document_title: Bharat Ratna

question_text: who was the first indian woman to be honoured with bharat ratna

text: Bharat Ratna

text: History[edit]

text: On 2 January 1954, a press communiqué was released from the office of the secretary to the President announcing the creation of two civilian awards—Bharat Ratna, the highest civilian award, and the three-tier Padma Vibhushan, classified into "Pahela Warg" (Class I), "Dusra Warg" (Class II), and "Tisra Warg" (Class III), which rank below the Bharat Ratna.[2] On 15 January 1955, the Padma Vibhushan was reclassified into three different awards; the Padma Vibhushan, the highest of the three, followed by the Padma Bhushan and the Padma Shri.[3]

text: There is no formal provision that recipients of the Bharat Ratna should be Indian citizens. It has been awarded to a naturalised Indian citizen, Mother Teresa in 1980, and to two non-Indians, Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan of Pakistan in 1987 and the former South African president Nelson Mandela in 1990.[6] Sachin Tendulkar, at the age of 40, became the youngest person and first athlete to receive the honour.[7] In a special ceremony on 18 April 1958, Dhondo Keshav Karve was awarded on his 100th birthday.[8][a] As of 2015, the award has been conferred upon 45 people with 12 posthumous declarations.[10]

text: The award was briefly suspended twice in its history.[11] The first suspension occurred after Morarji Desai was sworn in as the fourth Prime Minister in 1977. His government withdrew all personal civil honours on 13 July 1977.[12][13] The suspension was rescinded on 25 January 1980, after Indira Gandhi became the Prime Minister.[14][15] The civilian awards were suspended again in mid-1992, when two Public-Interest Litigations were filed, one in the Kerala High Court and another in the Madhya Pradesh High Court, challenging the "constitutional validity" of the awards.[11] The awards were reintroduced by the Supreme Court in December 1995, following the conclusion of the litigation.[13][16]

text: Regulations[edit]

text: The Bharat Ratna is conferred "in recognition of exceptional service/performance of the highest order", without distinction of race, occupation, position, or sex.[4] The award was originally confined to the arts, literature, science, and public services, as per the 1954 regulations.[2] In December 2011, the rules were changed to include "any field of human endeavour".[5] The 1954 statutes did not allow posthumous awards, but this was subsequently modified in the January 1955 statute, and Lal Bahadur Shastri became the first recipient to be honoured posthumously in 1966.[3][17]

text: Although there is no formal nomination process, recommendations for the award can only be made by the Prime Minister to the President with a maximum number of three nominees being awarded per year. However, in 1999, four individuals were awarded the honour. The recipient receives a Sanad (certificate) signed by the President and a medallion without any monetary grant. Under the terms of Article 18 (1) of the Constitution,[b] the recipients cannot use the award as a prefix or suffix to their name, although recipients may use either the expressions "Awarded Bharat Ratna by the President" or "Recipient of Bharat Ratna Award" to indicate that they have been honoured with the award.[4] The holders of the Bharat Ratna rank seventh in the Indian order of precedence.[19]

text: As with many official announcements, recipients are announced and registered in The Gazette of India, a publication released by the Department of Publication, Ministry of Urban Development used for official government notices; without publication in the Gazette, conferral of the award is not considered official. Recipients whose awards have been revoked or restored, both of which require the authority of the President, are registered in the Gazette. Recipients whose awards have been revoked are required to surrender their medals, and their names are struck from the register.[2][3]

text: Specifications[edit]

text: The original 1954 specifications of the award was a circle made of gold 1 3⁄8 inches (35 mm) in diameter with a centred sun burst design on the obverse side. The text "Bharat Ratna", in Devanagari Script, is inscribed on the upper edge in silver gilt with a wreath set along on the lower edge. A platinum State Emblem of India was placed in the centre of the reverse side with the national motto, "Satyameva Jayate" (Truth alone triumphs) in Devanagari Script, inscribed in silver-gilt on the lower edge.[2]

text: A year later, the design was modified. The current medal is in the shape of a peepal leaf, approximately 2 5⁄16 inches (59 mm) long, 1 7⁄8 inches (48 mm) wide and 1⁄8 inch (3.2 mm) thick and rimmed in platinum. The embossed sun burst design, made of platinum, on the obverse side of the medal has a diameter of 5⁄8 inch (16 mm) with rays spreading out from 5⁄6 inch (21 mm) to 1⁄2 inch (13 mm) from the center of the Sun. The words "Bharat Ratna" on the obverse side remained the same as the 1954 design as did the emblem of India and "Satyameva Jayate" on the reverse side. A 2-inch-wide (51 mm) white ribbon is attached to the medal so it can be worn around the neck.[3][11][20] In 1957, the silver-gilt decoration was changed to burnished bronze.[2][21] The Bharat Ratna medals are produced at Alipore Mint, Kolkata along with the other civilian and military awards like Padma Vibushan, Padma Bhushan, Padma Shri, and Param Veer Chakra.[22]

text: Controversies[edit]

text: The Bharat Ratna has been surrounded by several controversies and multiple Public-Interest Litigations (PIL) had been filed against the conferral of the award.[13][23][24][25][26]

text: On 23 January 1992, a press release was published by the President's Secretariat to confer the award posthumously on Subhash Chandra Bose. The decision triggered much criticism and a PIL was filed in the Calcutta High Court to revoke the award.[23] The petitioner took objection to the conferral of the award and its posthumous mention of Bose, saying that honouring a personality higher than the award is "ridiculous", and it was an act of "carelessness" to classify such a person with past and future recipients. It said that the award cannot be conferred to Bose posthumously as the Government had not officially accepted his death on 18 August 1945. The petitioner requested the whereabouts of Bose from 18 August 1945 till date, based on the information collected by the 1956 Shah Nawaz Committee and the 1970 Khosla Commission. Bose's family members expressed their unwillingness to accept the award.[27][28]

text: To deliver the judgement, the Supreme Court formed a Special Division Bench with Judge Sujata V. Manohar and G. B. Pattanaik. The Solicitor General noted that to confer the award per the appropriate regulations pertaining to the Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan, and Padma Shri, the name of the recipient must be published in The Gazette of India and entered in the recipients register maintained under the direction of the President.[2] It was noted that only an announcement had been made by press communiqué, but the government had not proceeded to confer the award by publishing the name in the Gazette and entering the name in the register. Furthermore, the then presidents, R. Venkataraman (1987–92) and Shankar Dayal Sharma (1992–97), had not conferred a Sanad (certificate) with their signature and seal.[27]

text: On 4 August 1997, the Supreme Court delivered an order that since the award had not been officially conferred, it cannot be revoked and declared that the press communiqué be treated as cancelled. The court declined to pass any judgement on the posthumous mention of Bose and his death.[27][29]

text: In 1992, two PILs were filed in the High Courts; one in the Kerala High Court on 13 February 1992 by Balaji Raghavan and another in the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Indore Bench) on 24 August 1992 by Satya Pal Anand. Both petitioners questioned the civilian awards being "Titles" per an interpretation of Article 18 (1) of the Constitution.[b] On 25 August 1992, the Madhya Pradesh High Court issued a notice temporarily suspending all civilian awards.[13] A Special Division Bench of the Supreme Court was formed comprising five judges; A. M. Ahmadi C. J., Kuldip Singh, B. P. Jeevan Reddy, N. P. Singh, and S. Saghir Ahmad. On 15 December 1995, the Special Division Bench restored the awards and delivered a judgement that the "Bharat Ratna and Padma awards are not titles under Article 18 of the Constitution".[16]

text: Following the announcement, in November 2013, that C. N. R. Rao and Sachin Tendulkar were to be awarded the Bharat Ratna, multiple PILs were filed challenging the conferring of the award. The PIL filed against Rao declared that other Indian scientists, such as Homi Bhabha and Vikram Sarabhai, had contributed more than Rao and his claim of publishing 1400 research papers was "physically impossible". The suit stated that as Rao had proven cases of plagiarism, he should not be presented with the award but rather should be annulled.[24] The PIL filed against Tendulkar to the Election Commission under the Right to Information Act indicated that the awarding him the Bharat Ratna was a violation of the model code of conduct. The petitioner noted that as Tendulkar was an Indian National Congress nominated Member of Rajya Sabha, the decision to award him the Bharat Ratna would influence the voters of Delhi, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, and Mizoram where the election process was underway at the time.[25] Another PIL was filed against Tendulkar and a few ministers, "alleging a conspiracy to ignore" an Indian field hockey player Dhyan Chand."[26][c]

text: On 4 December 2013, the Election Commission rejected the petition stating that conferring the award on people from non-polling states did not amount to a violation of the code.[30] Other High Courts as well rejected the petitions raised against Rao and Tendulkar.[31]

text: Criticism[edit]

text: In 1988, then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi (1984–89) conferred the Bharat Ratna posthumously on film actor and former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, M. G. Ramachandran, in a bid to influence voters prior to the Tamil Nadu assembly elections in 1989.[32][33] The decision was criticised for awarding Ramachandran before independence activist B. R. Ambedkar and Vallabhbhai Patel, who were bestowed the honour in 1990 and 1991 respectively.[34] While Ravi Shankar was accused of lobbying for the award,[35] the decision by Indira Gandhi to posthumously honour K. Kamaraj was considered to have been aimed at placating Tamil voters for the Tamil Nadu assembly elections in 1977. The seventh Prime Minister V. P. Singh was criticised for posthumously honouring B. R. Ambedkar to please the Dalits.[36][32]

text: The posthumous conferments of the award on the recipients who died before the Indian independence in 1947 or the award was instituted in 1954 have been criticised by historians.[37] It was noted that such conferments could lead to more demands to honour people like Maurya Emperor Ashoka,[38] Mughal Emperor Akbar, Maratha Emperor Shivaji, Nobel Laureate Rabindranath Tagore,[39] Hindu spiritualist Swami Vivekananda,[40] and independence activist Bal Gangadhar Tilak.[41] The then Prime Minister P. V. Narasimha Rao (1991–96) was criticised for bestowing the award upon Vallabhbhai Patel in 1991, 41 years after his death in 1950; and upon Subhas Chandra Bose in 1992, who went missing since 18 August 1945.[41][42] Similarly in 2015, the Prime Minister Narendra Modi's decision to award Madan Mohan Malaviya, who died in 1946, met with criticism.[41] Janardan Dwivedi, politician of the Indian National Congress, said that Malaviya, who worked predominantly in Varanasi, was "deliberately chosen" by the Prime Minister Modi, who is the incumbent Member of Parliament from Varanasi.[43]

