Vital Issues. A report commissioned by East End Community Foundation. Written by Dr Megan Ryburn London School of Economics

Transcription

1 Vital Issues 2017 A report commissioned by East End Community Foundation Written by Dr Megan Ryburn London School of Economics

2 Contents Table of Figures... 2 Executive Summary... 3 Introducing Vital Issues... 5 What is East End Vital Issues?... 5 Methodology... 5 East End Community Foundation... 6 Dr Megan Ryburn... 6 Structure of the report... 7 Introducing the East End... 8 Grade Score Summary Fairness Data note and references Arts, Heritage and Culture Data note and references Environment Data note and references Safety Data note and references Healthy Living Data note and references Local Economy Data notes and references Work Data note and references Housing and homelessness Data note and references Education and Learning Data note and references Strong Communities Data notes and references

3 Table of Figures Figure 1-1 Tower Hamlets Index of Multiple Deprivation by LSOA Figure 1-2 Income Deprivation Affecting Older People Index average scores (%) and rank Figure 3-1 IMD: Living Environment average scores by local authority Figure 3-2 Map showing air quality (NO2) in Hackney Figure 4-1 Offences per 1,000 people by borough 2013 and Figure 4-2 Change in violent crime offences per 1,000 people, 2013 and Figure 4-3 Newham rise in hate crime offences Figure 4-4 Hackney rise in hate crime offences Figure 4-5 Tower Hamlets rise in hate crime offences Figure 5-1 Under 75 cardiovascular and cancer mortality rates per 100,000 of the population Figure 5-2 Percentage of obese children (Year 6) Figure 6-1 Labour productivity by sub-region (%) Figure 6-2 Gross average weekly earnings by place of residence and place of work Figure 7-1 Comparison of unemployment rate 2013 and Figure 7-2 Wage growth over time (average gross weekly earnings by place of residence) Figure 7-3 Occupation type (% employed population) Figure 7-4 Unemployment by ethnicity (%) Figure 7-5 Unemployment rate by age group (%) Figure 7-6 Youth unemployment rate by gender (%) Figure 8-1 Type of tenure (%) Figure 8-2 Average private rent by borough (monthly) Figure 9-1 Qualifications of population (%)* Figure 10-1 Wellbeing scores and ranks by borough Figure 10-2 Population who have carried out voluntary work in past 12 months (%)

4 Executive Summary This Vital Issues report, the second for the East End Community Foundation, offers a health check of London s East End, focusing on the boroughs of Hackney, Newham, and Tower Hamlets. It covers ten key issue areas, which range from Safety to Education and Learning to Housing and Homelessness. A broad indication of how the East End is doing nationally is given for each Issue Area, and then key topics within them are highlighted. Overall, there is relative consistency since the previous report was published three years ago, although it is important to note that the indicators by which the East End is measured and compared with all sub-regions nationally have changed since 2014 (for more information, see Grade Score Summary). The East End continues to be an incredibly diverse part of London, and the UK. The opening section of this report, Introducing the East End, provides a snapshot of this diversity. In particular, it is worth highlighting that 44% of the population in Hackney are Black or minority ethnic, and this figure is over 50% in Newham and Tower Hamlets. In all the boroughs, at least 20% of people have a main language other than English. With respect to the ten different Issue Areas, which are covered in turn in the rest of the report, on the whole the East End fares poorly. It is placed in the bottom quintile nationally for 7 of 10 Issue Areas. The first Issue Area covered in the report is Fairness. Using the core indicator of the Index of Multiple Deprivation average score as a measure, the East End is in the lowest quintile nationally for Fairness, although it has seen some improvement since It continues to have high levels of inequality within in each borough this is particularly noticeable in wards such as Canary Wharf. Moreover, children are significantly affected by income deprivation in the East End, and Tower Hamlets is the district with highest income deprivation affecting children in the country. Income deprivation strongly affects older people in the East End too. Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Newham are the three worst districts in the country in terms of income deprivation affecting older people. The second Issue Area covered is Arts, Heritage and Culture, and here the East End does better. It is ranked in the top 40% nationally on this measure, which assess the number of people employed in creative industries. Tower Hamlets and Hackney are in the top 20% of districts nationally for Arts Heritage and Culture using this measure. The three boroughs also have high levels of local amenities. In terms of attendance at or participation in the arts, findings are more mixed figures are particularly low in Newham, slightly below the national average for Tower Hamlets, but above average for Hackney. Turning to Environment, here the East End does not score highly. The East End is in the lowest quintile nationally, based on the Index of Multiple Deprivation: Living Environment average score. Indeed, out of 326 local authorities nationally, Hackney is ranked 6 worst in terms of environmental deprivation. Tower Hamlets is ranked 16, and Newham is ranked 38. Air quality is of particular concern, especially in Hackney, which has the fifth worst air quality of all London boroughs. On the topic of Safety, there has been a very slight overall improvement in terms of crime levels in the East End since the 2014 Vital Issues report. The East End is still in the bottom quintile nationally on this measure, however, and unfortunately violent crime rates have worsened in the East End. There has also been a sharp rise in hate crime across all three boroughs, which is one of the most noticeable changes since the last report was published. The East End is in the lowest quintile nationally for Healthy Living when assessed using the core indicator of under 75 cardiovascular mortality rates. There also continues to be a significant gap in life expectancy in Newham and Tower Hamlets. In Tower Hamlets, the life expectancy gap between men in the most and least deprived areas is 8.2 years. Findings are more positive 3

5 regarding adult obesity, and all boroughs have lower levels of adult obesity than the national average. Nevertheless, the percentages of obese children in all boroughs is significantly worse than the national average. Turning to mental health, the results are mixed. In Hackney and Tower Hamlets, over 14% of the population experience depression or anxiety, which is higher than the national average of 12.7%. In terms of severe mental health problems, all three boroughs, but especially Hackney, have a higher prevalence than average. The next Issue Areas assessed are the Local Economy immediately followed by Work. The East End s local economy is in the top 20% of sub-regions nationally, based on the core indicator of percentage of national Gross Value Added (GVA). As was the case in 2014, however, there are contradictions between the strength of the local economy and the employment situation of local people. The East End is ranked in the lowest 20% nationally in terms of Work, based on the unemployment rate. Although the unemployment rate has fallen in all of the boroughs as it has across the UK, the unemployment rate in all of the boroughs remains comparatively high. Tower Hamlets has the highest unemployment rate of all local authorities nationally. Unemployment disproportionately affects black and minority ethnic groups, and young people. Housing and homelessness is the subsequent topic addressed in the report. Consistent with the 2014 report, the findings here are negative. The East End performs in the bottom quintile nationally in terms of housing affordability. Rates of owner occupancy are far below the England and London averages, and private rent is above the London average in Hackney and Tower Hamlets. Homelessness and housing in temporary accommodation also continues to be a significant issue. Hackney has the third highest homelessness acceptance rate in all of London, and Newham has the most people in temporary accommodation of all London boroughs. Moving on to Education and Learning, the East End does fairly well in this respect. It is in the top 40% of sub-regions nationally for achievement of 5 or more GCSEs at A*-C, including Maths and English. There has been a slight decline for Tower Hamlets and Newham compared to the 2014 findings reported, but generally results in the East End have been on an upwards curve. There has also been a decrease in the number of year olds who are not in education, employment or training (NEETs). The NEETs borough averages are now below the England average. The final Issue Area is Strong Communities. The findings here are mixed. In terms of the core indicator, which is again the number of criminal offences per 1,000 of the population, the East End fares poorly. In terms of wellbeing, which is assessed as part of the Annual Population Survey, scores are above or close to the London average for Newham and Tower Hamlets. Wellbeing scores are lower than the London average across all measures for Hackney. Participation in terms of both volunteering and election turn-out was also mixed, with lower than average participation rates in Newham. To conclude, there is a degree of consistency over time, and findings certainly continue to indicate that there are areas in which the East End can improve. Perhaps particularly worth highlighting are the high levels of income deprivation affecting children and older people, the increase in violent crime and hate crime, higher than average levels of mental health problems, and continuing high unemployment rate. On the positive side, the boroughs do well with respect to arts and culture, and education and learning. A particularly significant improvement has been made in terms of lowering the number of young people not in education, employment or training. It will be interesting to see where the next few years take the East End across these varied issues. 4

