Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:08:46.839Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Household Benefit Cap: understanding the restriction of benefit income in Britain

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2020

CHRIS GROVER Open the ORCID record for CHRIS GROVER [Opens in a new window]
CHRIS GROVER*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, Bowland North, Lancaster University, LA1 4YN, email: c.grover@lancaster.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Britain’s Household Benefit Cap restricts the amount of benefit income unemployed households can receive. In this article, it is examined using material held at the UK’s National Archives recording debates about a proposal to introduce a similar policy – a benefit limit – in the first Thatcher Conservative government elected in 1979. It was rejected, but the Household Benefit Cap was introduced three decades later. The article locates debates about, and the practice of restricting benefit income, in perennial social security concerns with the financial incentive to do waged work. The article argues that while there are material differences that help explain the different policy outcomes in 1980 and 2010, they can primarily be explained by changing ideas about the roles of social security policy, including the development of the ‘incentive paradigm’ concerned with manipulating behaviour; a loss of concern with the hardship that would come with the introduction of a benefit restriction and a view that institutions other than the state are better placed to address poverty and buttress work incentives.

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Social Policy , Volume 51 , Issue 1 , January 2022 , pp. 2 - 19
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Original sources

NA AST/36/1439 Wage Stop: consideration of abolitionGoogle Scholar
NA AST/36/1441 Wage Stop: consideration of abolitionGoogle Scholar
NA BN/13/605 ‘Wage stop’: possible limitation on total benefit paymentsGoogle Scholar
NA CAB/134/4444 Ministerial Committee on Economic Strategy: papers 10–37Google Scholar
NA CAB/128/66/18 Conclusions Former Reference: CC (79) 18Google Scholar
NA PREM/19/1637 Social Services. Unemployment benefit: benefit limit; Family Income Supplement; taxation of social security benefits, supplementary benefits and strikers’ benefits; part 4Google Scholar
NA T/227/5264 Benefit income limitations: ‘Wage Stop’Google Scholar

