We have a new facts and figures column in the magazine, Barometer, and I thought
CoffeeHousers might like a preview of one of the data series we have dug up for tomorrow’s edition. George Osborne has this week pledged that, from 2013, no family on benefits should receive
more than the average family does through work. But how many will it affect? Those living in expensive areas, for example, but also those with large families. CoffeeHousers may remember Karen
Matthews, who lived on benefits with seven children. She was demonised, understandably, but I was left thinking: we paid her to do that. The more kids she has, the more money she received –
so shouldn’t the system take some of the blame? If a lone parent with two kids has more disposable income than a hairdresser, is it a surprise that so many young women choose to start a
family? And how many just keep going, as our system pays them to?
I put in a data request for the number of people who are living on various out-of-work benefits, broken down by the number of dependent kids.

Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in