6 Introducing Vital Issues In the UK, we are lucky enough to have a wealth of information available to enable us to conduct a health check on our communities from census data to reports produced by charities, there is a vast amount out there. The problem is that this information is in many different places, which can be overwhelming when trying to check on how a community is doing. Vital Issues exists to bring together information about a community in one easy-to-read and easily accessible document. Started in Canada in 2001, the initiative was piloted in the UK in 2013 and is now being conducted by Community Foundations across the country. Vital Issues reports collate information on specific communities. They highlight the positives and the areas where there is room for improvement. Vital Issues reports are also condensed into briefer fact sheets, called Vital Signs. This creates a community philanthropy tool, making it easier to work out where to concentrate philanthropic attention and resources in the future. What is East End Vital Issues? This is the second Vital Issues Report for the East End of London. The first was conducted in Vital Signs fact sheets have been produced in 2014, 2015 and It has been conducted by the East End Community Foundation (EECF), and supported by Dr Megan Ryburn from the London School of Economics, and Grant Thornton Place Analytics. It examines ten Issue Areas, ranging from Safety to Education and Learning to Housing and Homelessness. It emphasises where things are going well, and where efforts should be focused to make things better. East End Vital Issues addresses themes as they affect the East End defined as the boroughs of Tower Hamlets, Hackney, and Newham. Methodology For each identified Issue Area, relevant studies and statistics from a range of sources have been reviewed. These include reports by local councils, charities, and independent research bodies, as well as census data, information from the Annual Population Survey, and the Labour Force Survey. Some of this information has been gathered and analysed by Grant Thornton Place Analytics (GTPA), and some by Dr Megan Ryburn from the London School of Economics, who has written the report. A more detailed description of the sources used, and how they contribute to the analysis, is given at the end of each Issue Area section. 5

7 East End Community Foundation The East End Community Foundation (EECF) was formed in 2012 following a merger of the Isle of Dogs Community Foundation and St Katharine & Shadwell Trust. It covers four boroughs in London s East End: the City of London, Hackney, Newham and Tower Hamlets. Our Vision A philanthropic East End free of poverty. Our Mission To drive philanthropy and charitable giving that responds to the community needs and aspirations in East London, both now and in the future. What we do EECF brings together local people, businesses, charities and public bodies to achieve our aims. We do this by using our extensive local expertise and networks to: Provide grants and capacity building support to grassroots organisations Deliver programmes which increase employability, educational achievement and community wellbeing Support our business, statutory and individual members to achieve their philanthropic and social responsibility goals Raise awareness of East London s changing needs and creating innovative local solutions to local issues Dr Megan Ryburn Since 2015, Megan has been an LSE Fellow in the Department of Geography and Environment at the London School of Economics. She obtained her PhD from Queen Mary University of London, where she held a Principal s Studentship. Prior to that, she completed an MPhil in Latin American Studies at the University of Cambridge, enabled by a Santander University Scholarship. She carried out her BA (First Class Hons) at the University of Canterbury, New Zealand. She works particularly on migration in Latin America, but her research interests include migration studies more broadly, citizenship practices, and civic and community participation. With Professor Cathy McIlwaine, Megan co-authored the inaugural East End Vital Issues report in 2014 while she was still at Queen Mary. She is very pleased to work on the 2017 report given her continuing interesting in London, and especially the East End. 6

8 Structure of the report Introducing the East End Grade score summary 1. Fairness 2. Arts, Heritage and Culture 3. Environment 4. Safety 5. Healthy Living 6. Local Economy 7. Work 8. Housing and Homelessness 9. Education and Learning 10. Strong Communities The report begins with a brief introduction to the East End, highlighting key figures divided by borough. The rest of the East End Vital Issues report covers ten Issue Areas, indicated in the box above. For each Issue Area, an overall grade score is given, which offers a broad indication of how the East End is doing compared to the rest of the UK. Grade scores range from A to E, with A being the best and E the worst. A table with a summary of all grade scores is provided on p.8. Following this, each Issue Area is examined in more depth. The Issue Area grade score is reiterated and explained, and up to three major themes within each Issue Area are analysed. 7

9 Introducing the East End If the East End was a village of 100 people 52 would be female and 48 would be male 10 would be aged would be over would be Black or minority ethnic and 42 would be White 33 would have a main language other than English 52 would hold a degree 9 would have no qualifications 7 would be unemployed and 1 of them would be aged would be experiencing depression or anxiety In one year, 10 would be victims of crime Grade Score Summary East End Hackney Newham Tower Hamlets Fairness E E E E Arts, Heritage and Culture B A C A Environment E E E E Safety E E E E Healthy Living E E E E Local Economy A A A A Work E E E E Housing and Homelessness E E E E Education and Learning B A C C Strong Communities E E E E 8

10 Grade scores reflect the quintile (20%) in which an area is ranked nationally, where A is the best 20% and E is the worst 20%. Grade scores are calculated using the national ranks for the indicators corresponding to each Issue Area. For example, for the Issue Area Fairness, the indicator is the Index of Multiple Deprivation score. Scores for each area are ranked nationally (usually by local authority). Each rank is turned into a percentage, which is then inverted (because a lower, rather than higher, rank is better). These figures are then organised into quintiles e.g. an E Grade for Fairness means that the East End is in the bottom 20 per cent nationally for this theme. All indicators are explained in the corresponding section of the report. It is important to note that the way of measuring grade scores has changed since the 2014 East End Vital Issues Report was written. Therefore, direct comparisons cannot be drawn between the scores given in this 2017 report and those given in the 2014 report. Previously, a composite of different indicators was used to calculate the grade score for each Issue Area. Now a single indicator is used to calculate the grade score for each Issue Area. For example, the score for Safety was previously calculated using a composite measure consisting of the number of offences per 1,000 of the population and the Index of Multiple Deprivation crime score. It is now calculated using only the number of offences per 1,000 of the population. Detail on each of the grade scores is given in the corresponding section of this report. 9

11 1. Fairness Fairness refers to equality in our communities. The effects of deprivation and inequality impact on us all, and working to bridge the gaps between rich and poor has been shown to significantly improve social problems. The East End does poorly in relation to fairness. The wealth of Canary Wharf, for example, contrasts dramatically with the deprivation of areas such as East India Dock. Grade Score: E A grade score of E places the East End in the lowest 20% of sub-regions nationally, based on the Index of Multiple Deprivation average score. 1 Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham E E E The core indicator for Fairness is the England Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) average score. The IMD incorporates information on seven domains (income, employment, education, health, crime, barriers to housing and services, and living environment) to create a standard measure of deprivation. Average IMD scores are calculated for every district in England, and these are then ranked. The IMD ranking for Hackney, Newham, and Tower Hamlets has improved since Nevertheless, all three boroughs remain in the 20 per cent most deprived districts nationally. Tower Hamlets is ranked 10 out of 326 districts nationally using the IMD average score as a measure (with 1 being the worst and 326 the best); Hackney is ranked 11; and Newham is ranked 23. In 2010, Tower Hamlets was ranked 7 out of 326 districts, Hackney was ranked 2, and Newham was ranked 3. Therefore, all three boroughs have become relatively less deprived since the previous IMD ranking was released in There are various possible explanations for this, and it is not possible to reach a definitive conclusion (for further discussion, see, for example, New Policy Institute, 2015). It may be partly due to efforts by local councils to tackle deprivation, particularly by focusing on employment, as Newham Council suggests (Newham London, 2015; Presser, 2016). It may also in part, however, be due to worsening deprivation in other districts in the UK, rather than a definitive improvement in the three boroughs (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2015; see also Tower Hamlets Council, 2015, p.2). Finally, it could partly be due to rising levels of income in some areas of the boroughs but not others (e.g. because of gentrification of some parts of the borough), which would raise the average IMD score for the whole borough. More research is needed to prove this conclusively, however. 1 Previously, a composite measure was used, whereas now the core indicator is just the IMD average score. Thus, the findings are not directly comparable with the 2014 East End Vital Issues report. 10

