James McCormick: Sharp focus needed if devolution is to help the disadvantaged

The findings of a major programme, published tomorrow by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JFR), show Scotland was the most improved part of the UK on key indicators of disadvantage.

The most notable success was a 15 per cent reduction in poverty among pensioners and an 8 per cent cut among children. The number of people without paid work fell by 5 per cent in the decade to spring 2008.

This saw Scotland placed in the top half of the UK's countries and regions, while the other devolved countries improved more slowly.

But was Scotland's progress on poverty down to devolution? The answer is probably not. Those areas of most improvement are influenced more by UK powers than by devolved policies. Powers reserved to Westminster – over employment, benefits and tax credits – played the major role in reducing poverty before progress stalled by the middle of the last decade.

Did devolution make any difference to low-income people and places? While the evidence is mixed, there is enough to suggest it made a dent in poverty.

Social housing in Scotland improved steadily while legislation to tackle homelessness provides a more secure safety net than in the past. Even so, low-income households in other sectors have lost ground – for example on quality standards.

The number of unqualified workers fell in all the devolved countries – a critical trend to reduce poverty in the long term. The Working for Families initiative to help disadvantaged parents into jobs, education and training is a devolved policy that really does make a difference, but is applied on too small a scale to make inroads on a national scale.

The best-known case of divergence is Scotland's policy of free personal and nursing care. Our universal approach is more comprehensive and costly than in the rest of the UK.

The JRF research highlights the Welsh approach of targeting extra help to those on modest incomes. This allows older people to keep more of their income before having to pay any care costs. In that respect, policy in Wales benefits those at risk of poverty.

Least success was seen for the risk of dying early. While the mortality rate for adults under 65 fell across the UK, it improved more slowly in the devolved countries. The Scottish rate remained highest in 2008, above that in most English regions ten years earlier – one of very few measures where Scotland lagged further behind.

Evidence on what devolution has meant for disadvantaged people and places is patchy. UK powers go furthest in tackling poverty, but only when they are applied at full tilt. Progress stalled even before the recession occurred.

Devolved powers produced modest signs of progress for the least well-off. But the commitment to tackling poverty runs well ahead of devolved powers to act.

Some approaches will need longer than ten years to really make a difference. And the JRF's work also pinpoints the need for much closer collaboration in policy making between the countries of the UK.

While Scotland's relative progress in the last decade is clear, the likely scale of cuts in public spending will lead some of these gains to unravel. Here is a major test for devolution.

A sharper focus will be needed on how to lessen the impact on the most disadvantaged and prepare for a just and sustainable recovery.

James McCormick is Scotland adviser to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.