By Helen Walker, Policy & Influence Worker, Macc

Gorton and Levenshulme highlights the need for a radical approach to building resilient communities that can transform people’s lives

Representatives of voluntary sector organisations and local groups in Gorton and Levenshulme have shared their experiences and views of working at a neighbourhood level during the Covid-19 crisis in a new Manchester Community Central (Macc) report that was published on Monday March 8th, 2021. Macc is the organisation that supports the voluntary, community and social enterprise sector in the city of Manchester.

Entitled, No Going Back: Gorton and Levenshulme, the publication gives a platform to 16 local organisations to highlight some of the local voices in a city neighbourhood that don’t often get a hearing. The collection of inspirational stories and quotes focuses on Gorton and Levenshulme, a community area that has faced its fair share of challenges during the Covid-19 pandemic.

“We wanted to explore the experience and views of community organisations working in neighbourhoods during the Covid crisis,” said Mike Wild, Macc’s Chief Executive. “The Gorton and Levenshulme organisations we feature in No Going Back show local communities getting together to organise vital support during the pandemic.”

In total, 16 organisations contributed to the report including two community associations, a bowling club, an organisation that teaches circus skills (yes, and you may be surprised why that matters!), a youth service, and an organisation that runs classes to reduce stress. The stories feature work with young people, South Asian women, refugees, migrants, people with dementia and older neighbours. The insight they share covers topics from how to make a new home to how to address health inequalities, how to set up a rapid volunteering scheme, how to organise food banks and why we shouldn’t need them.

“The experiences of the local voluntary organisations featured in No Going Back – Gorton and Levenshulme offer a glimpse of how communities can come together to tackle the health and social care crisis in Manchester, a crisis that has been building over the last 20 years and worsened by many years of austerity,” said Mike Wild,  “It is time to take a truly radical approach, one based in a practical and realistic idea of community, the kind of approach illustrated in every story that is highlighted in this publication,” he said.

Mike continued: “It is time to stop remaking the same old solutions in the hope that perhaps they will work this time. The response to the pandemic shows that there are other ways of organising help, support and care in communities: look at the diversity of organisations, of people and approaches in this report. There is an opportunity and an appetite to transform the way that statutory services operate in neighbourhoods so they are able to work alongside local VCSE organisations, faith organisations and businesses and make the best use of the talents, skills and assets of all.”

The report is available on Macc’s website. You can follow updates on Twitter using the hashtag #NoGoingBackMcr.

Childcare costs rise as providers struggle to remain sustainable during the pandemic

By Hannah May Parlett, Coram Family and Childcare

Britain’s parents are paying 4% more for childcare for children under two, and 5% more for children aged two than they were one year ago, according to the country’s most comprehensive annual survey of childcare costs. Coram Family and Childcare’s 21st annual Childcare Survey finds that parents have faced childcare costs rising well ahead of inflation and are now paying an average of £138 per week – over £7,000 per year – for a part-time nursery place for a child under two (in the North West the figure is £126.43).

Childcare providers are struggling to remain sustainable during the crisis, with 39% of local authorities in England seeing providers in their area raise their prices and 32% reporting that some providers have reduced the number of free early education entitlement places they offer. Furthermore, 30% have seen providers increase the number of children looked after by each staff member.

Despite over a third (35%) of local authorities in England reporting a rise in the number of providers in their area permanently closing in the last year, the majority have not yet seen an increase in shortages of childcare. Over two-thirds (68%) of local authorities in England reported having enough childcare available to meet demand for parents working full time, compared to 56% last year. However this is most likely to be due to decreased demand from families during the pandemic, rather than increases in the supply of childcare, and it is yet to be seen whether there will still be enough childcare places if, and when demand returns to pre-pandemic levels.

In addition, availability of childcare for certain groups is little improved on last year, with less than one in four local areas in England reporting enough childcare for 12 to 14 year olds (13%), parents working atypical hours (16%) and disabled children (25%). These shortages for disabled children exist despite the fact that fewer disabled children are using childcare – a third (31%) of local areas thought that fewer children with special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND) were using childcare than last year.

Megan Jarvie, Head of Coram Family and Childcare, said: “The pandemic has reminded us all of the vital importance of childcare, in enabling parents to work, boosting children’s learning and narrowing the gap between disadvantaged children and their peers. However the crisis has also exacerbated the issues that exist in the sector. For too many families the system simply isn’t working, and they are left struggling to make work pay after childcare costs or are forced out of the workplace entirely.

“There remains a risk that many providers could close, leaving more families struggling to find the childcare that they need, or that costs could further increase, at a time when family finances have already been stretched by the pandemic. Financial support from the Government has helped childcare providers to stay afloat, but we don’t know what the effects will be when this support ends. We’re calling for the Government to take urgent steps to improve the system now and in the longer-term so that every child can access the high-quality childcare that supports their early development.”

The Childcare Survey 2021 sets out actions that governments can take in the short-term to fix urgent problems in the system:

•  Launch a funding review for the free early education entitlements to make sure that funding levels are sufficient to support the delivery of high-quality education and care, including, but not limited to, issues resulting from Covid-19.

•  Reform Universal Credit so it does not lock parents out of work, by increasing the maximum amount of childcare costs paid under Universal Credit and move to upfront payments for childcare.

•  Extend the 30 hours free childcare provision for three and four year olds in England and Wales to families where parents are in training, to help boost their employment opportunities.

•  Double the early years pupil premium, to boost outcomes for the most disadvantaged children.

•  Re-allocate any underspend budget for Tax-Free Childcare to other parts of the childcare system – prioritising the most disadvantaged children.

For a copy of the full report please contact Emma Lamberton, Communications Manager, Coram.

Last week’s Budget announcement that Universal Credit will be cut by £20 a week in October is a setback for families. Imran Hussain, Director of Policy & Campaigns at Action for Children outlines why this choice hurts children – and how the decision could still be reversed.

The Budget announcement that Universal Credit will be cut by £20 a week in October is a setback for families – it is estimated that 2.5 million families with children currently on Universal Credit or Working Tax Credit will miss out on a combined total of £1.3 billion this year.

Here are five reasons why taking more than £500 in the next financial year (£1000 a year afterwards) from low income families will hurt families with children:

1. It would mean turning back to benefit levels that are low historically and internationally – UK unemployment benefits are the weakest in the OECD, after a decade of cuts that have hit in-work and out-of-work benefits.
2. Cutting Universal Credit will see child poverty – already high – rising sharply in the next few years, according to the Resolution Foundation. The only year expected to show a fall in child poverty will be 2020-21, the year of the increased Universal Credit rate.
3. Even with the £20 increase, many families Action for Children works with have struggled financially. Making the families we work with £1000 a year worse off is going to damage childhoods and life chances.
4. Nor does stripping back support later this year make sense when we know unemployment is not going to return to pre-pandemic levels for some time. Last week the Office for Budget Responsibility said higher unemployment will be with us for some time.
5. That’s unemployment; but there are also many families who are seeing – or will see in the next couple of years – significant cuts to their pay and hours. Cuts to Universal Credit hits the low paid, not just those out of work.

But there is good reason to believe the battle is not over, that the Government could end up deciding that it won’t cut Universal Credit:

1. The strength of the campaign pushed the Government further than it wanted. Action for Children’s report on its Emergency Fundwas among the first to argue against the cut, but many others, not just those working on poverty issues, have also made the case. And we know that GMPA has been adding its voice to this campaign.
2. There’s also concern within the ranks of the Government’s own MPs. In January 2021, the Government was so worried about a rebellion on the issue it ordered its MPs to abstain on a vote on extending the uplift.
3. Tim Pitt,a former adviser to ex Chancellor Philip Hammond, argues that the Government should strengthen the safety net because its voting coalition is now so different than in the past. Cutting Universal Credit is pain that would be felt by those in ‘Red Wall’ seats which formed the bedrock of its majority.
4. Crucially, public opinion on benefit levels is changing, with more people now agreeing that benefit levels are low.
5. Fundamentally, the pandemic has revealed that our support for the low paid and for those who lose their jobs is simply not good enough. It’s self-evidently a view the Government accepted when it increased Universal Credit.

Imran Hussain

Money matters for childhoods, life chances and the fight against poverty. That’s what the research shows and what anyone working with families knows.

So, it is encouraging in the sense that the battle is not over and there’s growing recognition in politics and society that we need to strengthen social security support.

A longer version of this article is available on the Action for Children website.

Greater Manchester Mental Wellbeing conversation findings published

By Charlene Mulhern, Greater Manchester Health & Social Care Partnership

Findings from the Greater Manchester Mental Wellbeing conversation have been published with over 4,000 people emphasising what is important for their mental wellbeing.

