be political; the impact is always personal.
“Not being able to afford the essentials is like trying to wade through quicksand,” said Ben, a volunteer at Warrington Foodbank who himself claims Universal Credit. “Just when you think you are kind of getting somewhere there’ll be something else, there’ll be another knock back.
“People are obviously using food banks because the money they’re getting from the social security system isn’t enough to sustain their basic needs. If the social security system were adequate food banks wouldn’t be needed. And that would be an amazing position to be in, for food banks to become unnecessary.”
John, another food bank volunteer, had to rely on emergency food aid himself when he lost his job and became homeless. He told the charity:
“When I was homeless, food banks saved me. They provided me with food, shower gels and other necessities I couldn’t afford. But it also gave me somewhere to go for a chat or to see someone. The kindness I was shown there, has stuck with me.
“I currently volunteer at my local food bank as a trustee, and I help run the food bank. I work three days a week.
“I wanted to pass on the kindness I was first shown when I needed a food bank. My experience has helped me to be better equipped to understand the tough situations some people are in when they need our food bank, and I can show empathy and understanding.
“But ultimately, food banks shouldn’t be needed in the first place, everyone should be able to afford to buy their own food and afford the essentials.”
The costs simply don't add up
Earlier in the same month it released its annual figures, the Trussell Trust pulled a stunt with the anti-poverty thinktank, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) to highlight the gap between the cost of essentials and the basic rate of Universal Credit, the Government's flagship welfare benefit.
The two organisations also roped in a couple of celebrities to help take the message to the public realm, when they transformed a billboard close to Finsbury Park tube station, London, into a so-called 'till-board'.
Essentially, they turned it into a giant receipt roll. This listed the typical essential costs we all incur each week. It served to highlight that these outgoings were always more than the basic income provided by Universal Credit, forcing many to go without.
Research by the charities claims that the £85 weekly Universal Credit standard allowance is £35 less than the weekly cost of common essential items for a single person. This, they say, is contributing to hundreds of thousands of people being forced to use food banks because they can’t make ends meet.
The Trussel Trust and the JRF, along with other charities across the UK, are urging the Government to tackle this by implementing what they call an 'Essentials Guarantee'.
This would involved changing the law to make sure that Universal Credit payments always – at a minimum – provide enough to cover the costs of the basic necessities, such as food, utilities, and “vital” household goods. This would be based on an independent recommendation.
Furthermore, the Trussell Trusts adds, it would be the “first time since the Welfare State was created that social security rates were based on what people need, and how much those things actually cost”.
The charities behind the idea have calculated that a list of essential items includes water bills, gas and electric, travel expenses, food items such as bread, rice and vegetables, and hygiene and cleaning products like toothpaste and washing up liquid; currently the cost of such essentials tots-up to approximately £120 per week for a single person
It might be added, given that housing benefits have been frozen, or risen below inflation, for several years, that it's past time for a proper upgrade of benefits such as Local Housing Allowance, too. Housing costs are a major – and increasing – weight on household finances.
Such a measure would be of little help, however, unless the Government also raised, or abandoned, it's overall benefit cap. This limits the amount any one household can receive in benefits. As such, any increase in social security benefits, as is, would simply be be cancelled out by the cap. It serves to ensure poverty remains built in.
The poverty of politics
Again, it's political; ramifications of policy choices inflicted on those least able to navigate the implications or cope with the consequences.
“This giant till roll makes it impossible to ignore the fact that the cost of even just essential items is surpassing the amount that hundreds of thousands of people in receipt of Universal Credit have to live on each week,” Revie said at the time.
“We want everyone who sees it [the till-roll] to stop and think about how they would cope if they had just £85 a week to live off – you quickly realise that it just doesn’t add up. For too long people have been going without because social security payments are not based on a real reflection of life’s costs and are being pushed deeper into hardship as a result.
“We all deserve the dignity of staying warm, fed and protected from poverty and we know with the right financial support, people would not be forced to experience hunger.”
The publicity stunt at Finsbury Park brought together actor Charlotte Ritchie, best known for her roles in Call the Midwife, Ghosts, and You, with Brit and Mercury Prize-nominated singer-songwriter Joy Crookes, alongside food bank managers, volunteers and people who have experienced poverty.
“People shouldn’t be struggling to afford everyday essentials in the UK, one of the richest countries in the world,” said Ritchie. “When a food parcel is given out every 13 seconds, something is seriously wrong. This campaign shows that Universal Credit doesn’t add up. Change is needed so that the social security system will always at the very least cover people’s essentials, so that no one needs to use a food bank to get by.”
Crookes added: “The giant till roll was a real eye-opener. Everyone should have enough money to cover their essentials, but you quickly realise £85 isn’t enough, and it’s forcing people to food banks. People need to see this activation and realise that it doesn’t add up.”
No, it certainly doesn't. In June, the JRF released the findings of its latest cost-of-living tracker. The new research showed “persistently high levels of hardship in the UK, with the numbers of low-income households going without essentials or in arrears not having budged in over a year”.
Some five million low income households have had to cut down on – or skip – meals because they can't afford food, it is claimed. Four million reported going hungry, and 2.7 million reported a poor diet because of the cost-of-living crisis.
Meanwhile, the JRF found that low-income households are struggling to afford their bills, with 4.5 million in arrears, and 2.6 million holding high cost credit loans with loan sharks, doorstep lenders, payday lenders or pawnshops: the parasites that feed off – and worsen – poverty.
Given the economic outlook of inflation falling slowly and interest rates remaining high for some time, the organisation said it is concerned about low-income households’ access to the lifeline of affordable credit, as 2.8 million have been declined loans in the last two years.
“We’re also deeply concerned about the health and well-being impacts of the crisis, with millions unable to afford a healthy diet, and those going without essentials more likely to need NHS healthcare services,” JRF added.
For low-income households on Universal Credit, around nine in 10 are going without essentials for the third survey in a row, it added, despite the uprating of benefits with inflation and temporary cost of living payments.
“These levels of hardship cannot become baked in as the UK’s new normal,” JRF urged.
Life doesn't have to be such a grind
Politics may be deemed the art of the possible, but the fallout of its trade is making life impossible for millions of ordinary folk across Britain.
Hunger and poverty is hardly an insurmountable problem; it's been dealt with before.
Certainly, it's fair to say, nobody should be going cold and hungry in modern Britain. The prospect of homelessness should not have become a matter of course. Food banks ought not to exist.
That they do is a matter of choice: politicians have chosen to abandon their citizens to sink or swim; ordinary folk have chosen to come together and throw them a lifeline.
The question is, how long can any of them endure?
MC