text: A few of the conferments have been criticised for honouring personalities only after they received global recognition.[44] The award for Mother Teresa was announced in 1980, a year after she was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Satyajit Ray received an Academy Honorary Award in 1992 followed by the Bharat Ratna the same year.[45][46] In 1999, Amartya Sen was awarded the Bharat Ratna, a year after his 1998 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. The award was proposed  by Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee to President K. R. Narayanan who agreed to the proposal.[47][48]

text: Popular demands[edit]

text: Though, as per the statutes for the Bharat Ratna, the recommendations for the award can only be made by the Prime Minister to the President,[4] there have been several demands from various political parties to honour their leaders. In January 2008, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader L. K. Advani wrote to the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh recommending Singh's predecessor Atal Bihari Vajpayee for the award.[49][50] This was immediately followed by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) lobbying for their leader, Jyoti Basu, former Chief Minister of West Bengal.[51] Basu, India's longest-serving chief minister, said that he would decline the honour, even if awarded.[52] Similar demands were made by Telugu Desam Party, Bahujan Samaj Party, and Shiromani Akali Dal for their respective leaders N. T. Rama Rao, Kanshi Ram, and Parkash Singh Badal.[53] In September 2015, regional political party Shiv Sena demanded the award for the independence activist Vinayak Damodar Savarkar stating that he had been "deliberately neglected by previous governments" but his family clarified that they are not making such demand and that the freedom fighter is known for his contribution towards independence movement and did not need an award for recognition.[54]

text: Per the original statutes, sportspersons were not eligible for the Bharat Ratna; however, a revision of the rules in December 2011 made eligible "any field of human endeavour".[5] Subsequently, several sportspersons' names were discussed; among the most talked-about of these was field-hockey player Dhyan Chand, who was recommended multiple times for the posthumous honour.[55] In 2011, 82 members of parliament recommended Chand's name for the award to the Prime Minister's Office. In January 2012, the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports forwarded his name again, this time along with 2008 Summer Olympics gold medallist shooter Abhinav Bindra and mountaineer Tenzing Norgay.[56] Bindra had earlier been recommended for the award in May 2013 by the National Rifle Association of India.[57] In July 2013, the ministry again recommended Dhyan Chand.[56][58] However, in November 2013, cricketer Sachin Tendulkar became the first sports-person to receive the honour and this garnered much criticism for the government.[7][59]

text: A PIL was filed in the Karnataka High Court where in the petitioner requested the court to issue a direction to the Ministry of Home Affairs to consider their representation dated 26 October 2012 and confer the Bharat Ratna upon Mahatma Gandhi. On 27 January 2014, a counsel appearing for the petitioner noted that after multiple representations from the petitioner, they were provided with the information under RTI that the recommendations to confer the award on Gandhi have been received multiple times in the past and were forwarded to the Prime Minister's Office. A Division bench comprising Chief Justice D.H. Waghela and Justice B.V. Nagarathna dismissed the petition stating that the subject is not amenable to any adjudication process and the nominations and conferment process is stated to be informal and in the discretion of the highest authority in the Government.[60][61]

text: List of recipients[edit]

text:
Key

   + Naturalized citizen recipient

   * Non-citizen recipient

   # Posthumous recipient

tag: table

text:
List of laureates awarded the Bharat Ratna[10]

Year

Laureates

Notes

1954

C. Rajagopalachari

An Indian independence activist, statesman, and lawyer, Rajagopalachari was the only Indian and last Governor-General of independent India. He was Chief Minister of Madras Presidency (1937–39) and Madras State (1952–54); and founder of Indian political party Swatantra Party.[62]

Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan

Philosopher Radhakrishnan served as India's first Vice-President (1952–62) and second President (1962–67).[63][64] Since 1962, his birthday on 5 September is observed as "Teachers' Day" in India.[65]

C. V. Raman

Widely known for his work on the scattering of light and the discovery of the effect, better known as "Raman scattering", Raman mainly worked in the field of atomic physics and electromagnetism and was presented Nobel Prize in Physics in 1930.[66]

1955

Bhagwan Das

Independence activist, philosopher, and educationist, Das is a co-founder of Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapith and worked with Madan Mohan Malaviya for the foundation of Banaras Hindu University.[67]

M. Visvesvaraya

Civil engineer, statesman, and Diwan of Mysore (1912–18), Visvesvaraya was a Knight Commander of the Order of the Indian Empire. His birthday, 15 September, is observed as "Engineer's Day" in India.[68]

Jawaharlal Nehru

Independence activist and author, Nehru is the first and the longest-serving Prime Minister of India (1947–64).[49][69]

1957

Govind Ballabh Pant

Independence activist Pant was premier of United Provinces (1937–39, 1946–50) and first Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh (1950–54). He served as Union Home Minister from 1955–61.[70]

1958

Dhondo Keshav Karve

Social reformer and educator, Karve is widely known for his works related to woman education and remarriage of Hindu widows. He established the Widow Marriage Association (1883), Hindu Widows Home (1896), and started Shreemati Nathibai Damodar Thackersey Women's University in 1916.[8][71]

1961

Bidhan Chandra Roy

A physician, political leader, philanthropist, educationist, and social worker, Roy is often considered as "Maker of Modern West Bengal".[72] He was second Chief Minister of West Bengal (1948–62) and his birthday on 1 July is observed as National Doctors' Day in India.[51]

 –

Purushottam Das Tandon

Often titled as "Rajarshi", Tandon was an independence activist and served as speaker of the Uttar Pradesh Legislative Assembly (1937–50). He was actively involved in a campaign to get official language status to Hindi.[73]

1962

Rajendra Prasad

Independence activist, lawyer, statesman, and scholar,[74] Prasad was closely associated with Mahatma Gandhi in the non-cooperation movement for Indian independence.[75] He was later elected as the first President of India (1950–62).[63]

1963

 –

Zakir Husain

Independence activist and education philosopher, Husain served as a Vice Chancellor of Aligarh Muslim University (1948–56) and the Governor of Bihar (1957–62).[76] Later, he was elected as second Vice-President of India (1962–67) and went on to become the third President of India (1967–69).[63][64]

Pandurang Vaman Kane

Indologist and Sanskrit scholar,[77] Kane is best known for his five volume literary work, History of Dharmaśāstra: Ancient and Medieval Religious and Civil Law in India; the "monumental" work that extends over nearly 6,500 pages and being published from 1930 to 1962.[78]

1966

Lal Bahadur Shastri[i]#

Known for his slogan "Jai Jawan Jai Kisan" ("Hail the Soldier, Hail the Farmer"),[79] Independence activist Shastri served as second Prime Minister of India (1964–66) and led the country during the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965.[49][80]

1971

Indira Gandhi

Known as the "Iron Lady of India",[81] Gandhi was the Prime Minister of India during 1966–77 and 1980–84.[49] During the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971, her government supported Bangladesh Liberation War which led to the formation of a new country, Bangladesh.[82]

1975

V. V. Giri

While studying at the University College Dublin, Giri was involved in the Irish Sinn Féin movement. Returning to India, he organized labour unions and brought them to take active participation in Indian freedom struggle. He was elected as the first President of All India Trade Union Congress in 1926. Post-independence, Giri held positions of Governor of Uttar Pradesh, Kerala and Mysore and various other cabinet ministries. He became the first acting President and was eventually elected as the fourth President of India (1969–74).[63][83][84]

1976

K. Kamaraj[ii]#

Independence activist and statesman Kamaraj was a Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu for three terms; 1954–57, 1957–62, and 1962–63.[85][86]

1980

Mother Teresa +

"Saint Mother Teresa of Calcutta" was a catholic nun and the founder of the Missionaries of Charity. She was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for her humanitarian work in 1979 and was beatified on 19 October 2003 by Pope John Paul II and canonised on 4 September 2016 by Pope Francis.[87]

1983

Vinoba Bhave[iii]#

Independence activist, social reformer, and a close associate of Mahatma Gandhi, Bhave is best known for his Bhoodan movement, "Land-Gift Movement".[88] He was given the honorific title "Acharya" ("teacher") and was awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award (1958) for his humanitarian work.[89]

1987

Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan*

Widely known as "Frontier Gandhi", independence activist and Pashtun leader Khan was a follower of Mahatma Gandhi. He joined Khilafat Movement in 1920 and founded Khudai Khidmatgar ("Red Shirt movement") in 1929.[90]

1988

M. G. Ramachandran[iv][d]#

Actor turned politician Ramachandran served as Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu for three terms; 1977–80, 1980–84, 1985–87.[85]

1990

B. R. Ambedkar[v]#

Social reformer and leader of the Dalits,[92] Ambedkar was the Chief architect of the Indian Constitution and also served as the first Law Minister of India.[93] Ambedkar predominantly campaigned against the social discrimination with Dalits, the Hindu varna system.[94] He was associated with the Dalit Buddhist movement and accepted Buddhism as a religion along with his close to half a million followers on 14 October 1956.[95]

Nelson Mandela*

Leader of the Anti-Apartheid Movement in South Africa, Mandela was the President of South Africa (1994–99).[96] Often called as the "Gandhi of South Africa",[97] Mandela's African National Congress movement was influenced by Gandhian philosophy.[98] In 1993, he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.[99]

1991

Rajiv Gandhi[vi]#

Gandhi was the ninth Prime Minister of India serving from 1984 to 1989.[49]

Vallabhbhai Patel[vii]#

Widely known as the "Iron Man of India",[100] Patel was an independence activist and first Deputy Prime Minister of India (1947–50). Post independence, "Sardar" ("Leader") Patel worked with V. P. Menon towards dissolving 555 princely states into the Indian union.[101][102]

Morarji Desai[e]

Independence activist Desai was the sixth Prime Minister of India (1977–79).[49] He is the only Indian national to be awarded the Nishan-e-Pakistan, highest civilian award given by the Government of Pakistan.[104]

1992

Abul Kalam Azad[viii][f]#

Independence activist Azad was India's first Minister of Education and worked towards free primary education. He was widely known as "Maulana Azad" and his birthday on 11 November is observed as National Education Day in India.[107]

J. R. D. Tata

Industrialist, philanthropist, and aviation pioneer, Tata founded India's first airline Air India. He is the founder of various institutes including Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Tata Memorial Hospital, Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Tata Motors, TCS, National Institute of Advanced Studies, and National Centre for the Performing Arts.[108]