12 Nevertheless, with the data we do have, it is possible to see that patterns of deprivation within each borough are demonstrative of high levels of inequality. Taking the example of Tower Hamlets, the map below shows patterns of deprivation in this borough broken down by lower-layer super output area (LSOA i.e. neighbourhood). Dark red indicates the most deprived areas, and green indicates the least deprived. Thus, the difference at ward level, between Poplar and St Katharine s & Wapping for example, is made apparent, as are the inequalities within particular wards such as Canary Wharf. Figure 1-1 Tower Hamlets Index of Multiple Deprivation by LSOA Blackwell & Cubitt Town Index > 25,903 16,422 < 3,284 The index reflects the 2015 Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) national ranking according to Lower Super Output Area (LSOA), where 1 is the most deprived LSOA in England and 32,844 is the least deprived. Source: Elaborated from Department for Communities and Local Government,

13 Breaking down the data further to highlight one key aspect of deprivation, a high percentage of children and older people face income deprivation in the three boroughs. 32% of children in Hackney, 29% of children in Newham, and 39% of children in Tower Hamlets are living in income deprived households, according to the Income Deprivation Affecting Children Index (IDACI). This means that Tower Hamlets is the district with highest income deprivation affecting children in the country. An income deprived family is one that receives certain means tested benefits or tax credits and has an income below the national poverty line (less than 60% of the median UK income). For a couple with two children, this would mean that they live on 1,703 per month before housing costs (Child Poverty Action Group, 2017). Figure 1-2 Income Deprivation Affecting Older People Index average scores (%) and rank Percentage Rank Tower Hamlets 50% 1 Hackney 43% 2 Newham 41% 3 Manchester 36% 4 Islington 36% 5 Hart, Hampshire 6% 326 London 22% England 16% Source: Elaborated from Department for Communities and Local Government, 2015 As indicated in Figure 1-2, in terms of income deprivation affecting older people, Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Newham are the three worst districts in the country. In Tower Hamlets, 50% of older people live in income deprived households, according to the Income Deprivation Affecting Older People Index (IDAOPI). This figure is 43% for Hackney and 41% for Newham. This is far above the London average of 22% and the England average of 16%, and compares unfavourably with the best ranked district in the country, Hart in Hampshire, where 6% of older people live in income deprivation. Indeed, Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Newham are the only districts in the country with rates over 40%. The IDAOPI is the percentage of people aged 60 or over who are receiving the following meanstested benefits: Income Support, income-based Jobseeker s Allowance, income-based Employment and Support Allowance, or Pension Credit (Guarantee). The Age UK report on Living on a Low Income in Later Life provides a very good introduction to what income deprivation means for older people. It highlights, for example, the social isolation that can result from income deprivation, as well as potentially dangerous cost-cutting on heating. To conclude, whilst some progress may have been made in terms of improving the overall average score on the IMD for Tower Hamlets, Newham, and Hackney, this finding needs to be approached with a lot of caution. They remain boroughs with very high levels of deprivation and inequality. Children and older people are amongst the most affected. 12

14 Data note and references All data is drawn from the English Indices of Deprivation The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), developed by central government, incorporates information on seven domains to create a standard measure of deprivation. The index uses the following domains, or indicators, of deprivation, weighted according to the percentages indicated in brackets: income (22.5%); employment (22.5%); education (13.5%); health (13.5%); crime (9.3%); barriers to housing and services (9.3%); and living environment (9.3%). All lower-layer super output areas (i.e. neighbourhoods) in England are ranked from 1 (most deprived area) to 32,844 (least deprived area). It is possible to aggregate these small area rankings to find the ranking for larger areas, such as local authorities. The most recent findings available are from the 2015 IMD, which relies on data gathered from 2012 to Age UK, Living on a low income in later life. Available at: [Accessed 14 July 2017]. Child Poverty Action Group, The UK Poverty Line. Available at: [Accessed 14 July 2017]. Department for Communities and Local Government, The English Indices of Deprivation. Available at: [Accessed 6 June 2017]. Department for Communities and Local Government, The English Indices of Deprivation 2015: Research Report. Available at: /attachment_data/file/464597/english_indices_of_deprivation_2015_-_research_report.pdf [Accessed 6 June 2017]. New Policy Institute, Poverty has not left East London, but it has changed. Available at: [Accessed 14 July 2017]. Newham London, English indices of deprivation Available at: [Accessed 14 July 2017]. Presser, What s behind the huge fall in deprivation in east London? And no, it s not gentrification. Available at: [Accessed 14 July 2017]. Tower Hamlets Council, Deprivation in Tower Hamlets: Analysis of the 2015 Indices of Deprivation data. Available at: es_of_deprivation_high_resolution.pdf [Accessed 14 July 2017]. 13

15 2. Arts, Heritage and Culture Here, arts, heritage and culture in the East End are examined. We assess the number of people employed in creative industries, the concentration of arts, cultural, and heritage facilities by land area, and looks at access and participation. The East End has a very good rating for arts, heritage, and culture, well above the national average and is a dynamic and exciting place to live in relation to cultural opportunities. Grade Score: B A grade score of B places the East End in the top 40% of sub-regions nationally, based on the core indicator for this Issue Area the number of people employed in creative industries. 2 Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham A A C The East End is a vibrant area, and has a strong ranking for arts, heritage, and culture. A very high number of people are employed in creative industries in the East End, with 5.8 per cent of the total East End population employed in this field. The Great Britain average is 3 per cent, and the London average is 5.6 per cent. Broken down at borough level, there is some discrepancy between the boroughs. Whilst Hackney is far above average, with 11.7 per cent of its population employed in creative industries, only 1.8 per cent of the population in Newham are working in this area. In Tower Hamlets, 4.1 per cent of the population are employed in creative industries so above the national average, but below the London average. The concentration of arts, cultural, and heritage facilities by land area has changed little in the past three years since the previous Vital Issues report, and more detailed findings regarding this topic can be found there. In summary, however, the three target boroughs all have high levels of local amenities. Tower Hamlets and Hackney, however, have more heritage sites, arts and cultural centres, and libraries than Newham. Newham still does much better than the national average, however. Newham also has the most retail floor-space, whereas Tower Hamlets has the least. This is at least partly because Newham is home to Westfield Stratford City Shopping Centre, the largest urban shopping centre in Europe. 2 Previously, a composite measure including a local amenities score was used to assess Arts, Culture, and Heritage. This indicator is heavily biased towards urban areas, however, and so the number of people employed in creative industries has been selected by Vital Issues as a more accurate core indicator. This means that the Grade Score is not directly comparable with that used in the 2014 East End Vital Issues report. 14

16 In terms of participation in the arts, the data available is rather old (gathered ), and new data is currently being gathered for publication in autumn 2017 (Arts Council England, 2017). Therefore, it is important not to draw very strong conclusions from this data. It nevertheless offers some interesting insights. What we can see at borough level is that, during the timeframe, the level of attendance at or participation in the arts was uneven across the three boroughs. When asked whether they had attended or participated in an arts event in the past 12 months, only per cent of people in Newham replied positively, making this the local authority with lowest attendance or participation in the country. In Tower Hamlets, attendance and participation was higher, at per cent. In Hackney, it was per cent, which was above the national average of per cent. In summary, when an overall score is calculated, the East End and the three target boroughs do very well in terms of arts, heritage and cultural. When this is broken down further, however, we see that there are significant differences between the boroughs. Hackney has very high levels of employment in creative industries, many cultural and heritage sites, and high attendance at and participation in the arts. Tower Hamlets also fairs well on these indicators. Newham, by contrast, does much more poorly across all indicators. Data note and references The data on employment in creative industries is drawn from Grant Thornton Place Analytics from the Business Register and Employment Survey (BRES), and is from That on availability of local amenities has been provided by Grant Thornton Place Analytics from reports and publications from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. The data on attendance and participation in the arts is from the Active Lives Survey, and was gathered from Arts Council England, The Active Lives Survey. Available at: [Accessed 6 June 2017]. 15

