Why fearmongering about child abuse helps no one

The NSPCC has claimed that child sexual abuse referrals have risen by nearly a third over a year.

In 2016-2017, the charity made an average of 90 referrals a week to the police and social services, as a consequence of 4,677 calls made by members of the public to the charity’s phone service, Childline. This was up from 3,578 the previous year.

The NSPCC’s dramatic announcement came after the Local Government Association (LGA) reported that around 500 child-protection inquiries have been started every day across England and Wales in recent years. In 2016 there were 172,290 inquiries, rising to 185,450 in 2017. The LGA warned of a ‘tipping point’, as local authorities struggle to cope with increasing demand while funding is cut. As a result of all of this, the National Police Chief’s Council (NPCC) has also complained of a ‘strain upon officers’.

However, when we look at actual intervention, the picture is somewhat different. The number of children subject to intervention by the authorities through a Child Protection Plan (CPP) has also been rising. Official figures from local authorities, provided by the NSPCC, show that CPPs have risen from 42,850 in 2012 to 50,310 in 2016. But, crucially, only five per cent of cases in 2012 related to instances of sexual abuse, falling to 4.8 per cent of cases in 2016. Neglect and emotional abuse were by far the most common categories of abuse dealt with by CPPs.

This disparity, between the large increase in referrals made by the NSPCC and a modest increase in suspected sexual abuse, is striking. Despite the increasing volume of referrals made by the NSPCC, there is no evidence to suggest that a third more children are being sexually abused. What’s more, the NSPCC also states that much of the abuse it deals with happens online. Of course, online child sexual abuse is serious and should be dealt with – but it is not the same as physical sexual abuse.

Nevertheless, the upward trend in NSPCC referrals is still taken as evidence that we’re in the midst of an epidemic of child abuse. The damage done to families who are unfairly treated with suspicion is regarded as a price worth paying in the pursuit of protecting children. But this relentless obsession with child sexual abuse is having a corrosive effect on families and communities. Instead of protecting children, the NSPCC is fuelling a moral panic which will divert resources away from tackling the rare, but serious, cases of child abuse that do occur.

First published in spiked

Another Christmas of crisis for the NHS

‘Tis the season for NHS tales of woe, featuring ‘bed blockers’, diverted ambulances and long waits on trolleys in hospital corridors. That the NHS is in crisis again as winter takes hold is as inevitable as Christmas itself.

This time around the cause of the Christmas non-cheer around the NHS was triggered by the stepping down of Lord Kerslake, from his chairmanship of King’s College Hospital Trust, following a decision by NHS Improvement to put the trust into financial special measures. While the government cynically sought to blame the trust’s problems on Kerslake and his team, he argued in the Guardian that ‘fundamentally, our problems lie in the way the NHS is funded and organised’. Massive overspends, recruitment crises and crippling pressures on services are indeed commonplace across the NHS.

‘The government and its regulator’, he says, ‘are simply not facing up to the enormous challenges that the NHS is currently facing’. And this isn’t just about funding. Despite an extra £2.8 billion promised in the Budget for struggling health trusts (short of the £4 billion a year demanded by NHS chief executive, Simon Stevens), and the £350million announced in the Budget to address winter pressures (coincidentally the same amount that was plastered on the side of that Brexit bus), the problems in the NHS persist. They will not be fixed, it seems, by simply throwing more money at them.

From primary care to home care, young people’s mental health to dementia care, the system is in meltdown. The number of patients waiting in A&E for more than four hours has more than doubled in as many years. The number of ‘long-stay patients’ in hospitals has also increased, largely as a result of an absence of care provision in the community for those who are fit enough to go home. And with bed occupancy levels now approaching 95 per cent, the likelihood of yet another Christmas log-jam in NHS hospitals is increasing.

Crisis preventative measures, such as encouraging people to have the flu jab and to consult their pharmacist rather than their GP if they have a minor ailment, are reportedly having an impact. And yet the overall demand on services is still intensifying as the resources at the NHS’s disposal become more scarce. You know things are bad when an article in the British Medical Journal could — only half tongue-in-cheek — blame the ‘highly dedicated and responsive GP, Dr Brown Bear’ in the kids’ cartoon Peppa Pig for ‘fostering unrealistic expectations about family doctors’.

