Latest Public Sector News

Nottingham deprivation levels rise sharply while London boroughs improve

Nottingham has seen the sharpest proportional increase in deprivation over the last five years, up by 8% to a total of 61 neighbourhoods amongst the most deprived decile nationally.

Figures released yesterday (30 September) by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) indicated that the city rose from 25^th most deprived local authority district nationally in 2010 to the eighth most deprived now.

Or, using calculations based on the ‘extent’ measure – which the department said can give a more “balanced indication” of change in relative deprivation – it is now the 7^th most deprived district. The ‘extent’ measure focuses on the neighbourhoods in the larger area that are amongst the most deprived three deciles of deprivation rather than the top 10%, but it gives “higher weight” to the most deprived decile and “gradually less weight” to each decile after that.

PSE contacted the Nottingham City Council for comment but did not hear back in time for publication.

On the other end of the scale, there have been “large decreases” in several London boroughs in the same time period, with Hackney, Tower Hamlets, Newham and Haringey no longer featuring amongst the 20 most deprived districts nationally.

Hackney in particular has seen a sharp decline in deprivation, from 42% of neighbourhoods to just 17% in 2015. Newham’s relative deprivation has dropped from 31% to 8% in the same timeframe.

But these London boroughs remain amongst the 20 most deprived districts according to the ‘extent’ of deprivation. However, where Hackney and Newham used to top the charts in 2010, they now feature as the 11^th and 25^th most deprived regions respectively.

National outlook

Despite the sharp changes, the DCLG’s report, by Baljit Gill of the department’s strategic statistics division, said there was “relatively little movement of neighbourhoods between deciles at the extremes of the distribution”, meaning that, in relative terms, the most and least deprived areas tended to remain the same. The vast majority of neighbourhoods considered the most deprived in 2010 were also the most deprived in 2015.

Only 18% of just over 2,600 neighbourhoods considered to be in the most deprived decile nationally in 2010 became “relatively less deprived” in 2015, most of which just shifted to the second decile.

Three in five (61%) local authorities in England contain at least one neighbourhood amongst the most deprived decile. In 2004, this figure was just under 50% of districts.

And although most “extreme” neighbourhood deprivation is concentrated amongst fewer areas, they have become more dispersed since 2004.

Gill said: “The proportion of local authorities containing at least one neighbourhood in the most deprived decile has increased with successive updates of the indices of deprivation.”

Middlesbrough is currently the most proportionately deprived district nationally, with Liverpool – which used to take its place at the top of the list – now taking 4^th place. When considering the ‘extent’ of deprivation, Manchester topped the list in 2015, with Liverpool just behind it.

The author added: “The absence of any notable changes in rank among the most deprived local authority districts is of internet as this indicates areas that have been persistently most deprived. As well as being the five most deprived local authorities according to the 2015 and 2010 indexes, Middlesbrough, Knowsley, Kingston upon Hull, Liverpool and Manchester were also among the ten most deprived local authorities according to the 2007 and 2004 updates.”

A DCLG spokesman said: “We will ensure that every part of Britain benefits from a growing economy and that everyone who works hard gets the opportunities they need to succeed.

“The most recent statistics show that the proportion of individuals with relative low income is now at the lowest level since the mid-1980s and we have near record levels of employment.

“Furthermore, councils facing the highest demand for services continue to receive more funding and have higher spending power than less deprived authorities.”