Penalising rural areas is unfair

They do so because it demonstrates a need to reach out to all members of society. The application of "fairness" also has other advantageous connotations – it is a concept that it is very difficult to measure.

Yet, as David Cameron and Ed Miliband try to demonstrate that their austerity agenda will be fairer than their opponent's, it is worth noting that this theme is used almost exclusively with regard to social policy in an urban setting.

It is rarely, if ever, applied to rural Britain – and those communities in Yorkshire's remote outposts, for example, where families and individuals are living on the poverty line and have been ignored by the state for too long.

Indeed, their family circumstances are very different to the rural idyll that is routinely used by politicians to characterise the countryside.

This is illustrated by today's Commission for Rural Communities report which concludes that a quarter of children living in rural England should, in fact, be classed as living in poverty – and how their prospects are being compounded by the remoteness or non-availability of key services.

In many cases, the decision to live in a remote village or hamlet is a lifestyle choice. That is accepted. But, for those families who have already lived in the countryside, it is just a way of life – they do not know any other means of eking out a living.

For their families, there is no choice of school – a right now enjoyed by urban families. There is only one school and it invariably involves travelling a long distance. There are also few children's centres or adequate checks on potentially vulnerable children – New Labour's social mobility and equality agenda totally bypassed rural Britain.

Fairness should be a two-way street – parental responsibility and the Government nurturing social policy. It should also apply equally to the whole country, urban and rural.

Mr Cameron needs to take heed of today's findings. For, if he does not, his Government will be denying youngsters from rural backgrounds the chance to fulfil their potential. What would be fair about that?