Satyajit Ray

Having debuted as a director with Pather Panchali (1955),[109] film-maker Ray is credited with bringing world recognition to Indian cinema.[110] In 1984, Ray was awarded the Dadasaheb Phalke Award, India's highest award in cinema.[111]

1997

Gulzarilal Nanda

Independence activist Nanda was two times interim Prime Minister of India (1964, 1966) and two times deputy chairman of the Planning Commission.[49][112]

Aruna Asaf Ali[ix]#

Independence activist Ali is better known for hoisting the Indian flag in Bombay during the Quit India Movement in 1942. Post Independence, Ali was elected as Delhi's first mayor in 1958.[113]

A. P. J. Abdul Kalam

Aerospace and defence scientist, Kalam was involved in the development of India's first satellite launch vehicle SLV III and was the architect of Integrated Guided Missile Development Program. He worked for Indian National Committee for Space Research, Indian Space Research Organisation, Defence Research and Development Laboratory and was appointed as the Scientific Advisor to the Defence Minister, Secretary to Department of Defence Research and Development and Director General of Defence Research and Development Organisation.[114] Later, he served as the eleventh President of India from 2002 till 2007.[63]

1998

M. S. Subbulakshmi

Carnatic classical vocalist Subbulakshmi, often hailed as "Queen of songs", is the first Indian musician to receive the Ramon Magsaysay award.[115]

Chidambaram Subramaniam

Independence activist and former Minister of Agriculture of India (1964–66), Subramaniam is known for his contribution towards Green Revolution in India. During the late 1970s, he worked for International Rice Research Institute, Manila, and the International Maize and Wheat Research Institute, Mexico.[116]

1999

Jayaprakash Narayan[x]#

Independence activist, social reformer, and commonly referred as "Lok Nayak" ("People's Hero"), Narayan is better known for "Total Revolution Movement" or "JP Movement" initiated during the mid-1970s to "overthrow the corrupt and exploitative Congress government".[117]

Amartya Sen

Winner of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences (1998),[118] Sen has done research over several topics including social choice theory, ethics and political philosophy, welfare economics, decision theory, development economics, public health, and gender studies.[119]

Gopinath Bordoloi[xi]#

Independence activist Bordoloi is the first Chief Minister of Assam (1946–50).[120] His efforts and association with the then Minister of Home Affairs Vallabhbhai Patel were widely acknowledged while keeping Assam united with India when parts of it were to merge with East Pakistan.[121]

Ravi Shankar

Winner of four Grammy Awards and often considered "the world's best-known exponent of Hindustani classical music", sitar player Shankar is known for his collaborative work with Western musicians including Yehudi Menuhin and George Harrison.[122]

2001

Lata Mangeshkar

Widely credited as the "nightingale of India",[123] playback singer Mangeshkar started her career in the 1940s and has sung songs in over 36 languages.[124] In 1989, Mangeshkar was awarded the Dadasaheb Phalke Award, India's highest award in cinema.[111]

Bismillah Khan

Hindustani classical shehnai player, Khan played the instrument for more than eight decades and is credited to have brought the instrument to the centre stage of Indian music.[125]

2008

Bhimsen Joshi

Hindustani classical vocalist, Joshi was a disciple of Kirana gharana, an Indian musical school. He is widely known for the Khyal genre of singing with a "mastery over rhythm and accurate notes".[126][127]

2014

C. N. R. Rao

The recipient of Honorary Doctorates from 63 Universities including Purdue, IIT Bombay, Oxford, chemist and professor Rao has worked prominently in the fields of Solid State and Materials Chemistry, Spectroscopy and Molecular Structure. He has authored around 1600 research papers and 48 books.[128]

Sachin Tendulkar

Having debuted in 1989, Tendulkar played 664 international cricket matches in a career spanning over two decades. He holds various cricket records including the only player to have scored one hundred international centuries, the first batsman to score a double century in a One Day International and the only player to complete more than 30,000 runs in both ODI and Test cricket.[129][130]

2015

Madan Mohan Malaviya[xii]#

Scholar and educational reformer Malaviya is a founder of Akhil Bharatiya Hindu Mahasabha (1906) and Banaras Hindu University and served as the university's vice-chancellor from 1919 till 1938. He was the President of Indian National Congress for four terms and was the Chairman of Hindustan Times from 1924 to 1946.[131]

Atal Bihari Vajpayee

Parliamentarian for over four decades, Vajpayee was elected nine times to the Lok Sabha, twice to the Rajya Sabha and served as the Prime Minister of India for three terms; 1996, 1998, 1999–2004.[49] He was Minister of External Affairs during 1977–79 and was awarded the "Best Parliamentarian" in 1994.[132]

text: Explanatory notes[edit]

text:
Jump up ^ The Bharat Ratna ceremony is usually held at Rashtrapati Bhavan, New Delhi but a special ceremony was held at Brabourne Stadium, Mumbai to honour Karve on his 100th birthday, 18 April 1958.[9]

^ Jump up to: a b Per Article 18 (1) of the Constitution of India: Abolition of titles, "no title, not being a military or academic distinction, shall be conferred by the State".[18]

Jump up ^ The PIL accused the then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde, Sports Minister Bhanwar Jitendra Singh and the secretary to the union home department.

Jump up ^ In 1960, Ramachandran was awarded the Padma Shri, the fourth highest civilian award, but declined as the invitation was written in the Devanagari script and not Tamil.[91]

Jump up ^ Desai had earlier abolished the awards while he was in the office of Prime Minister for it being "worthless and politicized".[103]

Jump up ^ Earlier, Abul Kalam Azad had refused the Bharat Ratna while he was the Education Minister of India (1947–58) citing that the selection committee members should not themselves be the recipients.[35][105][106]

tag: ol

text:
Jump up ^ Lal Bahadur Shastri died on 11 January 1966, at the age of 61.

Jump up ^ K. Kamaraj died on 2 October 1975, at the age of 72.

Jump up ^ Vinoba Bhave died on 15 November 1982, at the age of 87.

Jump up ^ M. G. Ramachandran died on 24 December 1987, at the age of 70.

Jump up ^ B. R. Ambedkar died on 6 December 1956, at the age of 65.

Jump up ^ Rajiv Gandhi died on 21 May 1991, at the age of 46.

Jump up ^ Vallabhbhai Patel died on 15 December 1950, at the age of 75.

Jump up ^ Abul Kalam Azad died on 22 February 1958, at the age of 69.

Jump up ^ Aruna Asaf Ali died on 29 July 1996, at the age of 87.

Jump up ^ Jayaprakash Narayan died on 8 October 1979, at the age of 76.

Jump up ^ Gopinath Bordoloi died on 5 August 1950, at the age of 60.

Jump up ^ Madan Mohan Malaviya died on 12 November 1946, at the age of 84.


document_title: Minister of Railways (India)

question_text: who is the railway minister of bihar in 2018

root

text: Minister of Railways (India)

text:
Minister of Railways
Emblem of India
IncumbentPiyush Goyalsince 3 September 2017
Ministry of RailwaysMember of
Cabinet of IndiaAppointer
Presidenton the advice of the Prime MinisterInaugural holder
John MathaiFormation
15 August 1947

text: The Minister of Railways is the head of the Ministry of Railways of the Government of India. The railway minister is usually accorded a cabinet rank, and is responsible for Indian Railways, one of the largest employers in the world. An important responsibility of the railway minister is to present in Parliament the Railway Budget, the Annual Financial Statement of Indian Railways. Piyush Goyal of the Bharatiya Janata Party is the current Minister of Railways, serving since 3 September 2017.Railways Minister (India)

tag: p

text: List of railway ministers[edit]

text:
№

Name

Portrait

Term of office

Political party(Alliance)

Prime Minister

-

Asaf Ali

2 September 1946

14 August 1947

Indian National Congress

None(Interim govt)

1

John Mathai

15 August 1947

22 September 1948

Jawaharlal Nehru

2

N. Gopalaswami Ayyangar

22 September 1948

13 May 1952

3

Lal Bahadur Shastri

13 May 1952

7 December 1956

4

Jagjivan Ram

7 December 1956

10 April 1962

5

Swaran Singh

10 April 1962

21 September 1963

6

H. C. Dasappa

21 September 1963

8 June 1964

7

S. K. Patil

9 June 1964

12 March 1967

Lal Bahadur ShastriIndira Gandhi

8

C. M. Poonacha

13 March 1967 and

14 February 1969

Indira Gandhi

9

Ram Subhag Singh

14 February 1969

4 November 1969

10

Panampilli Govinda Menon

4 November 1969

18 February 1970

11

Gulzarilal Nanda

18 February 1970

17 March 1971

12

K. Hanumanthaiya

18 March 1971

22 July 1972

13

T. A. Pai

23 July 1972

4 February 1973

14

Lalit Narayan Mishra

5 February 1973

2 January 1975

15

Kamalapati Tripathi

11 February 1975

23 March 1977

16

Madhu Dandavate

26 March 1977

28 July 1979

Janata Party

Morarji Desai

(13)

T. A. Pai

30 July 1979

13 January 1980

Janata Party (Secular)

Charan Singh

17

Kamalapati Tripathi

14 January 1980

12 November 1980

Indian National Congress

Indira Gandhi

18

Kedar Pandey

12 November 1980

14 January 1982

19

Prakash Chandra Sethi

15 January 1982

2 September 1982

20

A. B. A. Ghani Khan Choudhury

2 September 1982

31 December 1984

Indira GandhiRajiv Gandhi

21

Bansi Lal

31 December 1984

4 June 1986

Rajiv Gandhi

22

Mohsina Kidwai

24 June 1986

21 October 1986

23

Madhavrao Scindia

22 October 1986

1 December 1989

24

George Fernandes

5 December 1989

10 November 1990

Janata Dal

V. P. Singh

25

Janeshwar Mishra

21 November 1990

21 June 1991

Samajwadi Janata Party

Chandra Shekhar

26

C. K. Jaffer Sharief

21 June 1991

16 October 1995

Indian National Congress

P. V. Narasimha Rao

27

Ram Vilas Paswan

1 June 1996

19 March 1998

Janata Dal(United Front)

H. D. Deve GowdaI. K. Gujral

28

Nitish Kumar

19 March 1998

5 August 1999

Samata Party(NDA)

Atal Bihari Vajpayee

29

Ram Naik

6 August 1999

12 October 1999

Bharatiya Janata Party(NDA)