17 3. Environment This Issue Area takes as its core indicator the Index of Multiple Deprivation Living Environment domain. This is discussed in some depth, highlighting various key aspects, such as air quality. Other factors, such as waste management, are also considered. As with the majority of London, the East End does not score particularly well in relation to environment. Grade Score: E A grade score of E places the East End in the lowest 20% of sub-regions nationally, based on the Index of Multiple Deprivation Living Environment average score. 3 Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham E E E Most urban areas do not fare particularly well in relation to environmental indicators, and the East End is no exception. The core indicator for the environment Issue Area is the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) Living Environment average score. 4 All three boroughs, but particularly Hackney, do poorly in relation to this indicator, which incorporates both indoor and outdoor environment factors. The indoor factors are: the proportion of houses that do not have central heating; and the proportion of houses that fail to meet the Decent Homes standard. The outdoor factors are: air quality measurement based on four pollutants; and road traffic accidents involving injury to pedestrians and cyclists. Based on the IMD Living Environment average score, out of 326 local authorities nationally, Hackney is ranked 6 worst in terms of environmental deprivation. Tower Hamlets is ranked 16, and Newham is ranked 38. The IMD Living Environment average score for London is , but Hackney scores , which is far above this (the higher the score, the worse the rating). Tower Hamlets scores Newham does slightly better, with an average score of it does marginally better across all factors, but particularly with regards to outdoor factors, which is consistent 3 This differs from the 2014 East End Vital Issues core indicator, where a composite that also included factors such as natural beauty, and green space, was used. The advantage of the new indicator is that it is less subjective and uses more up-to-date data. The use of this new core indicator means, however, that comparisons cannot be drawn with the 2014 Vital Issues report, and in particular with the Grade Score. Moreover, there is no new data available regarding various other environment indicators included in the 2014 report such as natural beauty, green space, and ecological footprint and thus no change can be reported in this report with respect to these indicators. 16

18 with results for other boroughs further from Inner London. To see how the boroughs fare within the London context specifically, see Figure 3-1 below. Breaking the average score down further, 40% of Hackney s lower super-output areas (LSOAs) are in the most environmentally deprived 10% of LSOAs nationally. This figure is 30% for Tower Hamlets and 10% for Newham (ibid.). It is with respect to the outdoor indicators that the boroughs do especially badly, although indoor factors could by no means be considered good. Nearly all LSOAs in all three boroughs are ranked in the bottom 10% of LSOAs nationally in terms of the outdoor indicators. With regards to these outdoor indicators, air quality is a very serious issue throughout all of London within the first five days of 2017, various hotspots in London had already exceeded the annual air pollution limits (The Guardian, 2017a). It is certainly an issue of significant concern in the East End, especially in Hackney. The map reproduced above in Figure 3-2 shows annual average nitrogen oxide emissions per metre cubed in Hackney. As indicated in the map, in many parts of Hackney, healthy NO2 limits are far exceeded any area that is shaded yellow through to deep red is exceeding healthy NO2 limits. The map also shows the Air Quality Focus Areas in the borough (in boxes with hatching). These Focus Areas are places where the EU annual limit for NO2 is exceeded, and where there is high human exposure. Figure 3-1 IMD: Living Environment average scores by local authority London Average Source: Elaborated from English Indices of Deprivation,

19 Figure 3-2 Map showing air quality (NO2) in Hackney Source: Greater London Authority & Transport for London Air Quality, 2016 In terms of waste management another important environment indicator in general, London does poorly in terms of local authority recycling and reuse of household waste. This is certainly true in the East End, and the three target boroughs performed well below average in terms of waste management. In 2015, the England waste from households recycling rate was 43.9% (Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, 2016). The target for 2020 is to recycle 50% of household waste (ibid). In Newham, only 14.69% of household waste was sent for recycling or composting. Hackney and Tower Hamlets did slightly better, recycling or composting 24.83% and 26.71% of household waste respectively. However, there is some way to go for the East End to reach the 50% target. All in all, there are many areas of environmental concern in the East End. Air quality is very poor, especially in Hackney. Waste management is falling below the UK average, particularly in Newham. Data note and references The Index of Multiple Deprivation Living Environment data has been drawn from the English Indices of Deprivation This data was gathered in 2012/2013. The air quality data has been drawn from the London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory 2013, published by the Greater London Authority and Transport for London Planning. Waste management by household data comes from Grant Thornton Place Analytics, derived from the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. It was gathered in 2015/2016. Department for Communities and Local Government, The English Indices of Deprivation. Available at: [Accessed 6 June 2017]. 18

20 Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Statistics on waste managed by local authorities in England in 2015/16. Available at: uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/577716/final_stats_notice_nov_2016.pdf [Accessed 7 June 2017]. Greater London Authority & Transport for London Air Quality, London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory 2013 Air Quality Focus Areas December 2016 update. Available at: [Accessed 7 June 2017]. The Guardian, 2017a. London breaches annual air pollution limit in just five days, 6 January Available at: [Accessed 7 June 2017]. 19

21 4. Safety Safety here refers particularly to crime levels. We examine current crime levels and also look at change in crime levels in recent years. The East End scores poorly in relation to crime. There has been a very slight overall improvement in crime rates, but, worryingly, there has been a sharp rise in violent crime in the past three years. Grade Score: E A grade score of E places the East End in the lowest 20% of sub-regions nationally, based on the core indicator of total offences per 1,000 people. 5 Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham E E E There has been a very slight overall improvement in terms of crime levels in the East End since the 2014 Vital Issues report. There were 95.9 offences committed per 1,000 people in the period in the East End. In the period , there were offences committed per 1,000 people. As indicated in Figure 4-1 below, all three of the target boroughs have seen slight reductions in the number of offences per 1,000 people, with a more marked reduction in Tower Hamlets. Figure 4-1 Offences per 1,000 people by borough 2013 and 2016 Borough Year No. offences per 1,000 people Tower Hamlets Tower Hamlets Hackney Hackney Newham Newham Source: Elaborated from Grant Thornton Place Analytics data derived from the Home Office, 2013 and The previous 2014 East End Vital Issues used a composite measure to calculate the Grade Score (it included the IMD crime score), and so this Grade Score is not directly comparable with that in the previous report. 20

22 Unfortunately, however, violent crime rates have worsened in the East End and London as a whole. Figure 4-2 below indicates these worsening violent crime rates, showing that the East End and the three boroughs all have higher violent crime rates than London as a whole. The Metropolitan Police have highlighted the significant increase in knife and gun crime in London as a whole, which has risen by 24% and 42% respectively in the period 2016 to 2017 (The Guardian, 2017b). Whilst some of these crimes have been committed by gang affiliates, this is thought to be the case for only a quarter of knife crimes. The Met have indicated that they think the rise may be due to young people believing they need to carry a blade for self-protection (ibid.). Acid attacks are also becoming an increasing concern in London, and incidents have almost doubled since 2012, with 208 attacks occurring in London in (BBC News, 2017). Almost a third of last year s acid attacks occurred in Newham (ibid.). Figure 4-2 Change in violent crime offences per 1,000 people, 2013 and Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham East End London England and Wales Source: Elaborated from Grant Thornton Place Analytics data derived from the Home Office, 2013 and 2016 In addition to the rise in violent crime, also of concern is the rise in hate crime, and particularly racist hate crime, across all target boroughs. 6 This is a trend reported across the country, and throughout London (The Independent, 2017a). The rise in hate crime is shown below in Figure 4-3 for Newham, Figure 4- for Hackney and Figure 4-5 for Tower Hamlets. 6 There is sometimes cross-over between violent crime and hate crime for example, some recent acid attacks have been classed as hate crimes (The Independent, 2017b). 21

23 Figure 4-3 Newham rise in hate crime offences Source: Mayor of London Hate Crime Dashboard, 2017 Figure 4-4 Hackney rise in hate crime offences Source: Mayor of London Hate Crime Dashboard, 2017 Figure 4-5 Tower Hamlets rise in hate crime offences Source: Mayor of London Hate Crime Dashboard,

24 To summarise, there has been a slight overall decrease in crime across the three boroughs. Nevertheless, there has been an increase in violent crime and in hate crime, and in particular racist hate crime. Data note and references Data on total offences and violent offences is drawn from Grant Thornton Place Analytics, derived from the Home Office, and is for the year Data on hate crime comes from the Mayor of London Hate Crime Dashboard. It has been gathered from 2007 to BBC News, Acid attacks: what has led to their rise and how can they be stopped? Available at: [Accessed 15 July 2017]. Mayor of London, Hate Crime Dashboard. Available at: [Accessed 8 June 2017]. The Guardian, 2017b. Met warns of steep rise in London gun and knife crime, 12 April Available at: [Accessed 8 June 2017]. The Independent, 2017a. Huge rise in hate crime across London, new figures reveal, 7 March Available at: [Accessed 8 June 2017]. The Independent, 2017b. London acid attacks: residents voice shock and fear at gruesome attacks on their doorstep. Available at: [Accessed 15 July 2017]. 23

