Child Benefit (Hansard, 31 March 1981)

§ Mr. Patrick Jenkin

[pursuant to his reply, 16 March 1981, c. 36]: The texts of the letters from Deidre Sanders of The Sun News Group Newspapers Ltd. of 2 March and my reply of 31 March are as follows:

2nd March, 1981.

Department of Health and Social Security,

Ray House,

6, St. Andrew Street,

London,

EC4.

Dear Sirs,

78W

The Department of Health and Social Security recently invited comments on plans to pay Child Benefit monthly in arrears, rather than weekly as at present, to all families except those in the specially exempted categories.

Since Child Benefit is of great importance in the lives of many mothers, we published a short article in our issue of Friday, February 20, 1981, suggesting that readers fill in a form indicating their views and return it to us, so that we might pass on their feelings to your Department.

We received completed forms from 4,340 readers—a sizeable number, especially in view of the recent increases in postal charges. There was nearly unanimous opposition to the introduction of compulsory monthly payments in arrears: 98.7 per cent believed that parents should keep the right to collect Child Benefit weekly if they wish or need.

We next asked readers: "Would it cause your family financial difficulty if Child Benefit were paid monthly in arrears?"

The replies were:

Yes, great difficulty	64.5 per cent
Yes, some difficulty	31 per cent
No difficulty	4.5 per cent

The strength of this response surprised me, because in carrying out previous surveys I have found that readers tend to play down rather than exaggerate difficulties in their own situation.

We also asked readers whether they thought Child Benefit should be increased in the forthcoming Budget or not. We explained that to allow for inflation since the last Budget would demand an increase to £5.25. To make up the value lost because Child Benefit was not increased enough in the last Budget to cover inflation would mean raising it to £5.70. Readers replied as follows:

No increase	2.3 per cent
To £5.25	13.7 per cent
To £5.70	42 per cent
To more than £5.70	42 per cent

We also received more than 700 letters from readers. Most explain what an important part of the wife's weekly budget the Child Benefit is (even when it is not that large a percentage of the family income), emphasize the extra stress that a change to monthly payments would put on their family, and/or detail why they believe that the forthcoming Budget should include a sizeable increase in Child Benefit.

I include photocopies of a few letters which I hope will convey at least some of the emotion and anxiety which communicated itself to me as I read through the seven hundred.

Of course, a "Write-in" sampling of opinion such as this cannot claim the authority of a properly constituted random survey, but this response shows a strength of feeling and widespread degree of agreement which is extremely unusual on topics such as this.

There is clearly a strong feeling among readers of The Sun—the biggest-selling daily newspaper in this country—that a change to paying Child Benefits monthly in arrears will cause more suffering among families than the savings effected will merit, and that Child Benefit must be properly safeguarded against inflation. I am sure you will wish to take these views Alto consideration when examining the future of Child Benefit.

Yours sincerely,

Deidre Sanders

PO(S of S)2819/92

Ms Deidre Sanders

The Sun News Group Newspapers Ltd

30 Bouverie Street

Fleet Street

London EC4Y 8DE

31 March 1981

Dear Ms Sanders,

ARRANGEMENTS FOR PAYING SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS

Thank you for your letter of 3 March setting out the results of the survey conducted in association with your article in the 20th February issue of The Sun. You also wrote to Geoffrey Howe, and I hope that you will accept this as reply to both letters.

I can assure your readers that the Government will take into account the results of the survey (along with comments from other organisations and individuals) when it comes to make final decisions on how to pay child benefit. However I wonder if I could make a few comments about your survey.

First I would question whether those who replied really represent a cross-section of your readers. Your letter admits that the survey was not a properly constituted random sample, and 79W that makes it difficult to argue that the results would apply to people generally. I am afraid that carrying out your survey in conjunction with your article was bound to mean that you received replies from readers who felt unable to cope with four-weekly payment of child benefit rather than from people who were satisfied with the Government's proposals.

Secondly I doubt if the response to your article does show quite as much strength of feeling as you suggest. I understand that The Sun's advertising department says that your paper has a daily circulation of approaching 4 million copies, with a daily readership of about 12 million people including about 4½ million housewives reading the paper daily. Thus less than 0.1% of the housewives likely to have read your article felt so strongly about the prospect of 4-weekly payment of child benefit that they sent in the coupon you provided.

Lastly there is the issue of whether some mothers would experience great difficulty with 4-weekly payment of child benefit. Certainly the Government accepts that this payment period is not appropriate for everybody. That is why we proposed that those in receipt of supplementary benefit or family income supplement, lone parents and widows and families with 4 or more children should have the right to continue with weekly payment. This will cover about 1¼ million families. Your survey did not determine the financial status of your respondents but I strongly suspect that a large proportion of your readers who replied to your survey are among the families who can keep to weekly payment if they wish. However as more and more people are being paid monthly and it does not seem right to force everybody to have weekly paid child benefit, particularly when this is more expensive to the taxpayer. After all, market research has shown that 70% of mothers would find it very easy or fairly easy to manage with four-weekly payment, and experience in other European countries suggests that mothers can manage perfectly well with monthly payment of family benefits.

Your letter also discussed the level of child benefit. I am sure your readers will welcome the Government's decision announced in The Budget to increase child benefit in line with prices. This will mean a 50p increase next November.

Yours ever,

Patrick Jenkin