30

Mamata Banerjee

13 October 1999

15 March 2001

All India Trinamool Congress(NDA)

(28)

Nitish Kumar

20 March 2001

22 May 2004

Janata Dal (United)(NDA)

31

Lalu Prasad Yadav

23 May 2004

25 May 2009

Rashtriya Janata Dal(UPA)

Manmohan Singh

(30)

Mamata Banerjee

26 May 2009

19 May 2011

All India Trinamool Congress (UPA)

32

Dinesh Trivedi

12 July 2011

14 March 2012

33

Mukul Roy

20 March 2012

21 September 2012

34

C. P. Joshi

22 September 2012

28 October 2012

Indian National Congress (UPA)

35

Pawan Kumar Bansal

28 October 2012

10 May 2013

(34)

C. P. Joshi

11 May 2013

16 June 2013

36

Mallikarjun Kharge

17 June 2013

25 May 2014

37

D. V. Sadananda Gowda

26 May 2014

9 November 2014

Bharatiya Janata Party(NDA)

Narendra Modi

38

Suresh Prabhu

10 November 2014

3 September 2017

39

Piyush Goyal

3 September 2017

Incumbent

If the office of Minister of Railways is vacant for any length of time, it automatically comes under the charge of the Prime Minister.


document_title: Filling station attendant

question_text: when did oregon ban pumping your own gas

text: Filling station attendant

text: History[edit]

text: Early filling stations were usually located at general stores, where gasoline would be put in buckets and funneled into vehicles. Most early stations were little more than a manually powered roadside pump operated by an attendant.

text: Decline[edit]

text: In the 1970s, two periods of gasoline shortages (1973 and 1979) caused higher fuel prices which in turn resulted in permanent closure of many full-service gas stations as consumers looked for pricing relief.

text: Current status[edit]

text: In most western countries today, full-service stations and their attendants are not common and are usually considered somewhat nostalgic.[2] However, all stations in New Jersey offer only full service and "mini service". In these states, attendants are required to pump gasoline because customers are barred by statutes from doing it themselves. New Jersey banned self-service gasoline in 1949 after lobbying by service station owners and Oregon did the same in 1951. Proponents of the ban cite safety and jobs as reasons to keep the ban.

text: However, In Oregon a law passed by the Legislature in May 2017 and signed into law by Gov. Kate Brown in June will allow Oregon counties with 40,000 residents or less to deviate and allow for customers to pump their own fuel between the hours of 6pm to 6am. Essentially after normal hours of operation. The new law went to effect January 1, 2018.

text: Brazil[edit]

text: In Brazil, self-service fuel filling is illegal, due to a federal law enacted in 2000.[3] The bill was proposed by Federal Deputy Aldo Rebelo, who claims it saved 300,000 fuel attendant jobs across the country.[4]


document_title: Problem Child (film)

question_text: who played the bow tie killer in problem child

text: Problem Child (film)

text: Plot[edit]

text: Ben Healy (John Ritter) is a good-natured yuppie working for his father, "Big Ben" (Jack Warden), a very successful, but tyrannical sporting goods dealer running for mayor. Although Ben has worked under his father's employ without as much as a raise or promotion in return, his father plans on handing over control of the company and ownership of the land to the Japanese rather than following the classic "father-son" tradition, seeing his son as "too nice" to be his heir. Ben and his social-climbing wife, Flo (Amy Yasbeck), have been unable to conceive, because the fertility doctor told them they were both infertile.

text: Ben approaches an adoption agent, Igor Peabody (Gilbert Gottfried) with his dilemma, and Igor presents him and Flo with a cute 7-year-old boy named Junior (Michael Oliver). However, he is hardly a model child; devilish and incorrigible, he leaves a path of serious destruction in his wake, and is even pen pals with Martin Beck (Michael Richards), a notorious serial killer. The film is interspersed with an imprisoned Martin looking to escape and meet up with Junior, whom he misconstrues as a fellow criminal named "J.R."

text: Shortly after Ben and Flo bring Junior home, Big Ben visits, and is shocked that they adopted. Junior's bedroom catches fire when he shorts out the clowns in it, and Big Ben calls him "The Devil." Junior throws the cat at Big Ben and they both fall down the stairs.

text: Junior messes up a camping trip with the neighbors by urinating on the campfire, and manipulating a practical joke played on the kids by their father. He then terrorizes his neighbors' daughter's birthday party, after Lucy, the snobby birthday girl, bans him from her magic show for touching her presents (though her snobby and petty banning possibly spurred him into terrorizing the party). Finally, he displays an effective but unethical method for winning in Little League, which involves beating rival players up with a baseball bat after they bullied him (the bullying possibly spurred him into causing all that trouble; coincidentally, a few of the rival players were from the camping trip earlier). Ben begins having serious doubts about him, and decides to take him back to the orphanage. However, upon hearing he was returned 30 times, he decides to keep and love him, something no one has ever done. Junior accuses Ben of lying to him. Ben leaves his car keys in the ignition, and Junior drives it into Big Ben's sporting goods store. Ben finally gives up when his financial advisor calls and says his individual retirement account has been seized by Big Ben to pay for the damage done to his store. Martin then arrives at the house, with Junior claiming that he is his uncle, and Flo sees this as a chance to be rid of him. He kidnaps them by pretending to take them on a family outing, and leaves a ransom note for Ben.

text: While Ben first sees this as good riddance to both Flo and Junior, he soon notices signs that the latter is not the monster he appeared as. Through a series of pictures he drew, he depicts children and adults who treated him poorly as deformed monsters with hostile surroundings, but depicted Ben as a happy man in a pleasant background, revealing that he did value him as a father figure. Ben, realizing that Junior's behavior was simply a reaction to how he himself was treated by the rather selfish and condescending people he had been surrounded by most of his young life, undertakes a rescue mission to get him back from Martin.

text: Now exerting a more assertive attitude, Ben first steals his neighbor's car and hat and drives it all over their yard. He also appeals to Big Ben for the ransom money. When Big Ben says Ben ought to see the circumstances as the ultimate change for the better and let Flo and Junior rot, Ben pushes a button that puts him unknowingly on camera, where he ends up revealing his true nature on the news, even mooning the camera. Ben catches up with Martin and Junior at the circus. Junior is rescued after escaping from Martin through a trapeze act, and he calls Ben "Dad" for the first time.

text: Martin drives away, but the Healys are now on his tail. Flo, who is stuffed in a suitcase, tells Ben she wants a divorce, and he tells her to shut up. Eventually, the suitcase flies over the wall, and ends up in the back of a pig farmer's truck. Martin is arrested, but not before getting a shot off, which hits Ben in the chest. Thinking he has died, Junior tearfully apologizes and says he loves him. He wakes up and realizes the bullet ricocheted off his good-luck prune. Junior removes his bow tie and throws it over the bridge after Ben tells him he just wants him to be himself.

text: Cast[edit]

text:
John Ritter as Benjamin "Ben" Healy, Jr.
Michael Oliver as Junior
Jack Warden as Benjamin "Big Ben" Healy, Sr., Ben's wealthy, but mean and selfish father who holds contempt for his son's kindness and considerate personality
Gilbert Gottfried as Igor Peabody, the adoption agent at the orphanage
Amy Yasbeck as Florence "Flo" Healy, Ben's social-climbing wife
Michael Richards as Martin Beck, an escaped convict who goes by the moniker "Bow-Tie Killer"
Peter Jurasik as Roy, Ben and Flo's neighbor
Colby Kline as Lucy, a mean and spoiled girl whose personality spurs Junior into ruining her sixth birthday party
Dennis Dugan (cameo) as All American Dad

tag: ul

text: Production[edit]

text: The film was shot on location in Texas, from October 2 to November 24, 1989. The cities that were used for filming were Dallas, Farmers Branch, Fort Worth, Irving, and Mesquite. In addition, there were two weeks of reshoots in Dallas (more information on this below) in March 1990.[4]

text: During a 2014 interview on Gilbert Gottfried's Amazing Colossal Podcast, screenwriters Scott Alexander and Larry Karaszewski revealed that the story was inspired by the 1988 Los Angeles Times article "An Adopted Boy--and Terror Begins"[5] about a married couple suing an adoption agency after they were not informed that their adopted son had severe mental health issues with violent tendencies and had been previously returned to the agency multiple times.[5][6] While other writers pitched the story as a horror film in the vein of Bad Seed or The Omen, Alexander and Karaszewski thought it had potential as a comedy, envisioning a dark, adult satire of the then-popular trend in films where cute kids teach cynical adults how to love, as seen in Baby Boom, Parenthood (directly spoofed by the film's poster),[7][8] Look Who's Talking, Uncle Buck, Mr. Mom, Kindergarten Cop and Three Men and a Baby. However, the studio insisted upon turning it into a children's film, a conversion which necessitated numerous reshoots and rewrites, leading to a difficult production that left all involved disappointed and anticipating it to bomb. It defied these expectations, becoming a surprise hit and Universal's most profitable film of 1990 but was still so embarrassing for Alexander and Karaszewski (Alexander even cried after the cast and crew screening) that they tried to distance themselves from it, which proved difficult. Studios were initially reluctant to hire them or take them seriously based on their work on such a prominent disreputable film but, as the years went by, they would eventually come to work with executives who were children when it first came out, grew up watching its frequent TV airings, and were excited to be meeting its writers. Looking back, they still feel it's "a mess" but take some pride in being involved with one of the "very few [PG-rated] children's films that black and that crazy," citing the scene where Flo commits adultery with Martin while Ben is catatonic and contemplating murdering Junior in the next room as an example. They added, "And it's funny."[6]

text: In 2015 Dennis Dugan revealed that he was hired to direct the film, his first feature one (he'd previously directed episodes of the TV series Moonlighting, Wiseguy, and Hunter), after jumping on a coffee table in a meeting with Universal executives and saying, "You're looking at me like I'm fucking nuts, and this is what we want. We want this kind of chaos." Dugan suggested John Ritter, with whom he'd worked as an actor before turning to directing, for the role of Ben Healy. The studio was initially reluctant, feeling they needed a more famous actor, but eventually relented. Jack Warden turned down the role of "Big Ben" Healy before Dugan offered him half of his net points; he was so touched that he took the part, although he refused Dugan's offer. Amy Yasbeck was cast as Flo; they fell in love during production, eventually marrying in 1999. Both Ritter and Gilbert Gottfried were allowed to ad lib while filming, but Universal reprimanded Dugan for shooting too much footage of the latter. The film's first test screening was disastrous, with 70 percent of the audience walking out, verbal complaints from viewers, and a score of only 30. The studio forced two weeks of reshoots, including a retooled ending and the addition of key scenes, such as Lucy's birthday party.[9]

text: Release[edit]

text: Box office[edit]

text: The film debuted at third place.[10] It went on to be a commercial success at the box office, grossing $54 million domestically and $72 million worldwide.