References

Atkinson, A. and Flemming, J. (1978), ‘Unemployment, social security and incentives’, Midland Bank Review, Autumn, 6–16.Google Scholar
Banting, K. (1979), Poverty, Politics and Policy. Britain in the 1960s, London, Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbier, J.-C. (2004), ‘Systems of social protection in Europe: Two contrasted paths to activation, and maybe a third’, in Lind, J., Knudsen, H., and Jørgensen, H. (eds.), Labour and Employment Regulation in Europe, Brussels, Peter Lang Google Scholar
Beatty, C. and Fothergill, S. (2014), ‘The local and regional impact of the UK’s welfare reforms’, Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 7, 63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benda, L., Koster, F. and van der Veen, R. (2020), ‘Activation is not a panacea: active labour market policy, long-term unemployment and institutional complementarity’, Journal of Social Policy, 49: 3, 483–506.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonoli, G. (2010), ‘The political economy of active labor-market policy’, Politics and Society, vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 435–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britton, A. (1997), ‘Full Employment in a Free Market’, in Philpott, J (ed.), Working for Full Employment, London, Routledge.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (2006), Tackling poverty is a social responsibility, https://conservative-speeches.sayit.mysociety.org/speech/599937.Google Scholar
Carmel, E. and Papadopoulas, T. (2003), ‘The new governance of social security in Britain’, in Millar, J. (ed.), Understanding Social Security: issues for policy and practice, Bristol, Policy Press.Google Scholar
Checkland, S. and Checkland, E. (1974), The Poor Law Report of 1834, Harmondsworth, Penguin.Google Scholar
Clark, M. (1978), ‘The Unemployed on Supplementary Benefit: Living Standards and Making Ends Meet on a Low Income’, Journal of Social Policy, 7: 4, 385–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clasen, J. and Clegg, D. (2007), ‘Levels and levers of conditionality: Measuring change within welfare states’, in Clasen, J. and Siegel, N. (eds.), Investigating Welfare State Change. The dependence variable problem in Comparative Analysis, Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
DHSS (Department of Health and Social Security) (1978), Social Assistance: A Review of the Supplementary Benefits Scheme in Great Britain, London, DHSS.Google Scholar
DWP (Department for Work and Pensions), (2012), Benefit Cap (Housing Benefit) Regulations 2012: Impact assessment for the benefit cap, London, DWP.Google Scholar
DWP (2014a), In-depth interviews with people affected by the Benefit Cap, Research Report No 895, London, DWP.Google Scholar
DWP (2014b), Post-implementation effects of the Benefit Cap (wave 2 survey), Research Report No 894, London, DWP.Google Scholar
Dinan, S. (2019), ‘A typology of activation incentives’, Social Policy and Administration, vol. 53: 1, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellison, N. (2011), “The Conservative Party and the ‘Big Society’”, in Holden, C., Kilkey, M. and Ramia, G. (eds.), Social Policy Review 23. Analysis and debate in social policy, 2011, Bristol, Policy Press.Google Scholar
Employment Committee (1995), The Work of the Employment Department, minutes of evidence, 23 May, HCP 458-i, London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Esser, I., Ferrarini, T., Nelson, K., Palme, J. and Sjöberg, O. (2013), Unemployment Benefits in EU Member States, Brussels, European Commission.Google Scholar
Grover, C. (2012), ‘Localism and poverty in the United Kingdom: the case of Local Welfare Assistance’. Policy Studies, 33: 4, 349–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grover, C. (2016), Social security and wage poverty: historical and policy aspects of supplementing wages in Britain and beyond, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamnett, C. (2014), ‘Shrinking the welfare state: the structure, geography and impact of British government benefit cuts’. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 39: 4, 490–503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J (1992), ‘Political thought and the welfare state 1870–1940: An intellectual framework for British Social Policy’, Past and Present, 135, 116–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hickson, K. (2010), ‘Thatcherism, poverty and social justice’, Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 18: 2, 135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillman, J. and Clarke, P. (1988), Geoffrey Howe. A quiet revolution, London, Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
HM Government (2010), The Coalition: our programme for government, London, Cabinet Office.Google Scholar
Hoggett, P., Wilkinson, H. and Beedell, P. (2013), “Fairness and the politics of resentment”, Journal of Social Policy, 42: 3, 567–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hollingsworth, K. (2015), ‘Judging children’s rights and the benefit cap: (SG and Others) secretary of state for work and pensions’, Child and Family Law Quarterly, 27: 4, 445–466.Google Scholar
Howell, R. (1976), Why work? A challenge to the Chancellor, London, Conservative Political Centre.Google Scholar
Hudson, J., Lunt, N., Hamilton, C., Mackinder, S., Swift, C. and Meers, J. (2016), ‘Nostalgia narratives? Pejorative attitudes to welfare in historical perspective: survey evidence from Beveridge to the British Social Attitudes Survey, Journal of Poverty and Social Justice, 24: 3, 227–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussain, M., Ejrnæs, M. and Larsen, E. (2020), ‘Are benefit reductions an effective activation strategy? The case of the lowest benefit recipients in Denmark’, Journal of Social Policy, https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279420000318.Google Scholar
