Taking a look at the ‘Left Behind Communities’ report
Date published:
Rachel Anderson’s latest column for The Journal
How’s the January health kick going? I know, you can’t face looking at the discounted mince pies in the supermarket and the sight of another bean sprout leaves you looking wistfully at the calendar and kicking the scales under the bathroom cabinet.
It’s easy to make light of the post-Christmas health kick (or lack of it). But the impact of the health on happiness, wealth, education productivity and quality of life and the stark differences between communities was highlighted last week in a report by the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Left Behind Communities. The report highlights the disparities in health between effectively the poorest areas and the wealthiest. “Left Behind Communities” is a horrid phrase which was probably the product of a focus group somewhere in Westminster. It’s debateable what it means and whether the people living in them feel as miserable, patronised and left behind as the name suggests’ but it is current Government parlance, so we’ll go with it as it does throw a light on health as one of the factors holding back many communities.
The findings of the report suggests that Men in LBNs live 3.7 years less than their more affluent counterparts and for women it is 3 years less. When drilling down further the real impact of health on all those other aspects of life becomes apparent and why failing to tackle such inequalities is such a crime. It’s not just about death rates it is about healthy years, on average women can expect 57 against 65 nationally and men can expect 55 against 64 nationally. Why? Because serious diseases are 15% more likely which debilitate faster and people in those communities are mostly in low paid physical jobs which exacerbate their conditions.
Of course, there are lifestyle choices involved. However, poor health impacts on so much more than just the individuals themselves, it impacts on earnings, education, caring responsibilities, family life, pensions, quality of life and overall poverty. Breaking a cycle in good health is hard enough, poor health makes it almost impossible, and the cycle perpetuates.
If we want to level up our communities, reduce poverty and improve life chances then we must recognise it is about more than simple job creation or throwing money at the problem. We have to see the underlying problems and not dismiss them as a “social” issue to be solved in isolation and employers, the community and public authorities must think differently and see it as an advantage to everyone if we want to improve.