|
(last updated January 2001)
|
Introduction and Overview
Despite its early pioneering role as a welfare state, Britain is
clearly a social policy laggard with regard to responses to the
gender role and other family changes of the latter part of the 20th
century. In its earlier move toward economic liberalism in the Thatcher
era, and its stress on means-tested rather than universal benefits,
it demonstrates its membership in what have been called the Anglo-American
"family of nations"(1,2). Following the US.
in recent years Britain moved to increase its labor flexibility,
deregulate wages, contain social spending, increase privatization,
and reduced its unemployment rate almost to the OECD average. The
privacy of the family is a traditional and well-established core
value in British culture. The assumption continues that government
should keep its role limited with regard to families, intervening
only in situations of crisis or dysfunction.
A recent report on family policy in Britain begins with the not
uncommon statement that "Britain does not have and has never had,
an explicitly formulated policy with regard to families and children.
Over time, however, British governments have adopted a range of
measures directly or indirectly targeted at families which have
had a significant impact on their standard of living. Mothers and
children constitute a major group of welfare beneficiaries"(3).
Moreover, there has been no coherent or consistent policy regarding
children or families with children; and children's needs have rarely
been the predominant factor in decision-making. Many would insist,
furthermore, that child policy in Britain has focused on poor children
far more than it has on children in general, and on dependent, handicapped
and troubled children even more than it has on poor children.
Britain's implicit family policy is largely an antipoverty policy,
stressing social assistance and means-tested benefits. In the mid-1990s,
Britain had the third highest poverty rate among the 19 countries,
exceeded only by the U.S. and Russia; and it had the highest rate
among those countries in which child poverty rates were higher than
poverty rates among the elderly(4). Its goals
have been extended somewhat in recent years, as family issues grew
in political importance under the Labor government. Among the major
concerns now are: income inequality in Britain which, along with
child poverty, has emerged as the highest in the EU; the prevention
of juvenile delinquency and youth crime; the promotion of better
parenting; and for the first time in Britain, interest in encouraging
work by lone mothers and in reducing the caseload of Britain's social
assistance program ("Income Support").
In the context of targeting policies on the poor, however, Britain
does have a significant child benefit that is more generous for
first children than in most other countries and also does well by
lone mothers, both working and at-home. Yet its child benefit has
not maintained its real value since family allowances were first
introduced in Britain after World War II and only its health service
remains exemplary where children are concerned. It has only recently
added a parental leave to its maternity leave policy, under pressure
from the EU, and its policy seems meager and minimalist in comparison
with other countries in the EU. Child care services are inadequate
with regard to quantity, quality, accessibility, and philosophy,
although there are some signs of improvement and greater responsiveness.
There is beginning acknowledgement of the need to integrate child
care and education. Finally, Britain is beginning to develop a system
of family support services, but these, too, are targeted only on
high risk, vulnerable children and families.
Under the leadership of Tony Blair and New Labor, there are beginning
efforts at reducing the assistance caseload (welfare in US terms)
and linking work expectations more closely with benefits. However,
despite new encouragements and incentives there is no requirement
that poor lone mothers claiming assistance go to work, and no time
limits on receipt of benefits by lone mothers. There has been a
substantial increase in the basic universal child benefit and the
higher benefit for first children; but these are still not indexed.
The supplementary lone-parent benefit has been eliminated and as
a result some argue that single mothers are worse off now than before.
There is a proposal for universal and free preschool for all four
year olds (Compulsory school begins at age 5 and more than half
the 4 year olds already attend school or preschool), and to expand
coverage for the 3 year olds. The prior British version of the U.S.
EITC (Family Credit) has been superseded by a more generous Working
Family Tax Credit (implemented in late 1999, see below). The child
benefit levels under social assistance have been raised. And the
government has created a new unit to coordinate policies on social
exclusion and a new Ministerial Group to assess family policy issues
holistically (see below). According to the British national expert
member of the European Observatory on Family Matters, Ceridwen Roberts,
among the family policy issues causing most political or public
concern now are:
- The high incidence of family and child poverty -- one in three
children in Britain lives below the poverty line (below 50 percent
of median income).
- Marriage and relationship stability: High levels of divorce
are accompanied by a growing incidence of cohabitation and extra-marital
childbearing.
- Balancing home and work life. Men in Britain work the largest
hours in Europe.
- - Teenage pregnancy -- the highest rate in Europe and not falling
significantly. Most teenage mothers (85 percent) are unmarried
and a very high proportion are financially dependent on the State"(5).
Family benefits constituted 1.85 % of GDP in 1995.
The New Labor Government has made the eradication of child poverty
by 2019 (halving child poverty by 2010) one of its central objectives.