25 5. Healthy Living This Issue Area considers a range of health indicators. It addresses life expectancy, cardiovascular and cancer mortality rates, adult and child obesity, infant mortality, and mental health. The picture is mixed for the East End, but there are various indicators with respect to which performance is a lot worse than the national average. Grade Score: E A grade score of E places the East End in the lowest 20% of sub-regions nationally, based on the core indicator of under 75 cardiovascular mortality rate. 7 Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham E E E Beginning with life expectancy at birth, which is an important indicator of overall population health and potential deprivation, there are some inequalities that must be highlighted here. For women in Hackney and Newham, life expectancy at birth is not significantly different from that of the England average for women. However, in all three target boroughs, life expectancy at birth for men is significantly lower than the England average. The England average is 79.5 years. In Hackney and Newham, it is 78.5 years. In Tower Hamlets, it is 78.1 years. Tower Hamlets also has a significantly lower average life expectancy at birth for women. The England average for women is 83.2 years, whereas in Tower Hamlets it is 82.5 years. There are also significant inequalities within the boroughs with respect to life expectancy. In Hackney, life expectancy between those living in the most and least deprived areas is not significantly different. The picture is different, however, in Newham and Tower Hamlets. In Newham, there is a gap of 5 years in life expectancy between men in the most and least deprived areas. This widens to 6 years for women. In Tower Hamlets, the life expectancy gap between men in the most and least deprived areas is 8.2 years. The life expectancy gap for women is 4.6 years. It should be noted, however, that, broadly speaking, this is something of an improvement on the data reported in the 2014 Vital Signs report. Specifically, with respect to Tower Hamlets, the life expectancy gap for men was 12 years. Turning to address one of the leading causes of early death, which is also the core indicator for this Issue Area, we find that the under 75 cardiovascular mortality rate is significantly higher than the England average in all three boroughs. The England average is 64.9 deaths per 100,000 people. In Tower Hamlets, this figure is In Newham, it is 88.5, and in Hackney it is As 7 The previous 2014 East End Vital Issues used a composite measure to calculate the Grade Score (it included the IMD health score, life expectancy, and obesity), and so this Grade Score is not directly comparable with that in the previous report. 24

26 indicated in Figure 5-1 below, the under 75 mortality rate from cancer is also higher than the national average in Tower Hamlets and Hackney, although not in Newham. In terms of infant mortality, the infant mortality rates for two of the three boroughs are similar to the England average, which is 4 deaths per 1,000 live births (this remains higher than for other Western European countries). In Newham, the infant mortality rate is 3.6 deaths per 1,000 live births, and in Tower Hamlets it is 4.3. In Hackney, however, the infant mortality rate is 5.6 deaths per 1,000 live births. Figure 5-1 Under 75 cardiovascular and cancer mortality rates per 100,000 of the population England average Tower Hamlets Newham Hackney Under 75 cardiovascular mortality rate Under 75 cancer mortality rate Source: Elaborated from NHS Data Catalogue, 2013 (cardiovascular), and Public Health England, 2016 (cancer) Figure 5-2 Percentage of obese children (Year 6) England average Tower Hamlets Newham Hackney Source: Elaborated from Public Health England,

27 Moving to a different set of indicators, in terms of the adult population classed as overweight or obese, all boroughs fare significantly better than the average population. Taken as a national average, 64.4% of the English population is overweight or obese. In Hackney, however, this figure is 50.4%; in Tower Hamlets, it is 52.7%; and in Newham it is 60.3%. Unfortunately, however, the percentages of obese children in all boroughs is significantly worse than the national average, as indicated in Figure 5-2 above, and this has in fact worsened very slightly since the 2014 East End Vital Issues report, for which data was used data is used in this report. According to the World Health Organisation (2017), childhood obesity is caused by a combination of unhealthy eating and low levels of physical activity. It increases the likelihood of developing noncommunicable diseases such as diabetes and cardiovascular diseases at a younger age. Childhood obesity and deprivation are strongly related (for information on children living in income deprived households in the East End, see the section on Fairness). There is also strong evidence that, on average, there are more fast food takeaway shops in deprived areas than in affluent areas. The consumption of fast food has been identified as an important factor contributing to rising levels of obesity (Public Health England, 2017b). Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Newham all have over 100 fast food outlets per 100,000 of the population, placing them in the worst 20% of local authorities in the country on this measure. There are fast food outlets per 100,000 people in Tower Hamlets, in Newham, and in Hackney (Public Health England, 2016). Finally, in terms of mental health, the results for the three boroughs are mixed. With respect to the prevalence of depression and anxiety, as measured by GP patient surveys in the period , 14.4% of the population of the NHS City and Hackney Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) report experiencing depression and/or anxiety. This figure is 14.3% for the NHS Tower Hamlets CCG, but drops to 11% for the NHS Newham CCG. The England average is 12.7%. The highest in the country is 19.1% in the NHS Liverpool CCG. This means that NHS City and Hackney CCG and NHS Tower Hamlets CCG are considered to have a prevalence of depression and anxiety significantly higher than the England average, but NHS Newham CCG is considered to have a prevalence significantly lower than the England average. In terms of severe mental health problems, one way of measuring this is to look at the number of people per 100,000 who are subject to the mental health act (this includes people who are detained, subject to Community Therapy Orders, or subject to short term holding orders). For the second quarter of 2016/2017, the England average was 38.4 people per 100,000. In the NHS City and Hackney CCG, per 100,000 of the population, people were subject to the mental health act this is the highest figure in the country. In the NHS Tower Hamlets CCG, 56.5 people per 100,000 were subject to the mental health act. This figure lowered to 48.2 in Newham, but for all three boroughs the figure is still considered to be significantly higher than the England average. To summarise, there are various areas to highlight with regards to healthy living in the East End. There are inequalities in life expectancy in some areas, and rates of early death from cardiovascular disease are high. Whilst the adult population fare slightly better than the English average in terms of being overweight or obese, the obesity statistics for children are high. In terms of mental health, results are mixed, with higher than average prevalence of depression and anxiety in Hackney and Tower Hamlets, but lower prevalence in Newham. In terms of severe mental health problems, all three boroughs, but especially Hackney, have a higher prevalence than average. 26

28 Data note and references All data is taken from the NHS Data Catalogue and Public Health England Health Profiles. The under 75 cardiovascular disease mortality rate data is from Life expectancy, cancer mortality rates, adult excess weight, and infant mortality rates data was gathered from Child obesity data was gathered from Prevalence of depression and anxiety data was gathered from Statistics on the number of people subject to the mental health act come from the second quarter of 2016/2017. NHS Data Catalogue, Under 75 Cardiovascular Disease Mortality Rate. Available at: [Accessed 16 July 2017]. Public Health England, Obesity Data and Tools. Available at: [Accessed 16 July 2017]. Public Health England, 2017a. Public Health Profiles. Available at: [Accessed 8 June 2017]. Public Health England, 2017b. Health matters: obesity and the food environment. Available at: [Accessed 16 July 2017]. World Health Organisation, Childhood overweight and obesity. Available at: [Accessed 16 July 2017]. Health Service Journal, Mapped: CCGs and STPs with the best and worst GPs [Accessed 20 July 2017]. 27

