A new report is out – Constructing
a Food Poverty Indicator for Ireland.
It estimates that one in ten people experienced ‘food poverty’ in 2010. In other words, hunger. I know the phrase ‘must-read’ is sometimes
over-used, but this is truly a must-read report. The very idea that one-in-ten of our
neighbours suffer from food poverty is truly frightening. Maybe you won’t be guaranteed a job, maybe you
won’t be guaranteed free medical care regardless of your need, but surely in a
civilised society we can ensure that no one goes without food. That we can’t, that we don’t, says something
about the kind of society that is being created for us.
This estimate produced by Caroline Carney (General Council
of the Bar of England and Wales) and Bertrand Maître (ESRI) is based on a
careful methodology. It uses deprivation
indicators that relate to food in the EU’s Survey of Income and Living
Conditions:
- Inability to afford a meal with meat or vegetarian
equivalent every second day
- Inability to afford a roast or vegetarian equivalent once a
week
- Whether during the last fortnight, there was at least one
day (i.e. from getting up to going to bed) when the respondent did not have a substantial
meal due to lack of money
- Inability to have family or friends for a meal or drink once
a month
While they produce a number of findings based on these
indicators, in the final analysis they omit the last one – having family or
friends over once a month for a meal or drink, though they acknowledge the
importance of this indicator:
‘This paper does not suggest that this item is not a valid
indicator of deprivation per se but is concerned with its ability to identify
food deprivation specifically. This item captures deprivation of social
participation, in particular social participation relating to food and drink.
However the other deprivation items being used by this research capture
deprivation that is specific to not affording adequate food.’
I don’t intend to reproduce the numerous tables contained in the
report to show the extent and scale of food poverty. However, I would like to draw attention to
the following findings:
For those who find it difficult to make ends meet, the food
poverty rate is 24 percent – which means that one-in-four in this category experience
one of the three indicators used above.
Those suffering from poor self-reported health status rank close behind.
There are a couple of things to note. First, these numbers are probably an
under-estimate. The authors point out
that the data they were using, from the EU-SILC report, covers only private
households. This would exclude homeless,
asylum seekers, travellers and people in institutions. As the report rightly points out, ‘These
groups may be more vulnerable to food poverty.’
Second, this only goes up to 2010.
We should not be surprised if the food poverty rate has risen since
then. Budget 2011 contained a number of
highly regressive measures (cuts in social protection payments, the flat rate
tax in the form of cutting personal tax credits, the USC) along with falling
employment and income for key groups.
Budget 2012 contained social protection cuts in particular items and
across-the-board cuts in real terms (that is, after inflation), along with the
regressive Household Charge.
I urge you to have a look at this highly accessible report. Flip through the tables and graphs. At least read the conclusion. It may not be as sexy as the latest
story about property prices or public sector allowances or some Minister’s
latest peccadillo – but can we please have some perspective in this debate.
Some of our neighbours are going hungry.
Notes on the Front 
Leave a reply to Michael Taft Cancel reply