Gordon Brown introduced the 2000 budget in March. It focused on
reducing child poverty through support to low-income families, and
an emphasis on work and work-related benefits.
Return to Top
|
Highlights
Click here to view or print country highlights
in pdf format.
|
Government Agencies
According to a recent report by the British member of the European
Family Observatory, the government has confronted the problem of
policy fragmentation across multiple agencies by establishing a
Ministerial Group on the Family in 1998, chaired at a senior level
by the Home Secretary, on which ministers from all relevant Departments
sit(6). This is an effort at addressing family
policy issues holistically. This Committee has led to the publication
of the first ever consultation document on family policy, "Supporting
Families", published in November 1998 and stimulating extensive
public interest. The document contains a record of the government's
main initiatives for families since taking office and identifies
areas for further work.
The relevant ministries are the: Department of Social Security,
Department of Health, Department for Education and Employment.
|
Demographic and Other Social Trends
UK is among the large European countries, with a population of
59 million in 1998, about the same size as France and Italy but
smaller than Germany(7). Britain is an aging
society, with almost 16 percent of its population aged 65 and older
while children under 15 account for 19 percent. The British family
is following the same pattern as that of the other advanced industrialized
countries: smaller families, fewer marriages, more divorces, more
cohabitation, declining birthrates, more out-of-wedlock births,
later age at first birth, and more working mothers. The British
fertility rate in 1997 was 1.7. Marriage and childbearing are increasingly
separate with the illegitimacy rate increasing dramatically from
12 percent in 1980 to about 33 percent in 1996 and close to 40 percent
by the end of the century. An article in the New York Times (1/15/01)
reported that 51.2 % of all new births were to unwed mothers. Two-thirds
of all extra-marital births are to women under 25 years of age.
However, most of these are registered by both parents. Very young
children are increasingly likely to be living with cohabiting rather
than legally married parents. Although Britain's teen non-marital
birth rate is much lower than that of the U.S., it is the highest
in the EU, by far. Lone parents constitute almost 20 percent of
all families with children. Never-married mothers are the largest
and most rapidly growing group constituting 42 percent of all lone
mothers in 1997. Ethnic and racial minorities, although still a
relatively small proportion of the population, are becoming more
significant. In 1997, 67 percent of married mothers were in the
labor force but 60 percent of these worked part time(8).
Labor force participation of lone mothers is significantly lower,
at 41 percent. (The gap between married and lone mothers is becoming
more of an issue now in Britain.) Fifty-five percent of married
mothers with children under 5 were in the labor force.
|
Social Protection
The full flowering of the British welfare state was left for World
War II and the development of the Beveridge Plan. The Plan proposed
an integrated, contributory, flat-rate and universal social insurance
system covering old age, retirement, disability, unemployment, sickness,
and family allowances in addition to a national health service and
full employment policies. Although the full proposal was never implemented,
a significant part was. It shaped the British welfare state from
that time on and left its mark on present British social policy.
Britain spends about 28 percent of GDP on social protection (1996),
slightly less that the EU average, including about 2.4 percent for
family benefits, slightly above the EU average (2.3 percent). Britain
has by far the highest rate of social assistance use among the European
15 . A minimum wage (a new policy for Britain) is set at a level
similar to the US minimum. Of all British social policies, family
(child) benefits have varied the most in British income transfer
policies. The value of child benefits have never been as high as
when they were first established. The economic situation of children
deteriorated especially in the 1980s and 1990s. Family benefits
never had the financial, popular, political support given pensions
or the National Health Service. Only in the Blair administration
has there been a significant effort at announcing a child policy
agenda, and even then there has been concern about the declining
support for lone mothers.
In short, as LSE economist and social policy scholar Howard Glennerster
(1997) writes, "Distinctively less generous than the Scandinavian
or continental European countries, the UK system of welfare is much
more dependent on the market and income tested benefits but keeps
its highly developed national minimum safety net and national responsibilities
for health and education. It may be called "a hard core welfare
state"(9).
For more information on the social security systems, labour market
regulations, collective bargaining, social and family policies,
see the International Reform
Monitor.
Return to Top
|
Child, Youth and Family Policy Regimes
Maternity, Paternity, Parental, and Family
Leaves
Maternity Leaves are job-protected leaves for working women at
the time of pregnancy and following childbirth lasting up to 18
weeks, of which up to 11 weeks can be taken before birth. They are
paid at 90 percent of earnings for the first six weeks, and then
at a low flat rate and are financed by payroll taxes. For those
who do not qualify because they left their jobs or are self-employed,
a parallel benefit, the Maternity Allowance is available at the
lower benefit level.
