§ Mr. Peter Bottomleyasked the Secretary of State for Social Services (1) what would be the cost in family income supplement payments if the definition of full-time work were reduced from 30 hours to (a) eight hours, (b) 16 hours, and 24 hours, respectively; and if he will give this information net of savings in supplementary benefit;
(2) how many additional families would become eligible for family income supplement if the definition of full-time work were reduced from 30 hours to (a) eight hours, (b) 16 hours, and (c) 24 hours, respectively; and if he will give this information separately for one-and two-parent families.
§ Mr. Orme,pursuant to his reply [Official Report, 8th November 1977; Vol. 938, c. 54], gave the following information:
There must be a limit to the reduction in the number of hours which could be prescribed in regulations as defining full-time work, and remain consistent with the family income supplement scheme. However, if the number of hours were reduced to 8, 16 or 24 the additional number of families who could immediately qualify for benefit would be 35,000, 20,000 and under 10,000 respectively. Virtually all would be one-parent families. The estimated cost in benefit in each case would be £13 million, £4½ million and £2 million in a full year, excluding administration costs. There would be a small saving of supplementary 751W benefit but only in the case of a reduction to eight hours. These estimates, which are subject to considerable sampling error, are based on a Department of Health and Social Security analysis of information recorded by respondents to the family expenditure survey and, therefore, take account only of families in which the head is an employee and already works between 8 and 30 hours. No information on hours of work is available for the self-employed; nor is it known how many more families might qualify if they undertook work for, or increased their hours of work to, at least eight hours.