29 6. Local Economy The local economy of the East End is examined in this section. It is measured in terms of Gross Value Added and labour productivity. Weekly earnings are also discussed. The East End economy is extremely strong, and it is one of the most productive areas in the UK. Nonetheless, this economic success does not necessarily directly benefit all East End residents equally, as will be discussed in more depth in the next section on Work. Grade Score: A Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham A A A A grade score of A places the East End in the highest 20% of sub-regions nationally, based on the core indicator of percentage of national Gross Value Added (GVA), which is a measure of productivity. 8 There is consistency in terms of the performance of the local economy since the previous 2014 Vital Issues report. All three of the boroughs, but especially Tower Hamlets, hold a very high share of national Gross Value Added (GVA), which is a measure of the value of goods and services produced in an area. The percentage share of national GVA in Tower Hamlets is 2.05%, in Hackney it is 0.49%, and in Newham it is 0.39%. This ranks Tower Hamlets in 3 rd place nationally in terms of its share of GVA, followed by Hackney with a ranking of 31 and Newham with 58. The average share of GVA across London is 0.7%. Another way of measuring the strength of the local economy is by looking at labour productivity. To do this, GVA per hour worked in workplaces in the area is calculated. All sub-regions of London have labour productivity levels above the UK average. As illustrated in Figure 6-1, the highest level of labour productivity in London is in Tower Hamlets 85% above the UK average. This is the highest level of labour productivity of any sub-region in the UK. In Newham and Hackney (which are aggregated for this measure), labour productivity is also very high at 27% above the UK average. As indicated in the 2014 East End Vital Issues report, however, it is very important to note that there may be contradictions between the strength of the local economy and the employment situation of local people. This is illustrated if we look at the weekly earnings of those who work in each of the boroughs compared with the earnings of those who live in the boroughs. In all cases, average wages are higher for those who work in the boroughs compared to those who live there. In 8 The previous 2014 East End Vital Issues used a composite measure to calculate the Grade Score (it was a combination of the productivity score of the area with its percentage share of GVA), and so this Grade Score is not directly comparable with that in the previous report. 28

30 the case of Hackney, this is not particularly marked, and the difference is also not so great in Newham. Indeed, both for those who work and those who live in these two boroughs, average weekly earnings are below the London average this is particularly noticeable in Newham. Tower Hamlets, however, is a very different case. In Tower Hamlets, the average weekly earnings for those who work in the borough are , compared with average weekly earnings of for those who live there. Figure 6-1 Labour productivity by sub-region (%) Tower Hamlets Camden and City of London Haringey and Islington Wandsworth Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham Hackney and Newham Harrow and Hillingdon Merton, Kingston upon Thames and Sutton Enfield Barnet Ealing Lewisham and Southwark UK=100 Source: Office for National Statistics, 2016 Figure 6-2 Gross average weekly earnings by place of residence and place of work Earnings by place of work Earnings by place of residence Hackney Newham Tower Hamlets London Great Britain Source: Official Labour Market Statistics,

31 To conclude, the local economy is very strong in all three of the target boroughs, but especially in Tower Hamlets. As has been indicated, however, there may be discrepancies between the strength of the local economy and the employment situation of local people. This will be illustrated further in the next section on Work, where, amongst other things, the type of employment by sector between those who work and those who reside in the borough is compared. Data notes and references Data is from three key sources. That pertaining to share of national GVA by borough is provided by Grant Thornton Place Analytics, and is from Information on labour productivity comes from the Office for National Statistics, and is from The data on earnings by place of work and place of residence is taken from the Official Labour Market Statistics, and is from the 2016 Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings. Official labour market statistics, Local Authority Profiles. Available at: [Accessed 10 July 2017]. Office for National Statistics, Sub-regional productivity: March Available at: egionalproductivity/march2016 [Accessed 10 July 2017]. 30

32 7. Work This section explores employment and unemployment in the East End. It addresses wage growth and employment by occupation, and also highlights youth unemployment. Overall, the findings are mixed, with significant variance between boroughs. Grade Score: E A grade score of E places the East End in the lowest 20% of sub-regions nationally, based on the core indicator of unemployment rate. 9 Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham E E D In the UK as a whole, the unemployment rate has fallen significantly in the past few years, reaching just 4.7% in January 2017, the lowest it has been since 1975 (The Guardian, 2017c). This is reflected in the East End, where the total unemployment rate has fallen in all of the three boroughs. This is illustrated in Figure 7-1 below. Nevertheless, as also indicated in the graph, and reflected in the grade scores, the unemployment rate remains high in all of the boroughs, but especially in Tower Hamlets, which has the highest unemployment rate of all local authorities nationally. Whilst the fall in employment overall could still be seen as a positive change, this fall has been coupled with slow wage growth, which reflects a similarly slow increase across London and the country as a whole. From 2008 to 2016, the average year-on-year wage increase for the three boroughs of Hackney, Tower Hamlets, and Newham was just 1.5%, as illustrated in Figure 7-2. At times, wage growth nationally, and in the three target boroughs, has been similar to or below the headline rate of inflation, therefore putting a squeeze on households. Following a decline in interest rates from 2012 to 2016, following the Brexit vote they have begun to rise again. In May 2017, for example, the UK inflation rate was at a near 4-year high of 2.9% (Trading Economics, 2017). Whilst 2017 wage data is not available yet, it is likely that, as with the rest of the country, wages have not experienced significant growth for those residing in the East End, and thus have effectively declined because of the rise in inflation. 9 The previous 2014 East End Vital Issues used a composite measure to calculate the Grade Score (it included the unemployment rate, the youth unemployment rate, and the employment rate), and so this Grade Score is not directly comparable with that in the previous report. 31

33 Figure 7-1 Comparison of unemployment rate 2013 and National average London East End Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham Source: Elaborated from ONS Annual Population Survey, 2013 and 2017 Figure 7-2 Wage growth over time (average gross weekly earnings by place of residence) London Hackney Tower Hamlets Newham Source: Elaborated from Official Labour Market Statistics, 2017 Data on average wages is useful for showing us the difference in wages between those who live in the boroughs and those who work in them (as illustrated in the previous section on Local Economy). It is also useful for showing growth or decline in wages overall. Average wage data can only paint a broad picture, however, because when an average is taken, the very high wages of some mask the very low wages of others. Therefore, to get a better sense of inequalities, one helpful measure is to examine types of occupation in the three boroughs. As shown in Figure 7-3, the results are very mixed. In Hackney, the number of people in Major Group 8-9 (processing plant and elementary jobs) is low. However, the number of people in processing 32

34 plant, machine operative, and elementary jobs is higher than the London average in Tower Hamlets, and much higher than the London average in Newham. The London average is 13.9% of the employed population, but in Newham this figure reaches 23.9%, which is the third highest percentage of people in this type of employment for any local authority in London. Newham also has a much lower than average number of people employed in Major Group 1-3 (management and professional). In Tower Hamlets, there are more people than average employed in Major Group 1-3, in addition to more than average employed in Major Group 8-9, pointing to something of a polarisation of employment in this borough, which corroborates findings on inequalities set out in Fairness. Figure 7-3 Occupation type (% employed population) Soc 2010 Major Group 1-3 Soc 2010 Major Group 4-5 Soc 2010 Major Group 6-7 Soc 2010 Major Group 8-9 Hackney Newham Tower Hamlets London Source: Elaborated from ONS Annual Population Survey, 2017 Explanation of Major Groups Soc 2010 Major Group 1-3: Managers, professionals, and associate professionals Soc 2010 Major Group 4-5: Administrative & secretarial, and skilled trades Soc 2010 Major Group 6-7: Caring, leisure and other service, and sales and customer service Soc 2010 Major Group 8-9: Process plant & machine operatives, and elementary occupations Findings with respect to the construction industry specifically which is an area of interest given the construction boom in the East End show mixed results. In the UK as a whole, 7.1% of the population work in construction. In London as a whole, this figure is 6.6%. For Newham, it is significantly higher, with 8.9% of the population working in construction. It is significantly lower in Hackney and Tower Hamlets, however, at 3.7% and 2.5% respectively, where it could possibly be expected to be higher given the significant amount of construction occurring in these boroughs at present. In terms of 33

35 indicators of inequality other than type of employment, unemployment continues to disproportionately affect black and minority groups, as indicated in Figure 7-4 below. In Tower Hamlets, 19.8% of ethnic minority UK nationals are unemployed, compared with a UK average of 7.8% and a London average of 8.3%. There are also a high number of ethnic minority UK nationals in Hackney who are unemployed (11.7%), and there is significant unemployment of white non-uk nationals in Hackney as well (7.1% compared with a UK average of 4.2%). Figure 7-4 Unemployment by ethnicity (%) Aged 16+ white UK national Aged 16+ white not UK national Aged 16+ ethnic minority UK national Aged 16+ ethnic minority not UK national Hackney Newham Tower Hamlets UK London Source: Elaborated from ONS Annual Population Survey, 2017 The final key measure to report on in this section is youth unemployment. Youth unemployment, as with unemployment generally, has fallen across the country and throughout London. The same is true in the East End. Nevertheless, as shown in Figure 7-5 those aged remain the most affected by unemployment in the East End, and youth unemployment remains higher than the UK rate in all boroughs. It is higher than the London rate in Hackney and Tower Hamlets, although it is lower than the London rate in Newham. The UK youth unemployment rate for the age group for the second quarter of 2017 was 12.9%, and for London it was 16.3%. In Tower Hamlets, the youth unemployment rate is 24.6%, and in Hackney it is 19.4%. Young women in Tower Hamlets are particularly affected, as indicated in Figure 7-6 below. 34

