Skip to main content

What is the Unicef wellbeing index really measuring?

UNICEF have published a list of industrialised countries ranked by the "well being" of their children- and the UK is at the bottom.

Cue breast beating, ashes and sack cloth.

Cue a government minister saying that the statistics are out of date (the "we don't wet the bed anymore" defence).

Cue left wing academic claiming that social inequality and the "dog eat dog society" is the root cause of our children's misery.

Oh, am I being a bit cynical? Well these kind of reports do seem to have become rather ritualised, and I don't really know what they do except tell us what we know already: our social problems hit kids the hardest.

Given that every government claims to be putting the welfare of our children first, it is a pretty miserable outcome to see that our kids get drunk more, use drugs more, have more teenage pregnancies, less family life, are poorer and have lower self esteem than the other 19 industrialised countries.

On the other hand is this the fault of the government or indeed any government?

The fact is that there is not that much that any politician can do directly to support family life- that is a question for the families themselves- especially parents. If parents won't discipline their own kids, then we have a problem.

I believe in an agenda of personal autonomy: that citizens have the right to do what they please within fairly broad legal limits- but the obligation to take the consequences. Give people back their sense of control and they will quickly learn the necessary disciplines.

In a Britain where the government can even ignore the House of Commons, there is too much power at the centre and that must be curbed- now. Expanding government control "to deal with the shameful issue of child poverty" has not worked, will not work, and may even make things worse.

"Trust in the People, tempered with Prudence" was the Gladstonian motto- one worth reviving, I think.

Comments

Liberal Polemic said…
There is a very left-wing bias to this whole report (and most of the UN agencies). I am particularly concerned by the vexing issue of "relative poverty".

I fail to understand how a poor child in Britain is worse off than an even-poorer child in Slovakia, simply becuase the British child is able to see a porche from her window rather than a clapped out Lada.
Cicero said…
Absolutely, Tom, and this kind of "all must win prizes" approach leeches self reliance out of the system- undermining self esteem still further.

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...