text: Critical reception[edit]

text: The film received widely negative reviews upon its release. On the film review aggregator site Rotten Tomatoes, it received a critics' rating of 4% based on 28 reviews, and an audience rating of 41%. The critic consensus reads: "Mean-spirited and hopelessly short on comic invention, Problem Child is a particularly unpleasant comedy, one that's loaded with manic scenery chewing and juvenile pranks".[11] On Metacritic, it has a 27/100 rating based on 12 critics, indicating "generally unfavorable reviews".[12]

text: Although the film was rated PG, it is still heavily censored when shown on television due to the remarks made about adoption, which critics saw as insensitive.[13] It was not screened for critics prior to its release.[13] It acquired a PG rating instead of a PG-13 rating, in regards to a scene where a man mooning a camera is briefly shown; as well as a scene that briefly reveals snapshots that Junior took of people on toilets and in showers.

text: Hal Hinson, writing for The Washington Post, noted "Dugan has a brisk, imaginative comic style; he sets up his gags well, so that there's still some surprise in the punch lines when they come. Essentially, the problem here is the same as the problem in Gremlins 2. It's basically about tearing stuff up, and after a while you grow tired of seeing variations on the same joke of a cute kid committing horrible atrocities."[14]

text: Protests over posters[edit]

text: One of the posters for the film showed a cat in a tumble dryer, with the implication being that Junior had put it inside.[13]  A group named In Defence Of Animals organised protests against the posters, and some cinemas took them down in response.[13] The group also objected to a scene in the film in which Junior splinters a cat's legs.[13]

text: Accolades[edit]

text: For the film (as well as The Adventures of Ford Fairlane and Look Who's Talking Too), Gilbert Gottfried was nominated for a Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Supporting Actor, but lost to Donald Trump in Ghosts Can't Do It.

text: Home media[edit]

text: The film was more successful on home video.[15] The VHS version adds an extra bit just before the closing credits, in which Junior interrupts it to tell the audience that he'll be back next summer for Problem Child 2. Then he disappears and a loud flatulent noise is heard, followed by Ben shouting "Junior!", him laughing, then the closing credits roll. The VHS version was released on January 31, 1991.

text: The first DVD release was released by GoodTimes Entertainment on May 1, 2001. It and Problem Child 2 were released together on DVD in the US on March 2, 2004, as a package entitled Problem Child Tantrum Pack. They were presented in open-matte full screen only.[16] However, no home video release thus far features the deleted footage shown on TV airings of it.

text: The film was re-released on the Family Comedy Pack Quadruple Feature DVD (with other comedy films like Kindergarten Cop, Kicking & Screaming, and Major Payne) in anamorphic widescreen (being its first widescreen Region 1 DVD release) on August 5, 2008.[17][17]

text: It was released on Blu-ray on October 10, 2017. Problem Child 2 was released on Blu-ray on May 15, 2018.

text: Legacy[edit]

text: Sequels[edit]

text: The film inspired two sequels: the first, Problem Child 2, was released theatrically in 1991; the second, Problem Child 3: Junior in Love, was a television film aired on the NBC in 1995. The first one brought back the original cast in their original roles and picked up where the first film ended. However, Yasbeck was given a new role with a new dynamic totally opposite to her original character. In the third and final film, recast Ben and Junior with William Katt and Justin Chapman, while Gottfried and Warden reprised their roles as Igor Peabody and Big Ben and does not follow the storyline of the first two films.

text: Television series[edit]

text: There was an animated TV series that aired in 1993. Gottfried was the only original cast member to be featured as a voice-over actor, making him the only cast member involved in all three films as well as the cartoon (Warden was in all three films, but not the TV series).

text: NBC has ordered a pilot for a live-action TV series based on the film, produced by STXtelevision, Imagine TV, and NBCUniversal.[18]

text: Television version[edit]

text: Twelve minutes worth of deleted footage were featured in most, if not all, television airings of the film. None of these scenes have ever been available on DVD.[19][20] The first TV version aired on September 15, 1991, on NBC-TV. The profanity in it was redubbed with milder obscenities and phrases.


document_title: Poverty in the United Kingdom

question_text: what is the poverty line in the uk 2016

question_tokens: what is the poverty line in the uk 2016

text: Poverty in the United Kingdom

text: History[edit]

text: 1950s and 1960s[edit]

text: In the early 1950s, it was believed by numerous people that poverty had been all but abolished from Britain, with only a few isolated pockets of deprivation still remaining.[7] Much of this assumption was derived from a 1951 study which showed that in 1950 only 1.5% of the survey population lived in poverty, compared with 18% in 1936 when a previous study had been conducted in that town by Rowntree. A leader in The Times spoke positively of this ‘remarkable improvement – no less than the virtual abolition of the sheerest want.’[8]

text: Over the course of the 1950s and 1960s, however, a "rediscovery" of poverty took place, with various surveys showing that a substantial proportion of Britons were impoverished, with between 4% and 12% of the population estimated to be living below the Supplementary Benefits’ scales. In 1969, Professor A. Atkinson stated that

text: According to this definition, between 2-5 million Britons were trapped in poverty. In addition, some 2.6 million people were in receipt of Supplementary Benefits and therefore living on the poverty line. This meant that at least 10% of the population were in poverty at his time. Bad housing conditions also constituted a major cause of poverty in the postwar era. In the early Sixties, it was estimated that three million families lived in "slums, near slums on grossly overcrowded conditions," while a 1967 housing survey of England and Wales found that 11.7% of all dwellings were unfit.[9]

text: In their 1965 study on poverty, "The Poor and the Poorest," Professors Peter Townsend and Brian Abel-Smith decided on measuring poverty on the basis of the National Assistance levels of living and estimated that some 14% (around 7.5 million) of Britons lived in poverty.[7] Townsend and Abel-Smith also estimated that since the mid-1950s the percentage of the population living in poverty had risen from 8% to 14%.[10]

text: Differences in health between the classes[edit]

text: The continued existence of poverty in the 1960s was also characterised by differences in health between different social classes. In 1964-65 the incidence of infant deaths was more than half as much higher in the two lowest social classes than in the two highest social classes. In 1961-62 28% of all men recorded at least one spell of sickness of four days or more. For the lowest social classes, however, 35% of men had experienced this, compared with 18% of men in the highest social classes.[9] There is evidence that in large families the height of children was less than that for the average, while families with three or more children were more likely to be inadequately nourished.[11]

text: 1970s and 1980s[edit]

text: In his 1979 work "Poverty in the UK", Townsend suggested that 15 million people lived in or on the margins of poverty. He also argued that to get a proper measure of relative deprivation, there was a need to take into account other factors apart from income measures such as peoples’ environment, employment, and housing standards.[7]

text: According to one study, 365,000 families in Britain (excluding Northern Ireland) in 1966 were in poverty by an old assistance standard, and 450,000 families by a new standard.[11] In another study on poverty, Wilfred Beckerman estimated that 9.9% of the British population lived below a standardised poverty line in 1973, compared with 6.1% of the population of Belgium.[12]

text: Low pay was also a major cause of poverty,[13][14] with a report by the TUC in 1968 finding that about 5 million females and about 2.5 million males earned less than £15 a week.[8] According to one study, around 20% to 23% of employees in the late 1960s had low hourly wages.[15] In 1974, a quarter of adult employees in Britain earned less than £27 a week or less before tax, only slightly above the officially defined poverty line for an average family.[16] Regional differences in pay also remained pronounced during the post-war period.[17] Slum housing also remained a problem, with 12% of British households living in houses or flats considered to be unfit for human habitation in 1972.[18] In 1975, government statistics estimated that 1,800,000 children lived in poverty.[17]

text: Nevertheless, the number of people estimated to be living in poor housing conditions was lower at the start of the 1970s than at the start of the 1960s. In 1961, 4,700,000 households lived in unfit or substandard homes, compared with 2,846,000 in 1971.[19]

text: During the late 1960s and 1970s, progress was made in reducing the level of post-war poverty and inequality,[20] with 3 million families in Britain in poverty in 1977, compared with 5 million in 1961.[21] According to the 1971 Supplementary Benefits scale, the percentage of individuals living in poverty fell from 9.4% in 1963 to 2.3% in 1973.[22] Low pay continued to remain a major problem by the end of the 1970s, however, particularly amongst manual workers.[23]

text: Based on various measurements, however, the number of Britons living in poverty rose significantly from 1979 to 1985. The number of Britons living in poverty (when defined as living below the Supplementary Benefit level) rose from 2,090,000 to 2,420,000 during that period, while the number of people living in poverty when defined as living on or below the Supplementary Benefit level rose from 6,070,000 to 9,380,000. Using a poverty measurement of living at 140% of the Supplementary Benefit level or below, the rise was from 11,570,000 to 15,420,000.[24]

text: From 1979 to 1987, the number of Britons living in poverty (defined as living on less than half the national average income) doubled, from roughly 10% to 20% of the whole population. In 1989, almost 6 million full-time workers, representing 37% of the total full-time workforce, earned less than the "decency threshold" defined by the Council of Europe as 68% of average full-time earnings.[25] In 1994, 76.7% of all part-time workers earned less than this threshold.[26]

text: Comparison with the rest of Europe[edit]

text: Figures from the European Commission estimated that from 1975 to 1985 the number of people living in poverty had doubled in Britain, from just over 3 million to 6.5 million. In 1975, the United Kingdom had fewer people living in poverty than Germany, Italy, Belgium, and Luxembourg. By 1989, Britain had a higher poverty than each of these four countries. In 1989, 12% of the UK population was estimated to be living in poverty, compared with 11.7% in Italy, 8.5% in Germany, 7.9% in Luxembourg, 7.4% in the Netherlands, and 7.2% in Belgium.[24]

text: 1990s to 2000s[edit]

text: From the late 1990s onwards, however, poverty began to fall steadily, helped by policies such as big increases in national insurance benefits[27] and the introduction of the national minimum wage.[28] Using the 60% of median income after housing costs poverty line, the percentage of the British population living in poverty rose to 25.3% in 1996/97, compared with 13.7% in 1979.