36 Figure 7-5 Unemployment rate by age group (%) Hackney Newham Tower Hamlets UK London ! Source: Elaborated from ONS Annual Population Survey, 2017! = missing data Figure 7-6 Youth unemployment rate by gender (%) Males - aged Females - aged Total aged Hackney Newham Tower Hamlets UK London Source: Elaborated from ONS Annual Population Survey,

37 Summing up, findings on work are mixed for the East End. Unemployment rates have fallen, as they have in the rest of the country, however wage growth has also been slow and sometimes lower than inflation, meaning some families will have felt a squeeze on living costs. Moreover, the decline in the unemployment rate has only been very slight for Tower Hamlets. Regarding occupation trends, in Hackney, they show a tendency towards managerial and professional employment, with lower than average percentages of the population employed in other types of work. In Tower Hamlets, there is something of a polarisation between employment in factory and elementary work and managerial and professional employment. Newham, by contrast, has very high rates of people employed in factory and elementary jobs, and relatively few in the highest level occupations. With respect to ethnicity, black and minority ethnic groups continue to be disproportionately affected by unemployment. Finally, youth unemployment remains fairly high across the East End, but particularly in Tower Hamlets. Data note and references All data is drawn from the Official Labour Market Statistics, which is based on the ONS Annual Population Surveys, and has been gathered at different points in the period 2016 to Official labour market statistics, Local Authority Profiles. Available at: [Accessed 9 June 2017]. Official labour market statistics, Annual Population Survey. Available at: [Accessed 16 July 2017]. The Guardian, 2017c. UK unemployment falls to joint lowest rate since 1975 but wages stall, 15 March Available at: [Accessed 9 June 2017]. Trading Economics, United Kingdom Inflation Rate. Available at: [Accessed 9 June 2017] 36

38 8. Housing and homelessness Here we address housing and homelessness in the East End. This involves consideration of housing affordability, household tenure rate, private rent cost, and measures of homelessness. Housing continues to become increasingly unaffordable in the East End, and levels of owner occupancy are very low. The cost of private rent is high. Homelessness, and the number of people in temporary accommodation, is also high in the East End. Grade Score: E A grade score of E places the East End in the lowest 20% of sub-regions nationally, based on the core indicator of affordability. 10 Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham E E E Housing and homelessness continues to be an issue of serious concern in the East End. The three boroughs are all in the least affordable 10% of the country. Housing affordability is calculated by area by dividing average house price by average annual earnings. Hackney is the 5 th least affordable local authority in the whole UK, Tower Hamlets ranks 29 th, and Newham stands at 32 nd. Put another way, this means that the average house price in Hackney is times average earnings in the borough, in Tower Hamlets it is times average earnings, and in Newham it is times average earnings. From , housing has become 29.99% less affordable in Hackney, 22.85% less affordable in Tower Hamlets, and 13.1% less affordable in Newham. The average price for a one bed flat or maisonette in Hackney was 519,772 in April In Tower Hamlets, it was 458,929, and in Newham it was 350,122. The England average price was 222,356 (Land Registry, 2017). Given these high house prices, as one would expect, in terms of tenure across all three boroughs rates of owner occupancy continue to be far below the England and London averages, as illustrated in Figure 8-1. As an average across the three boroughs, only 29% of houses are owner occupied, compared with a London average of 52% and a UK average of 65%. Also, worth highlighting is that social rental is significantly above the England and London averages, particularly in Hackney and Tower Hamlets. 10 The previous 2014 East End Vital Issues used a composite measure to calculate the Grade Score (it included affordability, owner occupancy, and homelessness), and so this Grade Score is not directly comparable with that in the previous report. 37

39 In conjunction with low rates of owner occupancy and poor affordability, private rent is extremely high, as indicated in Figure 8-2. Private rent is above the London average in Hackney and Tower Hamlets, at and per month respectively. It is somewhat lower in Newham ( 1, per month), but still well above the England average of per month. Homelessness and housing in temporary accommodation also continues to be a significant issue in the East End, and in London more broadly. In London, 5.1 households were accepted as homeless for every 1,000 households in the period (London s Poverty Profile, 2015). The figure for the rest of England is 1.9. Although not as high as at its 2003/2004 peak, homelessness has increased in London between 2009 and Hackney has the third highest homelessness acceptance rate in all of London, and Newham the fourth, at 8.2 and 7.9 households per 1,000. Tower Hamlets is ranked 16 th of all boroughs, with an acceptance rate of 5.1 (ibid.). In terms of temporary accommodation, Newham has the most people in temporary accommodation of all London boroughs, with a total of 3,302 people housed in temporary accommodation in the period Of these, 1,267 were housed outside the borough. Hackney and Tower Hamlets rank 10 th and 11 th respectively (ibid.). Thus it is clear that housing and homelessness is a key issue in the East End. Housing is increasingly unaffordable, and the change in affordability in a ten-year period has been dramatic. Private rent is also very high, and above the London average in the case of Hackney and Tower Hamlets. Rates of homelessness and housing in temporary accommodation are also high. Figure 8-1 Type of tenure (%) UK London Hackney Tower Hamlets Newham O W N E D ( O U T R I G H T O R W I T H M O R T G A G E ) R E N T ( S O C I A L ) R E N T ( P R I V A T E ) Source: Elaborated from Annual Population Survey, Data in the previous 2014 East End Vital Issues report came from the 2011 census as opposed to the Annual Population Survey. They are thus only broadly comparable as the APS is indicative only. 38

40 K E N S I N G T O N A N D C H E L S E A W E S T M I N S T E R C A M D E N C I T Y O F L O N D O N R I C H M O N D U P O N T H A M E S I S L I N G T O N W A N D S W O R T H H A M M E R S M I T H A N D F U L H A M H A C K N E Y T O W E R H A M L E T S L A M B E T H B A R N E T H O U N S L O W M E R T O N S O U T H W A R K B R E N T H A R I N G E Y E A L I N G K I N G S T O N U P O N T H A M E S H A R R O W G R E E N W I C H N E W H A M E N F I E L D L E W I S H A M B R O M L E Y W A L T H A M F O R E S T R E D B R I D G E H I L L I N G D O N S U T T O N C R O Y D O N B A R K I N G A N D D A G E N H A M B E X L E Y H A V E R I N G L O N D O N A V E R A G E E N G L A N D , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Figure 8-2 Average private rent by borough (monthly) Source: Elaborated from Valuation Office Agency, 2016 Data note and references Data is drawn from five key sources. That on affordability comes from the Office of National Statistics, and is compiled from the House Price Statistics for Small Areas and Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings. This data is from Information on house prices is drawn from the Land Registry House Price Index, and is for April Data on tenure by borough is also from the Office of National Statistics, and is drawn from the Annual Population Survey, Data on private rent is taken from the Valuation Office Agency, and is from Finally, that on homelessness and temporary accommodation is taken from London s Poverty Profile, and is from Land Registry, House Price Index. Available at: [Accessed 17 July 2017]. 39

41 London s Poverty Profile, Poverty Indicators: Homelessness. Available at: [Accessed 12 June 2017]. Office for National Statistics, Housing tenure of households, borough. Available at: [Accessed 12 June 2017]. Office for National Statistics, Statistical bulletin: Housing affordability in England and Wales: 1997 to Available at: housing/bulletins/housingaffordabilityinenglandandwales/1997to2016#links-to-related-ons-statistics [Accessed 12 June 2017]. Valuation Office Agency, Average private rents, borough. Available at: [Accessed 12 June 2017]. Department for Communities and Local Government, [Accessed 25 June 2017]. 40