Parental Leaves have been established recently, as a result of
an EU directive and supplement the maternity leave policy. They
are unpaid, job-protected leaves which can be taken by either parent,
and which can last up to 13 weeks. They can be taken at any time
within the first five years of the child's life.
|
Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC)
In Britain (like the U.S.), infant schools stressing education,
were established in the early 19th century, expanded rapidly, and
then largely disappeared to be replaced later by part-day kindergartens.
They provided an "inferior" form of care and education to the children
of poor working women and covered 20 percent of three year olds
and 40 percent of 4 year olds in 1851 and 43 percent of 2-5 year
olds by 1901. They constituted a voluntary but free educational
service for all young children from the age of 2 or 3, if parents
chose to avail themselves of it(10).
In contrast, middle and upper class children were cared for at-home
by "nannies" or their equivalent, supplemented increasingly, beginning
in the last quarter of the 19th century, by kindergartens organized
on the model of the German, Friederich Froebel (as occurred in the
Nordic countries, the U.S., Canada, and several other European countries).
The failure to improve the quality of infant schools for children
of the working class, or to integrate these programs with the new
educational philosophy of the kindergarten, and the inclusion of
5 year olds in primary schools, contributed to the decline in the
popularity of nursery education in 20th century England. One other
result was the continuity of a pattern of fragmentation between
early education as an enrichment program and day care as a "protective"
service. It took almost another century for there to be significant
increase in coverage and a renewed effort at integrating the two
parallel streams.
At present, the British ECEC system is fragmented as to auspice
and program, diversified regarding philosophy, curriculum, and program
focus, very inadequate as to supply and of mixed quality at best.
Recently, there has been an administrative shift in auspice in some
locations from social welfare to education and funding cuts by the
central government to the local authorities. ECEC is divided between
education and social welfare with preschool programs under the Department
of Education and Local Education Authorities and day care centers
or nurseries and child minders under the Department of Health and
the Local Authority Social Services Departments. Preschool is still
viewed as a program of enrichment, preparing middle class children
for school from the age of 2 ˝ or 3 while day care programs serve
children in need: poor, deprived, immigrant, neglected, abused and
disabled children. Compulsory school begins at age 5 and most four-year-olds
are already in school. The Blair administration has announced a
goal of full coverage of four-year olds and a doubling by 2002 of
places for the 3s, but there is little discussion regarding the
expansion of programs for younger children. There has been some
development of a compensatory and integrated early childhood program
("Sure Start") that some compare with the U.S. Headstart -- or Early
Headstart --program. Although a significant proportion of the 3-year-olds
are in preschool programs, most are part-day and part-week programs.
A small group or children who are "at risk" or have problems of
various sorts are in social welfare day care. Only a small proportion
of the under 3s are in out-of-home care and they are largely in
playgroups or cared for by child minders (family day care providers).
There is also interest in raising math and English achievement
levels for 7 year olds.
The Labor Government has also established a new child care tax
credit which is described below as part of the Working Family Tax
Credit.
Return to Top
|
Family and Child Allowances
Child Benefit (CB) is a universal (non-income-tested), tax
free cash benefit provided for each child in a family, including
the first. The benefit is available until a child is age 16 (or
19 if at school) is financed out of general revenue, and, since
1992, has been indexed to wages. However, its value, as a percentage
of social benefits or average wages has not been maintained since
first established at the end of World War II. Since 1991 CB has
been paid at a higher rate for the first child, and at the same
flat rate for all others. The CB package in the early 1990s, provided
to a single mother with two children, was worth about 8 percent
of average male wages and 13.4 percent of average female wages.
CB for a two-child, two-parent family was worth about 6.5 percent
of average male earnings in 1992. It compares well with the other
European countries with regard to small families (those with one
or two children) but poorly with regard to larger families. In two-parent
families, the benefit is paid to the mother, thus becoming (at least
in the UK discussion) a kind of "mothers wage".
One-Parent Benefit was a universal CB supplement provided
for the first child in a single parent family, on the same basis
as CB. It was eliminated under the Blair administration.
Return to Top
|
Child and Family Tax Benefits
The filing unit for income taxes is the individual, with husbands
and wives being taxed independently.
The Working Family Tax Credit, established in October, 1999
and replacing the earlier Family Credit for low-income working families,
is a refundable tax credit for families in which at least one parent
works at least 16 hours a week or more. It is designed to "make
work pay" for families by providing a wage (or earnings) supplement
and by reducing the poverty trap and the lack of affordable childcare.
