Despite the fact that the number of children aged under 16 fell markedly between 1971 and 1999, far more children and families were receiving benefit at the end of the 1990s than had been doing so at the beginning of the 1970s. Although, as always, the reasons are complex, there is a clear story to tell. Declines in fertility were outweighed by new claims on social security that resulted from new family forms, which in turn reflected a changed morality (Figure 20.1). At the same time, developments in the labour market eroded the self-sufficiency of families, and government sought to alleviate this situation by creating new inwork benefits, which meant that employment no longer ended reliance on means-tested benefits.

Two policy changes – one indigenous to social security, the other exogenous – more or less complete the picture. Introducing Child Benefit effectively guaranteed that every family with children would receive at least one social security benefit (since non-take-up of this universal benefit has always been negligible). The exogenous policy was housing, and the change in strategy from subsidising ‘bricks and mortar’ towards targeting low-income households. As a result, social security inadvertently became an instrument of housing policy, and families with children were forced to claim social security on account of their housing costs.

Lone parents

The tripling in the number of lone parent families between 1971 and 1998 changed the contours of social security provision.