News

Paul Burgess delves into welfare history to review past governments' records on benefit reform

Is there a precedent for the government's interest in social security benefits reform?

The social security system is a central part of the political economy and every government, at least since the early 1970s, has dabbled with it. It is just too important to people's lives to be ignored.

Edward Heath's Conservative government first introduced Invalidity Benefit and Attendance Allowance in 1970-1. It also brought in Family Income Supplement (the forerunner to Family Credit) for the low paid. The first national rent rebate scheme followed in 1972.

In 1975 the Wilson government endorsed changes introduced by Barbara Castle, which included the introduction of Mobility Allowance, the non-contributory Severe Disablement Allowance, equal treatment for women in the National Insurance scheme, and the State Earnings Related Pension Scheme.

Invalid Care Allowance came in to remedy the absence of provision for those sacrificing their careers to care for someone.

In the light of the government's Welfare to Work and minimum wage policies, we should note that Barbara Castle was the first politician brave enough to remove a deeply-rooted vestige of the Poor Law: a rule called the Wage Stop.

This limited a family's benefits to the level of the last wages received by the breadwinner. For obvious reasons, the families of unskilled workers with several children were the worst hit.

It was state endorsement of family poverty. Frank Field, then secretary of the Child Poverty Action Group, was a vigorous opponent of the Wage Stop - indeed, as the first contributor to Community Care's benefits column, it would be surprising if the archives did not have something from him on the subject.

The extra payment for one parent families appeared at this time, after the Finer Commission found that lone parents faced extra costs.

Few need reminding that benefits changed in the 1980s under the Thatcher governments. But until the 1987 Fowler 'reforms' it was mainly the unemployed who were on the receiving end.

Out went Supplementary Benefit and Family Income Supplement; in came Income Support, the Social Fund and Family Credit. Out went benefit for 16- and 17-year-olds, in came lower benefit rates for under-25s.

The Major governments of the 1990s made deep cuts in Invalidity Benefit as it became Incapacity Benefit, and further damaged the insurance principle as Unemployment Benefit became Jobseekers Allowance.

The Child Support Act 1995 broke new ground. But Attendance Allowance, and Disability Living Allowance for those aged up to 65, grew dramatically with self-assessment - leading to increased suspicions of fraud.

I suppose the question must be, can anyone get it right?