42 9. Education and Learning Education and learning here refers particularly to skills acquisition and secondary school and higher qualifications. GCSE attainment, the number of 16 to 18 year-olds not in employment, training, or education, and the overall qualification levels of the adult population are addressed. The findings are mixed, with a decline in GCSE attainment, but positive improvements elsewhere. Grade Score: B A grade score of B places the East End in the top 40% of sub-regions nationally, based on the core indicator of achievement of 5 or more GCSEs at A*-C, including Maths and English. 12 Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham C A C The East End does relatively well in relation to GCSE achievement, which is a core indicator of educational attainment. The national average for the proportion of students who achieve 5 or more A*-C grades including maths and English in 2015/2016 was 57% of the student population in statefunded schools. In Hackney, this was far exceeded, with an average of 63.5%. Tower Hamlets and Newham came in slightly below the national average for GCSE achievement, with 56.6% and 56.1% of the student population achieving 5 or more A*-C grades including Maths and English, respectively. This represents a slight decline for Tower Hamlets and Newham compared to the GCSE figures reported in the previous 2014 East End Vital Issues report, where both were above average for England. 13 Nevertheless, it is important to note that GCSEs results declined across the country in the period (The Independent, 2016) and generally results in the East End have been on an upwards curve (see, for example, Tower Hamlets Council, 2016). Another important measure of young people s education is the number of people aged who are not in education, employment or training (NEETs). There is good news on this front, with decreases in the number of year olds in the NEETs category in all three boroughs. Hackney has seen the biggest decrease, from 7% of the year-old population categorised as NEET in 2012 down to 2.5% in In Newham, the decrease has been from 5.3% in 2012 to 3.7% in The proportion dropped from 4.9% in 2012 to 3.4% in 2015 in Tower Hamlets. This is coherent with a drop throughout England, from 5% in 2012 to 4.2% in 2015, and in London from 4.7% in 2012 to 3.1% in The NEETs borough averages are all now below the England average. This is 13 Figures in the previous 2014 East End Vital Issues report were for 5+ A*-C GCSEs not necessarily including Maths and English, however, there has been a decline in both measures. 5 or more A*-C grades including Maths and English is the new indicator used by Vital Signs. 41

43 coherent with the slight decline in youth unemployment, but may also be indicative of a greater number of people in the year-old age bracket remaining in education or undertaking some form of training. 14 Figure 9-1 Qualifications of population (%)* England av England av London av London av Tower Hamlets Tower Hamlets Newham Newham Hackney Hackney NVQ4+ NVQ3 NVQ2 NVQ1 Other qualifications No qualifications Source: Elaborated from Annual Population Survey 2013 and 2016 *Note: totals do not add up to 100 as data on those in apprenticeships is missing, and totals have been rounded to the nearest decimal place. Explanation of NVQ levels NQV4+: Degree level or above NQV3: 2+ A-levels or equivalent NQV2: 5+ GCSEs or equivalent NQV1: 1-4 GCSEs or equivalent Other qualifications: Vocational/work-related qualifications, Foreign qualifications No qualifications: No academic or professional qualifications 14 It is important to note that not all unemployed people aged are NEET they may be in education or training but also actively looking for work (the definition of unemployed). Similarly, not all people who are NEET are unemployed they may be economically inactive, meaning they are not actively seeking work. 42

44 In terms of the qualification level of the overall adult population in the three target boroughs, some interesting findings also emerge when comparing 2013 and 2016 data, as indicated in Figure 9-1. As has occurred in England and London overall, the proportion of people in the target boroughs with qualifications at degree level or above has increased. The proportion of people with qualifications at this level is well above the England average in all cases, and close to the London average. Another positive finding is that the number of people with no qualifications in each borough has decreased, in the case of Hackney and Newham by around 5 to 6 percentage points, which is quite a significant change. All three boroughs remain above the London and England averages on this measure, but not as dramatically so as in It is still worth highlighting, however, that amongst those with no qualifications, in the past there has been a high proportion of the population with very low literacy and numeracy skills. Data from the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills 2011 Skills for Life Survey indicated that Hackney, Newham and Tower Hamlets were among the 16 English local authorities with the greatest proportion of adults estimated to have literacy levels between below entry level 1 and entry level 3 (attainment ages 5-11). Adults at these skill levels may not be able to write short messages to family, describe a child s symptoms to a doctor or understand food packaging labels. The boroughs also had the greatest proportions of adults estimated at numeracy entry level 1 and below (attainment ages 5-7). Adults below Entry Level 1 may not be able to select floor numbers in lifts. Thus, overall, we have mixed findings regarding education. GCSE attainment has declined, but there are positive findings regarding the proportion of young people not in employment, education, or training, which was previously a concern in the East End. The level of qualifications of the general adult population has also increased, but literacy and numeracy attainment may remain low amongst certain sectors of the population. Data note and references Data is from two key sources. That pertaining to GCSEs is the Department of Education. Results are for the academic year. Data on year-old NEETs is also published by the Department of Education. Annual calculations are used in this report, and are taken from 2012 and 2015, which is the most recent data available. The date on qualifications of the adult population is from the Office for National Statistics, and is derived from the Annual Population Survey, 2016 and Department for Business Innovation and Skills, Skills for Life Survey. Available at: [Accessed 16 July 2017]. Office for National Statistics, Qualifications of Working Age Population (NVQ), borough. Available at: [Accessed 16 June 2017]. Department for Education, Young people not in employment, education or training, borough. Available at: [Accessed 16 June 2017]. Office for National Statistics, GCSE and equivalent results: 2015 to 2016 (provisional). Available at: [Accessed 16 June 2017]. 43

45 10. Strong Communities This theme examines the strength of communities in the East End. We focus again on the crime score, but also on the sense of individual wellbeing within the community, and also use indicators such as the strength of voluntary participation and voter turnout at local elections. The East End fares poorly with respect to the core indicator of the crime score. However, the other findings are more mixed and vary across boroughs. Grade Score: E Grade score by borough Tower Hamlets Hackney Newham E E E A grade score of E places the East End in the lowest 20% of sub-regions nationally, based on the core indicator of total offences per 1,000 people. 15 This is a difficult topic to assess, and there is overlap with other Issue Areas, particularly Safety and Fairness. The core indicator selected by Vital Signs for this Issue Area is again the crime score number of offences per 1,000 people. Therefore, the East End does poorly with respect to Strong Communities. As indicated in the Safety Issue Area, hate crime is also high in the East End, another indicator of lack of cohesion and respect for diversity. Another measure that can be used to explore the general wellbeing of those in the community are the wellbeing scores from the Annual Population Survey. These measure the degree to which people feel things in their life are worthwhile, how satisfied they are with life, their levels of happiness, and their levels of anxiety. The results for the three boroughs appear in Figure 10-1 below, with the average score for each measure and the rank out of the 351 local authorities for which there is data. The England and London averages are also presented, and it is important to note that the London averages are consistently worse than those for England. Newham scores better than the London average on all measures except life satisfaction. Tower Hamlets scores better than the London average for all measures except for the degree to which people think things in their life are worthwhile. However, Hackney scores worse than the London average on all wellbeing measures, and is near the bottom of the ranking for the life satisfaction, happiness, and anxiety. The findings are not so positive with respect to one measure of community arts volunteering. Data from the national Taking Part Survey indicates very wide variance in the East End, as shown in Figure In response to the question During the last 12 months, have you done any voluntary work?, 15 The previous 2014 East End Vital Issues used a composite measure to calculate the Grade Score (it was a combination of different wellbeing measurements from the Annual Population Survey), and so this Grade Score is not directly comparable with that in the previous report. 44

46 Richmond upon Thames Kingston upon Thames Harrow Wandsworth Barnet Ealing Lambeth Islington Kensington and Chelsea Hammersmith and Fulham Haringey Hackney Bromley Lewisham Croydon Hounslow Southwark Redbridge Westminster Hillingdon Sutton Enfield Bexley Merton Camden Tower Hamlets Barking and Dagenham Waltham Forest Greenwich Brent Havering Newham London England 26% of people across London responded positively. In Hackney, 30% of people had done voluntary work. In Tower Hamlets, however, this figure dropped to 21%. Newham was the lowest of all London boroughs in terms of voluntary work participation only 7% of people had done voluntary work in the past 12 months. Figure 10-1 Wellbeing scores and ranks by borough Source: Elaborated from Annual Population Survey, Figure 10-2 Population who have carried out voluntary work in past 12 months (%) Source: Taking Part Survey,