The aim is to use this information to understand what matters and to shape future initiatives to improve mental wellbeing, making sure they reflect the needs of local people. Key findings have indicated that:

• The majority, (97%), of Greater Manchester citizens think that mental wellbeing is important or very important;
• Whilst significantly more people know what to do if they wanted to improve their mental wellbeing,(58%), there are 42% who are either unsure or who have no idea;
• Work (and/or college) is the single biggest factor associated with poor mental wellbeing and cited by around 1/3 of all respondents, followed by existing mental health illnesses and / or disabilities;
• Almost two in three people in Greater Manchester (61%) don’t feel connected to their community or place;
• An emphasis of green open space, the ambiance of the surroundings, good facilities and events and people behaving in a more supportive ‘community’ way would meet most people’s needs (63%) for a place of positive wellbeing. This reinforces that improving mental wellbeing is as much about shaping places as it is about engaging people
• The people surveyed highlight that too many people aren’t very happy (5.2/10), don’t find life satisfying (5.1/10) and worthwhile (5.7/10) and have fairly high levels of anxiety (5.6/10)

Responses to questions clearly indicated that there is no one single solution. Improving mental wellbeing across the population will require a whole system approach which involves everyone working together to bring about sustainable long-term system change. A plan to respond to feedback is now underway.

Access to the detailed report can be found here

Why Wigan Council have made it their own responsibility to consider poverty

GMPA is keen for socio-economic duty to be included in equalities legislation and early in 2020, as part of our work in response to the spread of COVID-19, we developed a briefing. Some public bodies, including Wigan Council, are taking matters into their own hands.


Councillor Paula Wakefield, Lead Member for Equalities and Domestic Violence at Wigan Council, explains why in Wigan Borough, a key consideration when developing new policies, is now the impact the policy will have on lower income households.

“I understand from personal experience the effect that coming from a lower income family can have on your life.  My family were in a relatively stable situation until my father died when I was 13. He had received contaminated blood products as part of a treatment he had for his Haemophilia. He went on to die from Hepatitis C.

It was the early 90’s and there was massive stigma and discrimination surrounding these conditions. We lost our home, and my father had lost his job and his life insurance. When he died we were forced into bankruptcy.

The impact of suddenly living in a low, single income household affected everything. I stopped asking my mum if I could go on school trips or holidays as I knew she couldn’t afford it. My brother and I received free school meals and bills for essentials like utilities suddenly became a real struggle.

I had done well at school but knew that higher education wasn’t an option. We couldn’t afford for me to go to University, I knew I had to get a job and bring money into the family as soon as possible. If you live in a lower income household, your life choices and pathways become limited, through no fault of your own.

Perhaps because of my background, addressing any type of inequality will always be a passion of mine, so when I was offered the Lead Member role for Equalities and Domestic Abuse at Wigan Council, I knew it would be a perfect fit. In one of the first meetings in my new role we discussed tackling the way people are disproportionately affected if they come from lower income families.

I was informed that a decision had been made by the Government not to include socio-economic disadvantage as part of the Equality Act but that we could include it in our own Equality Commitment, which is already a statutory requirement, in the same way that we had adopted carers and veterans into our Commitment.  I made the decision that this would be a priority and last year Wigan Council added socio-economic disadvantage to the protected characteristics listed in our Equality Commitment and our Equality Impact Assessments.

The fact that socio-economic disadvantage is now part of our Equality Commitment means that every time a new policy is developed, we are required to consider the impact it will have on those from lower income households. If we think it may have a detrimental effect, we discuss what we can do to make sure that does not happen.

Considering poverty as part of our Equality Commitment has also helped to raise the profile of the issue. Wigan Council is taking action to improve the life choices for those from lower income families in many different ways including making sure that high quality health services are accessible in lower income areas, providing quality, affordable homes and building more of the right homes, harnessing the power digital connectivity has to improve people’s opportunities and creating local economic growth through our Community Wealth Building Strategy.

Councillor Paula Wakefield

It is so important for councils to adopt socio-economic duty. The coronavirus pandemic has shown that, yet again, it is the lower income families that are disproportionately affected and we must do everything we can to mitigate it.

We must continue to campaign for socio-economic disadvantage to be included in national legislation. But it’s also important to remember that there are small changes we can make locally, that can have a huge and positive impact on lower income families.

Everyone deserves the same life chances – no matter where you are born or how much money you have and if a Local Authority can help on that journey, why would we choose not to?”