Jensen, T. (2018), Parenting the crisis. The cultural politics of parent-blame, Bristol, Policy Press.Google Scholar
Kay, J., Morris, C. and Warren, N. (1980), ‘Tax, Benefits and the Incentive to Seek Work’, Fiscal Studies, November, 8–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, S., Wilson, W., Apostolova, V. and Keen, R. (2016), The Benefit Cap, Briefing Paper Number 06294, London, House of Commons Library.Google Scholar
Lammasniemi, L. (2019), ‘The benefit cap and infliction of poverty’, Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 41: 3, 368–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lansley, S. (2014), “Britain’s wages crisis–is ‘predistribution’ or ‘redistribution’ the Way Forward?”, Political Quarterly, 85: 1, 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lister, R. (1991), ‘Social security in the 1980s’, Social Policy and Administration, 25: 2, 91–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maki, D. and Spindler, Z. (1975), ‘The effect of unemployment compensation on the rate of unemployment in Great Britain’, Oxford Economic Papers, 27: 3, 440–454.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maki, D. and Spindler, Z. (1979), ‘More on the effects of unemployment compensation on the rate of unemployment in Great Britain’, Oxford Economic Papers, 31: 1, 147–164.Google Scholar
Margetts, H. (1991), ‘The computerization of social security: the way forward or a step backwards?’, Public Administration, 69: 3, 325–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCafferty, T. and Mooney, G. (2007), “Working ‘for’ welfare in the grip of the ‘iron’ Chancellor: modernisation and resistance in the Department for Work and Pensions’, in Mooney, G. and Law, A. (eds.) ‘New Labour/hard labour. Restructuring and resistance inside the welfare industry, Bristol, Policy Press.Google Scholar
Mesher, J. (1981), ‘The 1980 social security legislation: The great welfare chainsaw massacre’, British Journal of Law and Society, 8: 1, 119–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Micklewright, J. (1989), ‘The Strange Case of British Earnings-Related Unemployment Benefit’, Journal of Social Policy, 18: 4, 527–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miliband, E. (2012), Labour’s New Agenda, Speech delivered to Policy Network, London, 6th September 2012, London, Policy Network.Google Scholar
Ministry of Social Security (1967), Circumstances of Families, London, HMSO.Google Scholar
Nickell, S. (1980), ‘A Picture of Male Unemployment in Britain’, The Economic Journal, 90: 360, 776–794.Google Scholar
Norris, G. (1978a), ‘Unemployment, subemployment and personal characteristics (a), The Inadequacies of Traditional Approaches to Unemployment’, The Sociological Review, 26: 1, 89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, G. (1978b), ‘Unemployment, subemployment and personal characteristics (b), Job Separation and Work Histories: the Alternative Approach’, The Sociological Review, 26: 2, 327–348.Google Scholar
Novak, T. (1988), Poverty and the State: an historical sociology, Milton Keynes, Open University Press.Google Scholar
O’Brien, M. and Penna, S. (1998), Theorising welfare. Enlightenment and modern society, London, Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Offe, C. (1984), Contradictions of the Welfare State, London, Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Page, R. (2015), Clear blue water. The Conservative party and the welfare state since 1940, Bristol, Policy Press.Google Scholar
Page, R. (2016), “‘Progressive’ neo-liberal conservatism and the welfare state: incremental reform or long-term destruction?’, in Fenger, M., Hudson, J. and Needham, C. (eds.), Social Policy Review 28. Analysis and debate in social policy, 2016, Bristol, Policy Press.Google Scholar
Palmer, S. (2016), ‘The “benefit cap” scheme and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child’, Cambridge Law Journal, 75: 1, 34–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (2010), 21st century welfare, Cm 7913, London, TSO.Google Scholar
Simpson, M. (2017), ‘The benefit cap fails human rights test’, Journal of Social Security Law, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 149–154.Google Scholar
Stewart, K. (2011), ‘A treble blow? Child poverty in 2010 and beyond’, in Holden, C., Kilkey, M. and Ramia, G (eds.), Social policy review 23. Analysis and debate in social policy, 2011, Bristol, Policy Press.Google Scholar
Torfing, J. (1999), ‘Workfare with welfare: Recent reforms of the Danish welfare state’, Journal of European Social Policy, 9: 1, 5–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ussher, K. (2012), What is pre-distribution?, http://www.policy-network.net/pno_detail.aspx?ID=4272&title=What-is-pre-distribution.Google Scholar
van der Veen, R. and Trommell, W. (1999), ‘Managed liberalization of the Dutch welfare state: A review and analysis of the reform of the Dutch social security system, 1985–1998’, Governance: An International Journal of Policy and Administration, 12: 3, 289–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, R. (1998), ‘Does work work?’, Journal of Social Policy, 27: 4, 533–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiteford, P. and Bradshaw, J. (1994), ‘Benefits and incentives for lone parents: A comparative analysis’, International Social Security Review, 47: 3/4, 69–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, S. (2012), ‘Welfare-to-work, Agency and Personal Responsibility’, Journal of Social Policy, 41:2, 309–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Young, J. (2002), ‘Crime and Social Exclusion’, in Maguire, M., Morgan, R. and Reiner, R. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Criminology. 3rd edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar