The Child Poverty Strategy: a long overdue step forward

The result of 16 months’ work by the Child Poverty Taskforce, it represents the most substantial step in years toward tackling the UK’s indefensibly high levels of child poverty and hardship.

Importantly, the strategy does not shy away from the scale of the challenge. It acknowledges that nearly a third of children are growing up in poverty, placing the UK among the worst performers in Europe and the OECD. It rightly foregrounds the impact of social security cuts, particularly the two-child limit, in driving up poverty rates. And it is unambiguous about the disastrous impact of poverty on the childhoods and life chances of the children who suffer under its effects, making a compelling moral and economic case for action. This echoes our Paying the Price report, which demonstrated the long-term economic benefits of lower child poverty through reduced service demand, higher tax revenues and lower welfare spending.

Today, the scale and urgency of hardship facing families is as severe as it has ever been. New analysis of the Action for Children Family Fund published today shows that 4,400 families and 15,000 parents, children and young people were supported with crisis grants for essentials like food, clothing, beds and white goods between summer 2024 and autumn 2025. Action for Children is receiving 300 applications a month for emergency help from families in its services. Over half are from families receiving Universal Credit, underlining the deep inadequacy of the social security system. And 71% of applications were for families with only one or two children, meaning they will see no benefit from the end of the two-child limit policy.

Much therefore rests on the strategy’s ability to deliver meaningful change for families at pace, and how it will continue to build upon these first steps over the life of the strategy. Here, we will consider the strategy’s significant strengths, and where the key gaps remain.

It engaged widely and meaningfully
Action for Children contributed to the strategy’s development in numerous ways, including providing evidence and research, policy suggestions and elevating the voices and lived experience of our young campaigners. Throughout the process, ministers and officials demonstrated a genuine commitment to engagement, consulting extensively with experts, civil society and families, and have pledged to continue prioritising voices with lived experience during implementation.

The government has made significant spending commitments (and raised taxes to do so)
Much of the document itself largely brings together existing or pre-announced measures. Some commentary has criticised this, but it was inevitable that significant spending commitments would be attached to major fiscal events like the Spending Review and recent Budget. Taken together, the commitments announced since the general election add up to a significant agenda. This includes:

• Removal of the two-child limit, the single biggest driver of rising child poverty;
• Extending free school meals to all children on Universal Credit in England;
• Sustained above-inflation increases to the Universal Credit standard allowance and lower deductions;
• Universal Credit childcare support extended to all children in a family;
• The revitalisation of local crisis support through the Crisis and Resilience Fund;
• Tens of billions of capital investment in social housing, transport and energy efficiency measures;
• Significant investment to reform children’s social care and prioritise early family support, including the expansion of Best Start Family Hubs.

It marks a welcome shift in language and tone
The strategy represents a welcome shift in tone, breaking decisively from a long-standing discourse that emphasised individual responsibility over structural causes, and rigidly promoted work as the best route out of poverty. Particularly striking is the explicitly positive case it makes for social security, and its recognition that parental employment rates are already high and that work is far from a guaranteed route out of poverty. It seems clear that policymakers have been on a journey here. Much of the early focus around the strategy was on employment levers, with social security discussed mostly in relation to work incentives rather than as a vital tool for poverty alleviation in its own right. Our Paying the Price report, the End Child Poverty coalition and other experts all argued forcefully that employment alone would not shift the dial on child poverty. To the government’s credit, it listened.

No targets, and a confusing picture on poverty impacts
The most glaring omission is the lack of meaningful numerical targets. By not setting clear short, medium and long-term goals, the strategy has forfeited the powerful galvanising effect that targets bring to focus minds and drive action across government.

Instead, it points to 550,000 children being lifted out of poverty, but this figure is not quite what it seems. It is based on a counterfactual scenario of projected poverty rates if no action were taken. Crucially, it does not mean that half a million fewer children will be in poverty in 2030 compared to the most recent figure of 4.5 million. Rather, it means there will be 550,000 fewer children in poverty than there would have been if the government had done nothing. Updated analysis from the Resolution Foundation suggests that by 2030, around 300,000 fewer children will be in poverty compared to today. This is substantial, but still implies a child poverty rate of 31%. This suggests that this is a strategy that, in the short-term at least, is much more about preventing child poverty from getting worse than it is about delivering significant reductions in the child poverty rate as it is today.

Nevertheless, we should be cautious of fixating on movements in statistical measures that are inherently incomplete and imperfect. Many actions within this strategy can’t necessarily be modelled, but will still have a meaningful impact on children’s lives.

A missed opportunity to set out a long-term vision
Turning the tide on child poverty can’t be achieved overnight, or even within a single parliamentary term. Yet the absence of targets speaks to a broader lack of a clearly articulated long-term vision. Early announcements described this as a 10-year strategy, but that language has disappeared in the final document, which mostly focuses on the next few years.

In practice, numerous actions in the strategy stem from wider government policies not exclusively aimed at child poverty, but which could help to address some of its structural drivers - like inadequate housing, poor transport connectivity and insecure work. Other aspects, like local government finance reform, carry similarly significant implications. However, there is little detail on how these longer-term policies knit together and will be shaped to actually benefit families in poverty. For example, while the strategy trumpets billions for regional and local transport infrastructure, it has little to say about ensuring this actually improves access to services and employment opportunities for families in poverty. The promise of a new ‘transport poverty tool’ to help guide decision-making could certainly help. But it also underscores the need for strong coordination across all levels of government, with child poverty recognised as a top Prime Ministerial priority. Unfortunately, this is unlikely to be helped by replacing the cross-cutting Child Poverty Unit in the Cabinet Office with a smaller team based in DWP.

Significant policy gaps remain
Ultimately, this is a strategy where the limits of what is possible have been defined by an extremely challenging fiscal environment. The government made the right choice in raising the revenue needed to scrap the two-child limit and prioritising it over other possible measures. But if the government is to realise its ambitions on child poverty, this can’t be the final word. Significant policy gaps remain, including the overall benefit cap, frozen local housing allowance rates and the inadequacy of our current approach to uprating benefits. The strategy also misses an opportunity to encourage families to claim all the financial support they entitled to. Modelling for Action for Children by Public First found that achieving 100% take-up of social security benefits among low-income families could reduce child poverty by nearly 400,000.

Finally, while the strategy points to a major programme of work underway in DWP to invest in employment support, reform jobcentres and drive up the employment rate across the economy, it offers few concrete actions to support parental employment and progression. At Action for Children, we are carrying out fresh research into in-work child poverty and progression that will report in the new year and offer some tangible recommendations to take forward.

This strategy is a long-overdue step forward, with major wins achieved in an exceptionally difficult fiscal climate. While significant gaps remain that will need to be revisited sooner rather than later, it lays strong foundations for progress and signals a genuine shift in tone and ambition. Ultimately, its success will be judged on the extent to which it is implemented well and properly built upon to deliver sustained improvements in family incomes, children’s lives and life chances. At Action for Children, we will do everything we can to help make that happen.