THREAD: Is the Govt changing its cherrypicking strategy on child poverty claims?

SPOT THE DIFFERENCE

1. What PM wrongly claimed on child poverty in 2019, earning @StatsRegulation rebuke

2. What PM claimed on child poverty at PMQs on 18 Nov 20

In the first statement, the PM used 2010 as a baseline. At the time, relative poverty was rising and absolute poverty was historically weak - we could not see where the 400,000 claim had come from.

An earlier thread on the PM's past claims https://t.co/AKNrOAsxc0
In the PMQs claim he talks about the last 10 yrs.

If he means since 2010, he'd be repeating his incorrect claim.

Does he mean the last 10 years for which we have statistics?

That would be starting at 2009/10 - under LAB & well before benefit cuts started to bite from 2012
Let's take a look, first, at the relative child poverty measure

Looking at the last 10 years, child poverty has RISEN by 200,000 (BHC) or 300,000 (BHC)
Can the PM's 400,000 claim be borne out by the absolute child poverty stats? Remember, we normally expect this figure to fall, as society gets richer

No, absolute child poverty fell by 100,000 on both BHC/AHC - a historically weak performance
Can the PM's claim to have cut child poverty by 400,000 be from the material deprivation measures?

No - because the new suite of measures goes back 9, not 10 yrs

No - we've seen a small fall on one measure and a small rise on the other
So, where is the 400,000 figure from?

The closest the PM can come to that would be if his baseline was even earlier and focused only on the BHC absolute poverty measure
But this throws up some quirks/problems:

1. 2008/09 is obviously going back 11 yrs, not 10 yrs. So the PM's statement was inaccurate.

2. This would be only apply to the BHC absolute measure. There was a 300,000 RISE on the AHC relative measure in the same period
3. Significantly, it appears Govt has changed its strategy of claiming poverty reductions by cherrypicking statistics for the years since 2010

The cherrypicking strategy was something I raised with @StatsRegulation 3 yrs ago & got a sympathetic response https://t.co/4JTcrSjnae
It appears the Govt is now cherrypicking which years it uses for its child poverty claims

The record after 2010 is so poor, it seems it is reaching back as far 2008.

Including that year under Gordon Brown seems to give the PM 300,000 of his 400,000 claim.
To recap, I don't know for certain where the 400,000 claim comes from, but it seems to be from the BHC absolute measure over 11 years.

If that's true, then I'd urge Govt to spend more time on actually tackling rising child poverty than creative ways to hide that reality

ENDS
@threadreaderapp unroll

More from Government

How does a government put a legislation on 'hold'? Is there any constitutional mechanism for the executive to 'pause' a validly passed legislation? Genuine Koshan.


So a committee of 'wise men/women' selected by the SC will stand in judgement over the law passed by


Here is the thing - a law can be stayed based on usual methods, it can be held unconstitutional based on violation of the Constitution. There is no shortcut to this based on the say so of even a large number of people, merely because they are loud.


Tomorrow can all the income tax payers also gather up at whichever maidan and ask for repealing the income tax law? It hurts us and we can protest quite loudly.

How can a law be stayed or over-turned based on the nuisance value of the protestors? It is anarchy to allow that.

You May Also Like

Хајде да направимо мали осврт на случај Мика Алексић .

Алексић је жртва енглеске освете преко Оливере Иванчић .
Мика је одбио да снима филм о блаћењу Срба и мењању историје Срба , иза целокупног пројекта стоји дипломатски кор Британаца у Београду и Оливера Иванчић


Оливера Илинчић је иначе мајка једне од његових ученица .
Која је претила да ће се осветити .

Мика се налази у притвору због наводних оптужби глумице Милене Радуловић да ју је наводно силовао човек од 70 година , са три бајпаса и извађеном простатом пре пет година

Иста персона је и обезбедила финансије за филм преко Беча а филм је требао да се бави животом Десанке Максимовић .
А сетите се и ко је иницирао да се Десанка Максимовић избаци из уџбеника и школства у Србији .

И тако уместо романсиране верзије Десанке Максимовић утицај Британаца

У Србији стави на пиједестал и да се Британци у Србији позитивно афирмишу како би се на тај начин усмерила будућност али и мењао ток историје .
Зато Мика са гнушањем и поносно одбија да снима такав филм тада и почиње хајка и претње која потиче из британских дипломатских кругова

Најгоре од свега што је то Мика Алексић изговорио у присуству високих дипломатских представника , а одговор је био да се све неће на томе завршити и да ће га то скупо коштати .
Нашта им је Мика рекао да је он свој живот проживео и да могу да му раде шта хоће и силно их извређао
Trump is gonna let the Mueller investigation end all on it's own. It's obvious. All the hysteria of the past 2 weeks about his supposed impending firing of Mueller was a distraction. He was never going to fire Mueller and he's not going to


Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.

Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.

Mueller's team was 100% partisan.

That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election

They looked high.

They looked low.

They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.

And they found...NOTHING.

Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.

What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?

THERE WEREN'T ANY.

Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.