text: From 1997/98 to 2004/05 (using the same 60% of median income after housing costs measurement), the percentage of the population living in poverty fell from 24.4% to 20.5%.[29] A 2000 report by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation estimated that 4 million people lacked access to a healthy diet,[30] while a review of EU food and health policies estimated that food poverty was far higher in the UK than any other EU member state.[31]

text: Poverty in the UK in the 21st century[edit]

text: This section may lend undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, or controversies. Please help to create a more balanced presentation. Discuss and resolve this issue before removing this message. (June 2017)

text: Rates of poverty fell just before the turn of the century and continued to do so until 2004-5. Since then rates of poverty have remained stable, with some year on year fluctuations caused by the financial crisis that started in 2008. The Institute of Fiscal Studies has counted the number of people in Absolute Poverty as falling from c.37% in 1996/7 (21.8m people) to c.22% in 2004/5 (13.2m), a figure that remained the same in 2014/5 (14.1m taking population growth into account).[29][32]

text: The trend for Relative Poverty is the same (a fall in the number of poor from 1997/8 until 2004/5 and a relatively stable amount since then), although the earlier numbers are lower. Alternatively it is suggested poverty rose from about 2008 to 2012 but remained stable since then.[33]

text: Changes to the benefit system from April 2017 such as not allowing some claimants to claim for more than 2 children are predicted to increase the number of families in poverty and get a quarter of a million further children into poverty. Policy in Practice estimates the two child limit will increase child poverty by 10% during this parliament. The Child Poverty Action Group charity (CPAG), claim it will reduce children’s life chances. Alison Thewliss said, “When Theresa May stood on the steps of Downing Street last year, she said that her new government would strive to help the ‘just about managing’ in society. It appears that this was just empty rhetoric. (...) The reality is that two-thirds of those affected are already in work.”[34][35] A doctor claims it is not unusual for up to seven people to live in a one bedroom flat. Parents sometimes do without food themselves to care for children, others cannot afford clothes, toothbrushes, toothpaste. Basic hygiene products like shampoo and sanitary towels are sometimes hard for poor people to buy and some must choose between buying hygiene products and buying food. Just under one in five UK children under 15 suffers food insecurity. That means sufficient safe, nutritious food cannot be guaranteed.[36][37]

text: Children become sick because they cannot keep warm at home, overcrowding and damp worsens respiratory conditions. Alison Garnham, of the Child Poverty Action Group, said, "Day in, day out, doctors see the damage rising poverty does to children's health. Low family incomes, inadequate housing and cuts to support services are jeopardising the health of our most vulnerable children. (...) Re-instating the UK's poverty-reduction targets would be an obvious place to start."[38]

text: Eurostat figures show that the numbers of Britons at risk of poverty has fallen to 15.9% in 2014, down from 17.1% in 2010 and 19% in 2005 (after social transfers were taken into account).[39] However, the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) fears that people who are "just about managing" could fall into poverty, as it forecast that the wages of people in low income and benefits might not keep pace with inflation.[33] One third of UK households are living below what is considered an adequate income according to the JRF research.[40] Campbell Robb of the JRF said, “Millions of families across the country are teetering on a precipice, with 400,000 pensioners and over one million more children likely to fall into poverty and suffer the very real and awful consequences that brings if things do not change. One of the biggest drivers of the rise in child poverty is policy choices, which is why it is essential that the Prime Minister and Chancellor use the upcoming Budget to put in place measures to stop this happening. An excellent start would be to ensure families can keep more of their earnings under the Universal Credit.”[41]

text: Poverty exists in rural communities as well as in urban areas. Rural poverty is frequently overlooked.[42]

text: The most common form of child poverty today is poverty in working families. Roughly 30% of British children are now classed as poor and of those two-thirds are from working families. Analysts claim cuts to working-age benefits would likely increase poverty rates greatly during the three years following 2017. Campbell Robb of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation said, “These troubling figures are warning signs we could be at the beginning of a sharp rise in poverty, with forecasts suggesting child poverty could rise further by 2021.”[43][44]

text: Food Standards Agency (FSA) research suggests some poor people miss meals or do without healthy food due to financial pressure. One third of unemployed people have cut out meals or reduced the quality of their diet due to lack of cash. 8% of respondents to a survey have low or very low food security, implying just under four million adults regularly struggle to get enough to eat. Other studies showed benefit freezes together with rising food prices are major factors in food insecurity. Rachel Loopstra who lectures in nutrition at King’s College London, said: “These robust survey data confirm how serious the scale of the problem of people not having enough money for food to eat is in the UK, and are consistent with reports of increasing food bank usage. Anna Taylor of the 'Food Foundation' thinktank, said: “To take so many British people off the breadline the government must drive uptake of the Healthy Start programme for young and low-income mothers, tackle gaps in food provision during school holidays, and review our welfare policies to protect the diets of society’s most vulnerable.” Campaigners and MPs have urged the UK government to monitor food insecurity. Ministers so far refused but the Scottish government agreed to enact a food insecurity measure. Women and young people are more likely to live in food insecure households.[45]

text: The Institute for Fiscal Studies says the benefit rate freeze and child tax credit cuts, together with the rollout of universal credit, which is less generous due to changes in work allowances, means, “large losses” for low-income households. John McDonnell said the IFS analysis showed a “clear threat” to working people’s living standards, while the Liberal Democrats claimed the “savage cuts” would make millions of households poorer. Projected benefit cuts will lead to the poorest working-age households losing between 4% and 10% of their income a year, according to the IFS.[46] Fewer than one in ten British people believe all work is fair and decent. 75% think more should be done to make work fairer. Many British people suffer insecure work with zero hours contracts.[47] Nearly half of workers are anxious over basic household expenses like food, transport and energy. One in six workers had left the heating off despite it being cold to save on fuel bills, and similar numbers had pawned possessions in the previous year because they were short of money.[48] Rents are rising and housing benefit is not rising to match this. Families are forced into increasing poverty, some facing a daily struggle to pay their rent and put food on their table. Some risk homelessness. Families with children are most affected and two thirds of affected families are in work.[49] Homelessness has risen over the last six years and the National Audit Office thinks welfare reforms and a freeze in housing benefit are a likely cause.[50]

text: An All Party Parliamentary Group on Hunger warned too many poorer UK children are hungry or malnourished during school holidays. Some subsist on a diet of crisps or stodgy food bought to fill their stomachs. One million children who receive free school meals during term time are at risk as are two million more from working poor families. For both types, school holidays add to financial pressure on families through the need to pay for childcare, food and fuel. These children return to school in bad physical shape, learn less well and get behind children who were better fed during school holidays. The life chances of underfed children are damaged.[51][52]

text: When housing benefit does not fully cover rent people can struggle to pay rent and buy all the other things they need as well. This can lead to increasing debt. Anne Baxendale of Shelter, said, “We are deeply concerned that the current freeze on housing benefit is piling a huge amount of pressure on to thousands of private renters who are already teetering on the brink of homelessness.” People are forced out of their homes because they cannot pay their rent and all their other bills.[53][54]

text: Reactions to Poverty[edit]

text: The Office for National Statistics has estimated that in 2011, 14 million people were at risk of poverty or social exclusion, and that one person in 20 (5.1%) was now experiencing "severe material depression."[55] Poverty among young people increased by 3.9% from 2007 to 2010.[56] In assessing social inequality in Britain, Danny Dorling has noted that "people in different parts of Britain and people living within different quarters of its cities are living in different worlds with different norms and expectations. This was not the case a few decades ago. This is not the case to the same extent in the majority of affluent nations in the world."[57]

text: A new term is appearing, 'Just About Managing' or 'JAM'. This applies to people who can put food on the table and pay rent or mortgage at least part of the time but have problems if their income falls or if there are unexpected bills. JAM's are typically families where at least one person works. JAM's may suffer social exclusion being unable to afford holidays or evenings out.[58]

text: The Resolution Foundation claims that the incomes of the poorest 10% in the UK will fall by 3% in real terms by 2020 due to government policies on tax and welfare. The lowest third of incomes will suffer falls in income over the coming years. Incomes will fall because many welfare benefits that poorer people receive have been frozen in cash terms and with inflation cash will be worth steadily less.[59]

text: The Institute for Fiscal Studies reported the numbers of poor United Kingdom children in wage-earning families increased from 2009 to 2014 and more poor children currently live in working families than live in families on benefits. The IFS reported "Recent falls in inequality are likely to prove temporary. Stronger earnings growth and the Conservatives’ planned income tax cuts would do most for incomes towards the top of the distribution, while planned benefit cuts will hit low-income households [both in and out of work] hardest."[60][61] Anne Longfield, Children's Commissioner for England wrote "The majority of children living in poverty have at least one parent who is working. Employment is important but if wages do not rise substantially in relation to living costs it will not provide a route out of poverty alone. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation has today published a report stating that families with children working full-time on the National Minimum Wage are now 15% short of the Minimum Income Standard that people believe offers an acceptable standard of living. Today's announcement will effectively confine to history any figures on the millions of children being raised in families who experience in-work poverty denying them necessities such as adequate food, clothing and heating."[62]

text: Julia Unwin of the Joseph Rowntree Foundation said "A strong economy and rising employment have masked the growing problem of in-work poverty, as years of below-inflation wage rises have taken their toll on people's incomes. The upcoming minimum wage rise will help, but many low-income working families will still find themselves worse off due to tax-credit changes. Boosting productivity and creating more jobs which offer progression at work is vital to make work a reliable route out of poverty."[60]

text: Campbell Robb of Shelter said "It's heart-breaking to think that so many people are having to make a choice between paying the rent and putting food on the table, or living in fear that any drop in income would leave them unable to cover their housing costs. The sad truth is that far too many people in Britain right now are living in homes that just aren't up to scratch - from the thousands of families forced to cope with poor conditions, to a generation of renters forking out most of their income on housing each month and unable to save for the future."[63]

text: As of 2015 there is actual hunger in the United Kingdom and significant numbers of UK citizens are driven to use food banks. There is also significant malnutrition. Poorer people are frequently forced to buy and eat cheaper, less healthy food. The BMJ, a UK peer-reviewed medical journal published:

