§ 11. Mr. F. M. Bennettasked the Minister of National Insurance how the estimated cost to the Exchequer of providing a 4s. family allowance for the first child and reducing the allowance of second and subsequent children to 4s. would compare with his proposals to raise the allowance for second and subsequent children to 8s., while continuing the policy of his predecessors in making no provision for the first child.
§ The Minister of National Insurance (Mr. Osbert Peake)The proposal would cost about £116 million a year as compared with £102 million.
§ Mr. BennettSince, admittedly, the first child is generally accepted as being the most expensive, and since the Chancellor of the Exchequer made it perfectly clear recently in debate that he did not object to an allowance for the first child in principle but only because of the excessive increase in cost entailed, is the Minister now prepared to reconsider that decision and thereby help to overcome the one blind spot in the Budget, namely, the family below Income Tax level with one child?
§ Mr. PeakeNo, Sir. The purpose of the Family Allowance Act was to give assistance to the larger families, and the suggestion my hon. Friend has put forward, while costing more, would reduce the amount of the allowances payable to all those who have two or more children in receipt of allowances.