A few weeks ago, I chaired a debate in Westminster about the falling birth rate and its implications. It was organised by the Centre for Social Justice, which I’ve long been proudly involved with. Miriam Cates, a Tory MP, was on the panel as was Rosie Duffield, a Labour MP. But when I arrived, Duffield had pulled out: she had taken so much abuse and threats from those furious that she would attend this debate that she felt she could not continue. The debate, quite plainly, is one many people would rather never took place and I look at it in my Daily Telegraph column today.
While populists have embraced this argument, there is nothing populistic about it. These are issues about the future, shape and structure of our societies – and whether the declining birth rate threatens the future of the welfare state. My own view is that it does, and we’re living a lie by assuming that there will be a massive workforce around to generate tax to support the pensions and related NHS expenditure (most of which goes on pensioners) in the future.
South Korea has spent £160 billion on this issue since 2006; since then, its fertility rate has declined by 25 per cent
But I’m also not sure that anything can be done to change a trend which reflects changing priorities. I’d recommend Stephen Shaw’s YouTube documentary about this which concluded that natalist policies have so far failed everywhere. Millions are actively making a choice not to have kids and there is not much the state can do to cajole or bribe them to change their minds. China shows that the state can prevail upon citizens to reduce family size, but South Korea shows the limits of bribes. My feeling is that this trend is global, irreversible and we’d best start thinking about the consequences, because the promise of a pension – made to those starting work now – was made on a demographic premise that is turning out to be false. People just don’t want kids in a way that the architects of the welfare state imagined and immigration won’t make up the gap as the migrants soon conform to social norms.
While researching this topic, I came across many points that I didn’t have space to use in the article. For those interested, here they are:
6. The population replacement level is 2.1 kids per women. At 1.57, the UK's rate is higher than most. But still the UK effect is pronounced in that our population of school pupils is expected to enter terminal decline, falling 9 per cent over the next nine years. If class sizes stay the same, this will mean a corresponding drop in schools and teachers.
This topic is a fascinating collection of different concerns and cultures. There is so much that you can add. For example, when I chaired that debate, various women in the audience made a good point; they are under the statistical microscope but what about the lack of men ready to start a family? Too many man-boys playing video games and stretching out the carefree period of their life before the arrival of the pram in the hall. As one woman put to me afterwards, 'women need men who have got their shit together'. This is a complaint reflected in music (Beyoncé’s Bills and Single Ladies) but not yet captured by social science. The point is that it’s unfair to place all the blame on women if, for various reasons, society is churning out fewer eligible men.
The Ehrlich madness taught us the danger of reading too much into any extrapolated population trend, so this picture will certainly change. But as things stand, it raises important questions about the future of the welfare state – questions too important to be left to the populist fringes.
What’s the real cause of falling birth rates?
5
0
22.12.2023
A few weeks ago, I chaired a debate in Westminster about the falling birth rate and its implications. It was organised by the Centre for Social Justice, which I’ve long been proudly involved with. Miriam Cates, a Tory MP, was on the panel as was Rosie Duffield, a Labour MP. But when I arrived, Duffield had pulled out: she had taken so much abuse and threats from those furious that she would attend this debate that she felt she could not continue. The debate, quite plainly, is one many people would rather never took place and I look at it in my Daily Telegraph column today.
While populists have embraced this argument, there is nothing populistic about it. These are issues about the future, shape and structure of our societies – and whether the declining birth rate threatens the future of the welfare state. My own view is that it does, and we’re living a lie by assuming that there will be a massive........
© The Spectator
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Andrew Mitrovica
Mort Laitner
Nikkei Editorial
Rami G Khouri
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