text: For the poorest in our society, up to 35% of disposable income will now be needed for food, compared to less than 9% for the more wealthy. This will increase reliance on cheap, highly processed, high fat, high sugar, high salt, and calorie-dense, unhealthy foods. 2 Re-emerging problems of poor public health nutrition such as rickets and malnutrition in the elderly are also causes for concern. (John D Middleton Vice president John R Ashton, Simon Capewell Faculty of Public Health)[64]

text: In 2016, 10% of UK households live in fuel poverty. Fuel poverty is calculated by gauging if a household's income would fall below the official poverty line after spending the actual amount needed to heat the home. The average fuel poverty gap of these households – that is, the amount needed to escape fuel poverty – is £371 a year, the latest figures indicate, with those in privately rented properties hit hardest.[65]

text: In a recent report commissioned by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation[66] poverty and participation are analyzed as a social phenomenon characterizing UK society following the tradition initiated several decades ago by Peter Townsend. Participation in society is measured in terms of social relationships, membership of organisations, trust in other people, ownership of possessions and purchase of services. The study finds out that all these dimensions of participation are lower among people with low incomes. While participation generally drops as income declines, participation stops falling among the 30 per cent or so of people with the lowest incomes, creating a participation 'floor'. The 30 per cent of people with the lowest incomes are forced to choose between the basic necessities of modern life; they must decide which needs to neglect. For people affected by the floor, additional income may well be spent on upgrading the quality of necessary goods and services rather than adding to them. Averages mask important variation. The participation floor for benefit recipients is lower than for other groups on the same income. Most minority ethnic groups experience greater material deprivation than the white majority but social participation is, on average, higher. Children's engagement in school life and friends is not directly affected by household income. However, parents on low incomes, on average, play less often with their children and spend less on activities. This is associated with poorer educational outcomes as judged by teachers. Low-income parents frequently spend more time than affluent ones assisting children with their school work because they have fallen behind their classmates.

text: Poverty and economic insecurity increase the risk that a person will commit suicide. The Samaritans claim The British economic condition, including low incomes, job insecurity, zero-hours contracts, unmanageable debts and poor housing all add to suicide risk. A report titled, Dying from Inequality, describes “overwhelming evidence of a link between socioeconomic disadvantage and suicidal behaviour”. “Men in the lowest social class, living in the most deprived areas, are up to 10 times more at risk of suicide then those in the highest social class living in the most affluent areas,” the report says. Unemployed people are more at risk of suicide than people with work, people with low education and people living in deprived areas are also at increased risk.[67]

text: The persistence of high poverty rates in the UK is associated with the relatively low generosity of the welfare state. The UK social security system is characterised by a residual welfare state model based on the notion of market dominance and private provision. The state only intervenes to moderate extreme poverty and provide for basic needs, largely on a means-tested basis (Esping-Andersen 1990;[68] Ferragina and Seleeib-Kaiser 2011[69]).

text: In 2017 inequality has been forecast to return to the levels of the Thatcher years. Torsten Bell of the Resolution Foundation, said: “[A] boom is slowing rapidly as inflation rises, productivity flatlines and employment growth slows. (...( This time around it’s low- and middle-income families with kids who are set to be worst affected. This could leave Britain with the worst of both worlds on living standards – the weak income growth of the last parliament and rising inequality from the time Margaret Thatcher was in Downing Street. The prime minister’s focus on supporting just managing families is absolutely right.”[70]

text: Inflation has been rising while the level of many benefits has remained fixed in money terms. This is causing hardship to low income families and there are calls for the level of benefits to be increased.[71]

text: Wales[edit]

text: Poverty within the UK is particularly concentrated in the country of Wales. While the relative income-poverty rate for the UK stood at 16.8% in 2014, the same poverty rate for Wales stood at 23% in the same year.[72][73] Poverty in Wales has remained in the 25% range, with only small dips throughout the last decade.[73] While the trends correlate with overall reductions in less impoverished areas of the UK, it does not correlate with Scotland, who in the 1990s, had a relative similar poverty trend as Wales.[72] Conservative attitudes began to grow during the reign of the Labour party in the 2000s, culminating in an overall negative opinion towards public spending increases beginning in the 2010s.[74] This negative trend created a lack of support for Welsh poverty reduction efforts, and can explain much of the stagnation present in the rate. The lack of attention to Wales has led to a consistent issue in Welsh politics being that of poverty, with efforts to primarily reduce the prevalence of childhood and Fuel Poverty a priority.[citation needed]

text: London[edit]

text: Data published in 2014 by New Policy Institute and Trust for London found in the three years to 2012/13, 2.2 million people were in poverty in London after housing costs. This figure represents 28% of London's population, 8 percentage points higher than the rest of England.[75] Further research published by Trust for London, carried out by Loughborough University, found that 4 in 10 Londoners cannot afford what the public regard as a decent standard of living - one that allows them to meet their basic needs and participate in society at a minimum level. This is significantly higher than the 30% that fall below the standard in the UK as a whole. This represents 3.5 million Londoners, an increase of 400,000 since 2010/11.[76]

text: How poverty in the United Kingdom is defined and measured[edit]

text: Historical statistics on poverty[edit]

text: The table below shows the percentage of the population in poverty derived by three different measures: relative poverty (earning less than 60% of the median), the National Assistance scale and the Supplementary Benefits scale. Estimates from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research.[77]

text:
Percentage of population in poverty

Relative poverty
National assistance scale
Supplementary benefits scale

Year
Households
Individuals
Households
Individuals
Households
Individuals

1953/54
6.5%
4.8%
6.5%
4.8%
22.5%
21.0%

1963
6.8%
5.5%
2.5%
1.4%
10.5%
9.4%

1967
5.8%
5.3%
0.9%
0.9%
6.0%
5.5%

1971
4.9%
4.2%
0.5%
0.5%
4.9%
4.2%

1973
4.3%
3.0%
0.3%
0.2%
3.5%
2.3%

text: Estimates of poverty in the United Kingdom from 1950-1975 (percentage of population)[78]

text: 1953-54: 1.2% (Abel-Smith and Townsend, FES) Unit: Household

text: 1954: 12.3% (Gough and Stark, IR) Unit: Tax unit

text: 1959: 8.8% (Gough and Stark, IR) Unit: Tax unit

text: 1960: 3.8% (Abel-Smith and Townsend, FES) Unit: Household

text: 1963: 9.4% (Gough and Stark, IR) Unit: Tax unit

text: 1967: 3.5% (Atkinson, FES) Unit: Household

text: 1969: 3.4% (Atkinson, FES) Unit: Household

text: 1968-69: 6.4% (Townsend, Survey) Unit: Household

text: 1971: 4.9% (Fiegehen et al., FES) Unit: Household

text: 1975: 11.3% (Berthoud and Brown, GHS) Unit: Household

text: Poverty as 60 percent of median income[edit]

text: The most common measure for poverty, as used in the Child Poverty Act 2010, is ‘household income below 60 percent of median income’. The median is such an income that exactly a half of households earn more than that and the other half earns less.[79]

text: In 2014/5, the median income in the UK was £473 per week (£24,596 a year). Those earning 60% of this figure (£284 a week / £14,758 a year) were considered to be in the low income bracket.

text: This is the definition that is used by the UK Government's Department of Work and Pensions in its yearly survey Households below average income.[80] However, their reports expressly avoid using the word poverty, using low income instead. Reports from others agencies, such as the Institute of Fiscal Studies Living Standards, Poverty and Inequality in the UK, use the same methodology, but specifically use the word poverty.[32][81]

text: This measure can be further divided.

text: Those who live in Absolute Poverty have a ‘household income below 60 percent of median income' as compared to a rate fixed in 2010/11 and that only changes in line with inflation.

text: Those who live in Relative Poverty have a ‘household income below 60 percent of median income' as compared to all other incomes in the same year.

text: Absolute Poverty is better at judging poverty in the short term, whereas Relative Poverty is better at seeing long-term trends. This is because general concepts of poverty change with time, and Relative Poverty reflects this better.[32]

text: Reports on poverty also tend to take housing costs in to account, distinguishing between Before Housing Costs (BHC, where housing costs such as rent and mortgage interest payments have not been deducted) and After Housing Costs (AHC). Different social groups in the UK tend to have vastly different costs for housing, affecting available income.[32]

text: Relative Poverty was used before its formal adoption now. In the early 1980s, Tony Byrne and Colin F. Padfield defined relative poverty in Britain as a situation in which people are able to survive adequately, but they are either less well off than they used to be (such as when they retire from paid employment) or that they are at a serious disadvantage "in their ability to experience or enjoy the standard of life of most other people – for example, not being able to afford an annual holiday."[7]

text: In 2011, there was some discussion of the measurement for poverty being changed (from households earning less than 60% of median income) to a broader analysis of poverty.[82]

text: The Consensual Method[edit]

text: As opposed to measuring income, the Consensual Method examines which necessities (e.g. food, clothing, access to healthcare, involvement in social and leisure activities) are thought by the general public to be essential for living in contemporary UK society.[83] Those families or individual who lack a number of these necessities are considered as poor. In the 2012 Poverty and Social Exclusion (PSE) survey on Living Standards, the three necessities deemed as being most often essential to a good standard of living were the ability 'to warm living areas of the home ', a 'damp-free home' and 'two meals a day.'[84]

text: Six specific surveys of low standards of living in the UK have made use of this method.

text:
1983 Breadline Britain Survey
1990 Breadline Britain Survey of Britain
1999 Poverty and Social Exclusion Survey
2002 Poverty and Social Exclusion in Northern Ireland
The 2012 PSE UK ‘Attitudes to Necessities of Life and Services’ survey
The 2012 PSE UK 'Living Standards' survey

text: Other forms of poverty[edit]

text: Water poverty is defined by the Government as spending more than 3% of disposable income on water bills. Nationally, in 2006, nearly 10% of households were in water poverty.[85]

text: Fuel poverty. A fuel poor household is one that struggles to keep adequately warm at reasonable cost. The most widely accepted definition of a fuel poor household is one which needs to spend more than 10% of its income on all fuel use and to heat the home to an adequate standard of warmth. This is generally defined as 21 °C in the living room and 18 °C in the other occupied rooms.[86][87] Fuel poverty affects over a million British working households and increases in energy prices affect poor people severely.[88]

text: See Fuel poverty in the United Kingdom.

