Jakarta Globe, Matt Carr, May 6, 2013
Volunteers at the food bank in Clay Cross in Britain. (IPS Photo/Lara Stanley) |
Clay Cross,
Britain. The social consequences of austerity economics have been most visible
in Europe’s southern periphery. In the United Kingdom, the coalition government
has brought in sharp cutbacks in welfare state provision in the name of dealing
with the financial crisis.
Their
impact is becoming increasingly visible. A survey by the Netmums website found
that one in five mothers in the United Kingdom regularly goes without meals to
feed their children. Thousands now rely on charities and emergency food banks
to feed themselves and their families.
In the last
12 months the Trussell Trust, the largest operator of food banks in the United
Kingdom, says it has fed 350,000 people, 100,000 more than anticipated and an
increase of 170 percent over the previous year.
People go
to food banks for many different reasons. Some are underemployed, others are
victims of domestic violence. Some have fallen victim to loan sharks who prey
on the poor by offering them loans at exorbitant rates of interest.
But most are
unemployed, and have had their benefits removed or cut as a result of the
government’s ideologically-driven onslaught on people it regards as work-shy
“scroungers.”
All these
factors have fueled what the Trussell Trust calls an “epidemic” of hunger that
is becoming increasingly visible in small and large towns across the United
Kingdom.
Clay Cross
is a small town of 5,000 in the hilly countryside of north Derbyshire that used
to be a center of the British coal-mining industry. Like many former mining towns
and villages in the area, Clay Cross has fallen on hard times since the closure
of its local pit back in the 1980s, but things have recently begun to get a lot
harder.
One evening
I visited the local Trussell Trust food bank in Saint Bartholomew’s Church on
the high street.
Inside,
volunteers were setting out some of the two tons of food donated by shoppers
during a two-day collection across various Tesco supermarkets the previous
weekend.
The food
bank only opened last August, but since then it has fed 1,147 people, and is
opening up other food banks in the surrounding area.
One of its
clients was David, who now works as a volunteer for the Trust. A former taxi
driver, David worked as a full-time carer for his disabled wife for 12 years.
But when she
died last year, he lost his carer’s salary and had no income for seven weeks
while he waited for unemployment benefit. During that time, he says, he lived
on three carrier bags of food that he was given by the food bank.
Delays in
benefits payments and benefits sanctions are the most common reason for people
coming to the food bank, and many of those who do, find the experience deeply
shameful and humiliating.
“Some
people wander in and crack on,” says project coordinator James Herbert. “Other
people stick their heads in, see there are a lot of people, and go away, and we
never see them again.”
Herbert and
his team are keen to overcome these reservations and to welcome people who turn
up at these drop-ins, but he is also indignant that such services are required:
“It’s reprehensible. Ultimately people should be ashamed of themselves. Local
and national government should be ashamed of themselves, to leave people in a
situation where they have to rely on charity to feed their families.”
Most
service users come to the Trust through referrals from charities or government
agencies, with vouchers that enable them to be collect food three or four times
only. Bernard (not his real name) has just come to the center on referral from
his local job center for the first time.
A
38-year-old volunteer mentor working with young offenders, Bernard was on
unemployment benefit until two weeks ago, when his benefit was cut because he
didn’t apply for one of the jobs offered by his local job center.
Bernard
insists that he never received the offer, and has appealed against the
decision, which may result in a 29 pounds a week hardship fund, or the full
restoration of his 71 pounds benefits. If not, he will get nothing for another
six weeks, even though he lives in a flat without gas, electricity, or food.
I asked him
what he thought of government “scrounger” rhetoric. “If I’m a scrounger then
I’m a scrounger, but at the end of the day, what else am I going to do? Am I
going to go and rob to survive? In the 21st century, in one of the most
advanced nations in the world, and people have got to come to food banks, something
is not quite right is it?”
Colin
Hampton, coordinator of the Derbyshire Unemployed Workers Center, agrees.
“The
situation is worse now than it ever was in the 1980s. People are coming to us
asking for food in desperate situations, and we refer them to food banks. But
while we appreciate that people are trying to help, our biggest worry is that
unless we express our outrage, this will become the norm, and people need to
ask why this is happening.”
British
Prime Minister David Cameron has praised the Trussell Trust’s work, but food
banks are a direct consequence of government policies that are designed to
force people off benefits, regardless of consequences. Labor MP Peter Hain
recently accused the government of “terrorizing” the unemployed in his constituency
by forcing them to choose between starvation and low-paid work.
The
19th-century Poor Law system once had a similarly punitive and deterrent
attitude towards the industrial poor. Today, hunger is a consequence of
manufactured poverty in the seventh largest economy in the world, and the poor
are once again being victimized and punished.
In these
circumstances, food banks may become a convenient substitute for statutory
assistance, enabling the political heirs of the late Margaret Thatcher to strip
still further at the welfare safety net, in the knowledge that people may be
hungry, but at least they won’t be starving.
Inter Press Service
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.