We need to go beyond the usual to-and-fro of NHS cheerleading on the one hand, about how much Brits ‘heart’ it, and NHS doom-mongering on the other hand, where the spectre of its imminent privatisation is constantly being raised. People like Stephen Hawking aren’t helping when they lend their name to a legal dispute against the establishment of accountable care organisations (ACOs), which they say herald the beginning of the end for ‘our NHS’, when in truth they are just institutional arrangements designed to integrate ‘silo’ services across the health and care system.

But Hawking is right that we need ‘proper public and parliamentary scrutiny, consultations and debate’ in relation to the NHS. As is Kerslake when he says: ‘We desperately need a fundamental rethink. Until then we are simply kicking the can down the road.’ Instead of obsessing over paper targets, or targeting peoples’ lifestyles and behaviour through the health system, the political class needs to engage the nation in a debate about the future of the NHS. Whether that ends in radical reform or starting all over again is open to question — but we know for sure we cannot continue with the crisis-ridden and cash-strapped status quo.

First published in sp!ked

The sorry state of welfare

Universal credit – the Tories’ flagship welfare policy aimed at saving money, easing claimants’ transition into work, and simplifying the benefits system by merging six different benefits into one – has hit headlines recently for all the wrong reasons.

As it has been rolled out, the requirement that claimants wait six weeks or more before receiving payment has, reportedly, led to everything from indebtedness to evictions. And the charge attached to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) hotline has caused outrage, too.

Last month, Labour put forward an opposition-day (that is, non-binding) motion calling for the roll-out of universal credit to be halted. It passed 229 to nil. Controversially, Tory MPs were instructed to abstain or absent themselves in an effort to avoid a backbench revolt.

It has been widely reported that the DWP helpline costs 55p per minute, which is hardly affordable for the already hard-up. In fact, the cost varies from 3p to 55p on a mobile, and is no more than 9p on a landline. Nevertheless, it became part of a narrative that the Tory government is being grasping and inhumane.

The Archbishop of York described those being bitten by the roll-out as the ‘present-day successors’ of the widows and orphans referred to in the Bible. Labour MP Frank Field, chair of the Work and Pensions Committee, has said the government must ‘avert a Christmas disaster’. Much of this is overdone, similar to over-the-top claims about food poverty and suicidal benefits claimants. But there are still some real problems with universal credit.

Food banks have been reporting increased demand for some time, and rising homelessness has been linked to welfare reform. The Smith Institute has linked the introduction of universal credit with millions of pounds worth of rent arrears in Southwark and Croydon in south London. And according to SNP MP Drew Hendry, 60 per cent of his constituency caseload is universal-credit-related. He has complained of a ‘systematic lack of care shown to those most vulnerable in our society’.

Universal credit has been beset by delays and controversy from the start. And until recently, it has been rolled out in an almost apologetic way – at the rate of five Job Centres a month. This was due to be accelerated to include all new claimants by autumn 2018, so that it would be fully implemented by 2022 to cover an estimated seven million households. (Such is the extent of the problem of welfare dependency.) But it’s looking unlikely that target will be met.

There have been very real problems with the way in which universal credit has been rolled out. And on these issues, there have been welcome signs of retreat, as a result of the pressure exerted inside and outside of parliament. There’s been a u-turn on a cap for housing benefit for social-housing tenants, a reduction on the six-week wait is expected to be in next month’s budget, and the helpline is now free of charge.

But the principle behind universal credit is a good one, and needs to be defended. The architect of universal credit, former work and pensions secretary Iain Duncan Smith, still maintains that it could ‘dramatically change lives for the better’. This ambition, to reform the welfare system and make it fit for the new century, has unfortunately been bogged down in political point-scoring and design failures.

Welfare dependency is a longstanding social, economic and cultural problem. It will take more than a technical fix to solve it. But at least the Tories recognise there is a problem, and are trying to treat benefits claimants like adults. Under universal credit, claimants receive their benefits directly. (Housing benefit, for example, previously went straight to landlords.) Also, it is paid on a monthly basis, like a salary, instead of fortnightly or weekly. Many of its critics, by contrast, think ‘vulnerable’ claimants are incapable of budgeting for themselves.

Virtue-signalling over the needy may shame the government into another u-turn, but it will do nothing to help claimants. What’s more, the rows over universal credit – a policy that, in principle, all parties support – makes it seem more drastic than it is. It is a policy that is argued for in the language of ‘supporting’ the ‘vulnerable’. A reminder that there’s still a much broader debate to be had about the future of the welfare state.

First published in sp!ked