text: Causes of poverty[edit]

text:
Disability - Disabled adults are twice as likely to live in low income households as non-disabled adults.[89]
Illness
Mental illness
Low intelligence[90] - People with an IQ of 60 or below are speculated to be in danger of poverty and homelessness in the USA in 2006.
Unemployment - benefit sanctions for failing to search for jobs on a full-time basis plunges the already poor unemployed into destitution as a punishment. There are currently not enough jobs in the UK to employ everyone who is looking for work.[citation needed]
Underemployment - having a low-paid job with wages lower than the living wage, often the minimum wage, and working part-time.
Being born to poor parents
Lack of social capital
Inadequate management of finances
Being a lone parent - half of all lone parents are on a low income.[89]
Racial discrimination[91][92]
Inherent biases in the economic system, for example having to pay a higher rate of interest on a loan.[citation needed]

text: Current/recent figures[edit]

text: Eurostat figures show that the numbers of Britons at risk of poverty has fallen to 15.9% in 2014, down from 17.1% in 2010 and 19% in 2005 (after social transfers were taken into account).[39]

text: If the poverty line is defined as those individuals and households with incomes less than 60% of their respective medians, then "nearly 60%" of those in poverty are homeowners.[93]

text: Historical measurements of poverty[edit]

text: Seebohm Rowntree chose a basic 'shopping basket' of foods (identical to the rations given in the local workhouse), clothing and housing needs - anyone unable to afford them was deemed to be in poverty. By 1950, with the founding of the modern welfare state, the 'shopping basket' measurement had been abandoned.

text: The vast and overwhelming majority of people that fill the government's current criteria for poverty status (see above) have goods unimaginable to those in poverty in 1900. Poverty in the developed world is often one of perception; people compare their wealth with neighbours and wider society, not with their ancestors or those in foreign countries. Indeed, this is formalised in the government's measure of poverty. A number of studies have shown that though prosperity in the UK has greatly increased, the level of happiness people report has remained the same or even decreased since the 1950s.[94][95][96]

text: Poverty reduction[edit]

text: Welfare overview[edit]

text: People enter the world of poverty due to: problems at the individual/family level and problems with the economy as a whole. Problems at the individual level include: race (human categorization), gender, sexual orientation, drug use, and level of education. Problems with the economy can include: low labor participation and high levels of unemployment .[97] Welfare is financial support given by the government to people in need. There are pressures on the welfare state because welfare must be justified in terms of its contribution to economic success. Welfare must contribute positively to the economy otherwise there is a risk of damaging currency values. Damage to currency values will damage trading positions and investment which will, in turn, hurt the economy overall.[98] The Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS) is responsible for the welfare services in the United Kingdom. Income maintenance is centrally administered through DHSS offices (regional and local level).[99] Those who earn 39 pounds a week (except some married women) or more must contribute to the National Insurance Scheme. The National Health Service (NHS) provides virtually free healthcare for all residents – this is also centrally administered.

text: Persistent poverty and poverty statistics[edit]

text: Persistent poverty is the effects of experiencing low income for long periods of time. In 2014, 6.5% of the United Kingdom's population was classified as being in persistent poverty; that equates to approximately 3.9 million people. The UK's poverty rate overall in 2014 was the 12th highest amongst all European nations at 16.8%, however; it has the third-lowest persistent poverty rate.[100] Income tends to be measured before or after housing costs are accounted for (BHC or AHC).[101] Poverty levels tend to be higher after housing costs are accounted for because the poorer households need to spend a higher percentage of their income on housing. In 2014-2015, 13.5 million people were in relative low income AHC (an increase of 300,000 from the year before) and 12.9 million people were in absolute low income AHC (a decrease of 700,000 from the year before). Relative low income means that people live in households with income below 60% of the median in a specified year. Absolute income means that people live in households with income below 60% of the median income in some base year.[101] In 2016, the incomes of poor households are extremely sensitive to the activity in the labor market. When any downturn in the labor market occurs, the poorest people in the UK are increasingly more vulnerable and at greater risk.[102] Median income (overall) has moved 2% above pre-crisis (2007-2008) levels. During the recovery period, inequality in workers’ earnings has decreased. There has been strong employment growth along with weak earnings growth which have kept inequality low for several years.[102]

text: Poverty reduction strategies[edit]

text: In 1999, Tony Blair, the former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, pledged that child poverty in the United Kingdom will end within a generation. The goal was to completely eradicate child poverty by 2020. Poverty is a result of several different factors, some of which include: a lack of education and training, low participation in the labor market, poor working conditions, and affordable housing.[103] The key components of the UK's strategy to fight poverty are to: increase labor market participation of those eligible to work, to make work more advantageous for those receiving social benefits, to promote financial security for families, and to improve access to public transportation.[103] One of the most crucial ways to reduce poverty is to increase benefit take-ups. In 2009-10 almost a third of those who were eligible for means-tested benefits did not claim their benefits. In 2011-2012, 15% of those eligible for Child Tax Credit did not claim their benefits. Also, 35% of those eligible for Working Tax Credit did not claim their benefits neither.[97] Improving these numbers and getting those people to claim their benefits would significantly help reduce poverty. Ways in which can help increase benefit take-up include: simplifying the language so those who receive the benefits understand what they are receiving, making the process of receiving the benefits easier and more efficient, and encouraging benefit take-up.[97] Other important ways to reduce the levels of poverty include: improve mental health, to ensure that children are supported sufficiently enough so that they can receive a quality education, help the unemployed find jobs, and improving child stability. A decrease in poverty would mean a more active economy because more people would have the ability to purchase more consumer goods than before.[104]

text: Viewpoints of major political parties[edit]

text: Poverty in 2015 General Election[edit]

text: For the UK General Election of 2015, research was undertaken to analyse the commitment of the UK's political parties in addressing poverty. It demonstrated that "poverty has been overlooked as an issue in the General Election campaign" and that only the Green Party had an effective policy to deal with poverty. Analysis of other parties' policies and how they are used to deal with poverty ended in negative conclusions: "The Conservatives and UKIP both performed fairly badly". Labour performed better in some specific policy areas when compared to the Conservatives, but "there is not very much difference between them." Overall, the audit noted that views towards poverty were affected by specific views for those receiving social security benefits: "there was a general tendency to come down hard on welfare recipients, with a shift towards means-testing and victim-blaming across the board. This can be seen particularly in the context of Immigration and Housing."[105][non-primary source needed]

text: Poverty and political parties in 2000s[edit]

text: Labour Party[edit]

text: While leader of the Labour Government, Tony Blair vowed in 1999 to cut child poverty 25% by 2005, 50% by 2010 and to eradicate child poverty completely by 2020. The Labour Party website states:

text: "In 1997 Labour inherited one of the highest rates of child poverty in Europe – with one in three children living in poverty. Our mission to abolish child poverty is grounded both in our determination to secure social justice, and to tackle the problems that the social exclusion of children builds up for the long-term. Work is the best route out of poverty and our successful welfare to work measures have lifted millions out of poverty including disabled people, who have too often previously been consigned to a life on benefits. At the same time, millions of families are benefiting from the Child tax credit, the Working tax credit, and record rises in Child benefit."[106]

text: Their 2005 manifesto[107] states:

text: "[Since the Labour government came to power in 1997] there are two million fewer children and nearly two million fewer pensioners living in absolute poverty."

text: Conservative Party[edit]

text: In late November 2006, the Conservative Party garnered headlines across the press when a senior member spoke out on poverty, invoking the name of Polly Toynbee. The headlines began when David Cameron's policy advisor and shadow minister Greg Clark wrote:

text: "The traditional Conservative vision of welfare as a safety net encompasses another outdated Tory nostrum - that poverty is absolute, not relative. Churchill's safety net is at the bottom: holding people at subsistence level, just above the abyss of hunger and homelessness. It is the social commentator Polly Toynbee who supplies imagery that is more appropriate for Conservative social policy in the twenty first century."[108][109]

text: This approach generated much comment and analysis.[110] It was followed two days later by Cameron saying poverty should be seen in relative terms to the rest of society, where people lack those things which others in society take for granted, "those who think otherwise are wrong [...] I believe that poverty is an economic waste, a moral disgrace. [...] We will only tackle the causes of poverty if we give a bigger role to society, tackling poverty is a social responsibility [...] Labour rely too heavily on redistributing money, and on the large, clunking mechanisms of the state."[111]

text: Beyond left and right: poverty as a major fault line in British society[edit]

text: Most people's ability to sustain their lifestyle and to participate socially comes under threat at around the bottom 30% of the income distribution, creating a sort of 'participation floor' that seems to demarcate a major divide in British society (Ferragina et al. 2016[112]). The floor begins around the point in the income distribution when the benefit system starts to contribute substantially to people's incomes but is not entirely rigid or for example, it is lower for recipients of social security benefits mainly on account of the greater material deprivation that they experience. For those on the floor, participation is severely constrained with people negotiating a zero-sum world in which spending on one area means reduction in another. Whereas for those above the floor, additional income translates into more evident consumption, greater social participation and trust; for those on the floor it means a slight easing of pressure, but no major change in lifestyle sufficient to be identified in survey evidence. The implications for policy and our understanding of society are profound. Much policy, notably the new Universal Credit that was the flagship policy of the past Coalition Government, seeks to maximise work incentives premised on the notion that additional income brings rewards for individuals in terms of higher living standards, and benefits society through greater consumption and a shared work ethic. Similarly, as emphasised by Lansley and Mack (2015[113]), New Labour during the period 1997–2010 (despite trying to tackle child poverty) intervened mainly through more generous and wide-ranging tax-credits rather than fighting poverty and inequality at source (Ferragina and Arrigoni, 2016[114]).

text: Pressure/interest groups[edit]

text: The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (site) is one of the largest social policy research and development charities in the UK and takes particular interest in the issue of poverty, with over 100 reports on poverty and disadvantage available on its website (external link to report listing).

text: The Child Poverty Action Group (site) campaigns for the elimination of poverty amongst children.

text: End Child Poverty coalition (site) also seeks the eradication of child poverty.

text: Oxfam UK Poverty Programme site) works with people and policy makers to tackle the causes of poverty.

text: In July 2013 Freedom from Torture(site) published its report "The Poverty Barrier: The Right to Rehabilitation for Survivors of Torture in the UK[115] which highlights the failings of the UK Asylum System in their handling of torture survivors arriving in the UK. The evidence included in the report comes from the testimony of over 100 survivors of torture and 18 members of Freedom from Torture's clinical department. The report highlights financial insecurity, social exclusion and hopelessness and how poverty prevents the rehabilitation process. One survivor stated: "... Our current living conditions keep our torture trauma still alive. We can't move on."