The Interface between Childcare, Family Support and Child Poverty Strategies Under New Labour: Tensions and Contradictions
Author:
Open Access
- 1 January 2008
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Social Policy and Society
- Vol. 7 (4) , 479-494
Abstract
New Labour's national childcare and family support strategies have been aimed at improving mothers' labour market participation and children's future educational achievements. As such, they constitute a key component of the child poverty agenda. HM Treasury has assumed a pivotal role in furthering the strategies' objectives. This article explores whether the mixed market economy selected as the vehicle to deliver childcare and family support provision, promotes separate markets for the poor and the better off, while hindering the achievement of child poverty strategy outcomes.Keywords
This publication has 38 references indexed in Scilit:
- Work/Family Balance Policies in the UK since 1997: A New Departure?Journal of Social Policy, 2007
- Alternative Policy Designs and the Socio-Political Construction of ChildcareContemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 2007
- The Social Costs of Child Poverty: A Systematic Review of the Qualitative EvidenceChildren & Society, 2006
- Early Education and Children's Outcomes: How Long Do the Impacts Last?*Fiscal Studies, 2005
- Globalisation, Domestic Politics, and Welfare State Retrenchment in Capitalist DemocraciesSocial Policy and Society, 2005
- Too Important to Leave to the Economists? The Political Economy of Welfare RetrenchmentSocial Policy and Society, 2005
- Young Citizens or Policy Objects? Children in the ‘Rights and Responsibilities’ DebateJournal of Social Policy, 2004
- What Really Happened to Child Poverty in the UK under Labour's First Term?The Economic Journal, 2003
- Social security in the UK under New Labour: what did the Third Way mean for welfare reform?Fiscal Studies, 2002
- Renewed Hopes and Lost Opportunities: early childhood in the early years of the Labour GovernmentCambridge Journal of Education, 1999