Investigation · Social policy · The 1997 regime

Broken Britain, 2007. We took the prescription. The patient got worse.

On Boxing Day 2007 the Guardian answered “is Britain broken?” with a shopping list: higher minimum wage, fatter tax credits, more benefits, more children’s centres, a £4bn cheque and “a major redistribution of the country’s wealth”. Britain bought the lot. Child poverty is where it was. Youth mental illness has doubled. A million young people do nothing. This is the receipt.

3 September 2026 GBTT Research 5 min read
A till receipt headed Broken Britain, order placed 26 December 2007, listing minimum wage, tax credits, welfare, Child Poverty Act and redistribution, totalling 45% of GDP, stamped in red: goods not received.
Nineteen years of the 2007 prescription, itemised.

The diagnosis, 2007

Yvonne Roberts’ year-end piece for the Guardian was sceptical of the “Broken Britain” gloom but conceded the numbers. UNICEF had Britain bottom of 21 rich countries for child wellbeing. Teenagers drank more, learned less and were more often mentally ill than their European peers. One child in ten was poor in 1979; one in three by 2007, and half of them lived with a wage earner.

Her fix: “improved benefits”, tax credits “generous enough”, “a minimum wage that’s realistic”, children’s centres, a £4bn cheque to lift 3.8m children out of poverty by 2010, and “a major redistribution of the country’s wealth”. Iain Duncan Smith’s alternative, family and personal responsibility, she called “crass”.

That is the statist prescription in one paragraph. Wages too low, so mandate them up. Benefits too thin, so thicken them. Families failing, so build state infrastructure around the family. Gap too wide, so redistribute.

The purchase

Every item on the list was delivered, by both parties, in the nineteen years that followed.

Table 1 — What 2007 asked for, and what Britain delivered
2007 asked forBritain delivered
A realistic minimum wage£5.52 an hour in October 2007. £12.71 from April 2026. More than doubled in cash terms.
Improved benefits, generous tax creditsTax credits reached £30bn a year. Working-age and children’s welfare is £145bn in 2025-26. Health-related benefits up from 1.1% to 1.8% of GDP.
£4bn and a targetChild Poverty Act 2010 wrote the targets into law. Repealed 2016, “missed by a country mile”. New strategy, December 2025.
RedistributionGini coefficient for disposable income down from 38.6% to 32.9%.
A state to pay for itSpending up from 40.2% of GDP to 45.0%. Tax at 35% of GDP, the highest since the 1960s, heading for 38%.
Sources below. Minimum wage comparison is cash terms.

Labour, Coalition, Conservative, Labour. Every one of them kept buying.

The result

Table 2 — The same scorecard, nineteen years on
Measure20072026
Children in poverty, after housing costs30.7%31% in 2023-24 on the same method. 27% on DWP’s new method.
Poor children with a working parent“Half”72%.
Young people with a probable mental disorderRising1 in 9 in 2017. 1 in 5 by 2023.
UNICEF child wellbeing rankLast of 2121st of 36. Teenage life satisfaction joint second from last.
16 to 24s not in education, work or trainingNot on the list957,000. 44% cite a health condition, up from 26% in 2015.
Relative child poverty, after housing costs, throughout. The 2024-25 DWP series break is flagged, not smoothed.

Inputs moved exactly as demanded. Outputs did not move, or moved backwards.

Why more state bought less

The wage floor rose and the cost of living outran it. Poverty is measured after housing costs. Britain mandated pay for nineteen years and built no houses for thirty. Rents, childcare and council tax ate the rise. That is how half became 72%.

The benefits bill went to sickness, not childhood. The 2007 ask was money for children. What grew was money for incapacity, fastest among the under-25s, who were those children. In 2007 the worry was that British teenagers were unhappy. In 2026 the state pays them to be.

“Austerity” was not a smaller state. It was the same state, repointed. Sure Start was on Roberts’ list and the Institute for Fiscal Studies says it worked: three GCSE grades for poor children, fewer hospital admissions, fewer special-needs plans. There were 3,290 centres and £1.8bn a year at the 2010 peak. Over 1,340 closed and the budget was cut by two thirds. Youth services, early intervention and council budgets went the same way. Yet total spending never fell below its 2007 share of GDP and now sits five points above it. The money did not leave. It moved: out of prevention and into cash transfers, incapacity benefits, pensions and the NHS. Britain did not try less state. It tried a state that pays for the damage instead of preventing it, and every party since 2010 signed off the reprioritisation. We set out the transfer line by line in The Austerity Lie.

The money did not leave. It moved: out of prevention and into paying for the damage.

Honesty: three true things at once

Some of the 2007 gloom was wrong. Teenage drinking fell from 71% to 35%. Smoking, drugs and teenage pregnancy fell hard. The vices went; anxiety and a sick note replaced them.

Inequality did fall. The Gini went from 38.6% to 32.9%. That is what damns the poverty figure: the gap closed and the bottom did not rise.

The 2024-25 poverty figure is on a new DWP method and is not directly comparable. On the old method, 2023-24 was level with 2006-07. Either way, nineteen years and several hundred billion pounds bought a flat line.

The point

Two diagnoses in 2007. The Guardian said the problem was money and the answer was the state. Duncan Smith said family, work and responsibility, and was called crass. Britain chose the first, and every government since kept choosing it. The cuts after 2010 changed what the state bought, never how much.

The child of 2007 is the 24-year-old of 2026: more likely to be mentally ill, more likely to be on a sickness benefit, more likely to be neither working nor studying, and no less likely to have grown up poor.

Not your parents’ fault. Not Gen Z’s fault. A policy regime, built from 1997, preserved after 2010, re-adopted in 2024, that treated a broken society as an underfunded one. The funding arrived. The invoice is 45% of everything the country makes.

Britain bought the whole 2007 shopping list. It is still waiting for the goods.

Sources & method

Method. Relative child poverty, after housing costs, throughout, as in the 2007 article. The DWP 2024-25 series break is stated in the text rather than smoothed over. The minimum wage comparison is cash terms.