Devolution is creating a system of winners and losers among low-income families, new research warns
Published: 5 November 2026
Place really matters when determining what support families in poverty receive, new research led by the Safety Net project finds.
Place really matters when determining what support families in poverty receive, new research led by the UofG finds.
As the UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham promises to rewire the state, localising decision-making powers and fiscal control, a Nuffield Foundation funded briefing calls for more attention to be paid to the existing devolved settlement, and its uneven impact on low-income families.
Currently, all children in poverty with recourse to public funds in England receive Free School Meals - but the figures for the other UK nations are starkly different, with almost one-in-four (24%) of children in poverty in Northern Ireland not having eligibility for Free School Meals, and just one-in-six in Scotland and Wales (17% in Scotland and 18% in Wales).
Localisation has also led to significant variation in the support provided by different local authorities. For instance, a family living in a Band D property and receiving the maximum level of Council Tax Reduction (CTR) in Doncaster would pay no Council Tax in 2025-26, but if they moved across the border to North Lincolnshire - which has a maximum CTR of 50 percent of Council Tax liability and caps support at Band B liability - they would have to pay nearly £1,400.
The analysis by Safety Nets - a research programme involving eight universities, the Resolution Foundation and Child Poverty Action Group - examines devolution through the lens of the continued cost of living crisis. It explores the different ways nations and regions of the UK use their devolved powers to reduce essential household costs and increase family incomes, while highlighting variations in support between different parts of the country.
This research is especially timely as Prime Minister Andy Burnham has made tackling the cost of living and greater devolution in England two of his top policy priorities. This was evident when Chancellor John Healey announced “the most radical act of devolution in a generation” during last week’s Autumn Budget speech.
Although devolution and localisation have created significant differences in social security and the public services available to families since 2012, the implications for living standards and child poverty remain poorly understood. With millions struggling with the cost-of-living crisis, a clearer understanding of how the distribution of powers across the UK shapes support for families is vital.
The report makes five key recommendations for the next phase of devolution:
Devolution should be designed with families, not simply for them, embedding meaningful co-production with people with lived experience.
Funding must follow responsibility, providing adequate, predictable and sustained resources.
Governments should distinguish between entitlement and discretion, protecting essential support while retaining flexibility where it adds value.
Evaluation should focus on outcomes and experience, including whether support is accessible, dignified and sufficient to meet families’ needs.
Local and devolved governments should have the support they need to go further, without undermining core entitlements.
Professor Ruth Patrick, Project Lead for Safety Nets at the University of Glasgow, said: “At the despatch box last week, Healey heralded the most radical devolution of power the UK has seen in a generation. While the vision is certainly radical, there is a danger that it is underpinned by a partial and incomplete understanding of the evidence base of the potential, limits and risks of devolution, especially in relation to mechanisms of support for families most affected by the cost of living crisis.
“Our latest research addresses the evidence gap by examining how where people live in the UK shapes the design, delivery and experience of social security. The UK Government must learn from both the strengths and fault lines of existing devolution. Burnham wants to rewire the state, but unless he tests the existing wiring, his project risks failure.”
Zahida Purves is a parent working with Changing Realities. She commented: “We are one nation but all treated differently. This research shows that support is neither fair, equal or sufficient. It is valuable and significant because we are seeing the barriers and limitations, key lessons to learn and implement, how some aspects are done well and where they are not. We see whether support is meaningful, whether it serves those communities, and who it excludes.
“We want a compassionate system that's rooted in adequacy, is an investment in people, and gives a secure foundation to build a positive future, something all our wellbeing depends on.”
Anvar Sarygulov, Research Grants and Programmes Manager at the Nuffield Foundation, said: “Across the UK, similar families increasingly face different levels of support from the social security system. This means a family’s access to essential help can depend on where they live, rather than on their needs. As more powers are devolved, central government needs to be alive to the very real risk of creating an inconsistent safety net for low-income households.”
First published: 5 November 2026