“The economic times are tough of course that makes things harder- but we are in this for the long haul - the complete elimination of child poverty by 2020. And so today I announce my intention to introduce ground-breaking legislation to enshrine in law Labour's pledge to end child poverty”. – Gordon Brown, conference speech.

Now that’s really decent of him. Now I don’t mean to be churlish but I have a few questions.

1. How is child poverty to be measured and who is going to do that measuring?

2. If Labour gets booted out of office before 2020 then is he absolved of that promise or will it still be legally binding if they are returned to power before 2020?

3. Can we take legal action against them if they fail?

4. Or is it just good conference rhetoric designed to shore up party support during the present economic crisis, which, in practice, means bugger all?

Answers on a post card please to Gordon Brown, Easy Street, Cloud Cuckoo Land, Erewhon.

Shall we wait and see what the legislation says?

Governments seem sometimes to be damned if they do and damned if they don't. I seem to recall a lot of adverse comment when the child poverty target was announced over the fact that it was not enshrined in legislation.

If this is going to be primary legislation it will of necessity bind any successive government until it is repealed. Can you see the appeal to voters: "We pledge to repeal the Child Poverty Act 2009 and replace it with a Code of Practice..."

It doesn't really matter what the legislation says and that is the point. You can abolish anything in law, its abolishing it in fact that counts and unless you have absolute control over economic forces and are not at the mercy of events then such promises might just appear foolish.

Further to Paul's points or rather implicit to Paul's points, is Brown's Govt/and the vast majority of the PLP are ideologically bound to the free market (laissez faire economics, mercantilism, marketisation call it what you like), which is predicated on individualism and self interest, rather than society and the common interest.

For Brown to truly tackle child poverty, even if he adopted a Keynsian approach which in its self would represent a seismic shift in current British politics, the sheer scale of reforms needed would take longer than 12 years, not just because of limited parliamentary time to get the legislation through, and as MacMillan put it in the 1980's we've sold off the family silver i.e. privatisation and PFI's, squandered North Sea Oil revenue etc etc.

But because of the current (and still to come medium and long term) legacies of 30 years worth of scorched earth socio economic policies and economic practices, that are already dwarfing Brown's 'child poverty policy' and before very long will ditch it in to the long grass.

Absolutely. The British economy has been in decline since the late 19th century. Since the end of World War 2 it took several years for the British economy to recover. Since the war the cyclical nature of the economy has seen each period last about 15-20 years, notwithstanding shorter periods of 1980’s “boom and bust”.

The period from the late 1950’s to about 1973/4 was known as the long boom. From then the economy went into a downward cycle of slowdown and contraction lasting until about 1991/2. From then the economy entered a period of growth and expansion and it is looking very much like it is entering a protracted period of slowdown and contraction again which might not see an upturn until 2024/5.

As in previous slowdowns there are countries that defy the trends, newly emerging economies (West Germany and Japan during the long boom, the Pacific rim economies during the 1970’s/80’s and China/ India, possibly, now) and these countries can sustain growing employment – for a while.

However, the established economies will experience rising unemployment and higher prices at least until fiscal policy is able to bring a certain level of stability to markets and this takes more international co-ordination now than it ever did.

Apart from the economic causes of poverty there are also the social factors; poor housing, low-income households, inflation, poor educational achievement, poor parenting (whether from low educational achievement or alcohol/substance abuse) or a combination of any or all of these things.

I will always give credit where it is due and there are many positive achievements of this government, which have made a difference to many families’ lives. However, If Gordon Brown (or anyone else for that matter) thinks that they are going to “completely eliminate” child poverty (whatever that might mean), a laudable aim to be sure, rather than to reduce it or to ameliorate its effects, while going into an economic downturn, then he is seriously deluding himself and he should not overreach himself by playing to the conference gallery.

The still unanswered questions for the British and American and World political, banking and business establishments/elites is regardless of how much money they pump into the banking systems to keep them afloat and create liquidity and encourage banks to start lending to one another.

Is what is actually now going to drive our economies, bearing in mind its been cheap credit or what is now known as debt?

Coupled with dwindling World Oil and Gas supplies (let alone soaring prices), and economies, social infrastructures and populations totally dependent on oil and gas, yet demonstrating the same denial 'heads in the sand approach' as they did to credit, because of the obsession with 'growth for the few' rather than 'sustainability for the masses'.

The party conferences in 2020 will have long forgotten any promises to "eliminate child poverty".