Northside People story highlights child poverty

THE heartbreaking story of a Finglas family which was highlighted by Northside People last year has been used as a key case study in a child poverty report.

The Children’s Rights Alliance, made up over 100 children’s organisations, published its Report Card 2013 on Monday, February 18.

The report is an annual rating of the Government’s commitments to children.

This year the Government got an

‘F’ grade for its performance on child poverty, mainly due to hard-hitting measures adopted in the last budget, which were said to undermine children’s rights to an adequate standard of living.

According to the Alliance, the budget cuts

“will certainly see more families with children falling into poverty

?.

In its chapter on the

‘Right to an Adequate Standard of Living’, the report highlights an article which appeared in Northside People last December.

The article told of Finglas mum Antoinette Norris, a mother of two special needs children, who stood to lose more than

?¬1,700 a year as a result of cruel budget cuts.

The government got a

‘D-‘ grade in this category as child poverty is still high.

Tanya Ward, chief executive of the Children’s Rights Alliance, said the use of case studies such as the Norris family’s situation are important to highlight real-life effects of budget cuts.

“Report Card 2013 focuses on many areas of children’s rights including the terrible impact of budget cuts on children and families,

? she stated.

“In the report card we try to use real life stories to better illustrate our point so we found a great article published in the Northside People last January.

“The piece was by Aoibhinn Twomey and it depicted the heartbreaking story of a family from Finglas who have two special needs children and are really struggling to stay afloat financially.

“Using true life stories in this way makes sense because it really speaks to the heart of readers.

?

The report also criticised budget cuts to child benefit which saw the allowance cut by

?¬10 a month for the first and second child;

?¬18 for the third child and

?¬20 for the fourth and subsequent children.

It also noted that further cuts to the back-to-school clothing and footwear allowance, which it said was the only payment dedicated to supporting low-income parents with the cost of school, would hinder children from fulfilling their right to an education and was also in contravention of the UN convention.