It is modeled after the US Earned Income Tax Credit. It guarantees
working families a minimum income above and beyond the level of
the minimum wage; and as a tax credit is expected to reduce the
stigma associated with claiming welfare. It is paid to the main
wage-earner and where men are in that position, they can choose
to make their wives the payees. It is expected that about half of
the beneficiaries will be women. It also includes a provision for
a new child care tax credit to provide help for working families
with moderate incomes. This credit meets up to 70 percent of child
care costs (in centers or family day care providers) up to a maximum
of about $160 for a family with one child and $240 a week for those
with two or more -- far more generous that the U.S. Dependent Care
Tax Credit. It is expected to benefit about 1.5 million working
families with children, a very significant number, and will be administered
by the tax department.
A new children's tax credit will be introduced in April
2001. Directed at 4.5 million families with children, it will replace
the married couples' and related allowances and be worth up to 416
£ ($615) a year, coupled with child benefits. Families with
one child could be receiving up to $1,800 a year in benefits. The
children's tax credit is phased out for higher-icome families.
|
Child Support
Child support is the payment of financial support for a child by
the non-custodial parent. Britain was late among the major industrialized
countries in enacting policies designed to strengthen child support
provisions. A recent report stresses the importance of child support
and of the debates and proposed reform. . "The original motivation
for reform in both the UK and the US came from the growing number
of lone parents and their increasing reliance on welfare payments…In
the UK, widespread discontent with the way in which earlier reforms
in 1993 have worked has renewed pressure for further change"(11).
One of the main concerns was the low proportion of welfare recipients
who were receiving child support (30 percent) and the low level
of support paid by those who paid any.
The 1993 legislation established the Child Support Agency (CSA),
required that those receiving welfare payments use the Agency for
the collection of support, and permitted others to do so if they
wished. The vast majority of the CSA caseload consists of those
claiming benefits. Substantial amendments to the original legislation
were introduced in 1995, following "a huge public outcry about the
effects of the Act, partly from lone parents and their organizations,
but mainly from non-resident parents affected by the policy"(12).
The report stresses four objectives of the proposed reform:
- reducing the administrative burden on the CSA and raising the
level of compliance of child support payments by non-custodial
parents;
- shifting some of the burden of support of the children of lone
mothers to the non-custodial fathers;
- reducing some of the work disincentives implicit in the current
child support formula;
- and as a consequence of above three goals, reducing child poverty.
A major change in the proposed reform is the use of a formula when
setting the support award (15 percent of income for the support
of one child, 20 percent for two, and 25 percent for three or more),
and capping the maximum amount of the net income of the non-custodial
parent that can be awarded. It is also expected that the CSA will
now be able to spend more on ensuring enforcement rather than calculating
liabilities. A 10 -L weekly disregard will be introduced as well,
creating an incentive for those on Income Support (welfare) to try
to obtain it
Return to Top
|
Other Child Conditioned Income
Transfers
Children are entitled to receive certain standard income transfers,
including: dependents' benefits for the children of old age pensioners;
dependent's benefits for the children of a disabled worker; special
benefits for a disabled child; Survivor's benefits for the guardian
of a minor child.
Of particular importance, however, is the Income Support benefit,
a cash, means-tested benefit designed to support low-income individuals
(both elderly and young) and families when earnings are absent or
social insurance benefits are low. Its roots are in British Poor
Law and it was first established as a national public assistance
scheme in 1948. It is available regardless of marital or family
status to low-income individuals aged 18 or older (or 16 if pregnant
or if they have a child). It offers a national, uniform minimum
income worth almost half an average female wage which makes it especially
important for lone-mother families. The Blair administration is
currently attempting to encourage poor lone mothers with children
aged 5 and older to take jobs rather than claim welfare, but it
is not requiring they do this.
|
Child and Adolescent Health
Britain emphasizes child health policies in the context of its
overall National Health Services and provides an exemplary home
health visiting service that is targeted on young children and their
families (along with the elderly and the handicapped). Child Health
services in England and Wales are delivered largely through the
National Health Service (NHS) which has responsibility for general
practitioners, community health, and hospital services -- and the
Department of Social Security where income transfers for children
and their families play a critical role in supporting child health.
NHS services are universal, available to the whole population regardless
of income, and delivered for the most part to all children below
the age of 16 (or 19 if in full time school). Since its inception,
the NHS has improved the quantity and quality of child health services
significantly. Child health care has remained divided between community
care and hospital care, and between prevention and treatment.
Children gain access to the health care system when they are born,
through automatic notification of their birth to the local health
visitor (HV) who is responsible for the geographic area where the
family lives. HVs are registered nurses with additional public health
training and are the key individuals in health care for very young
children, providing health education and preventive care, visiting
new mothers and babies at home usually within 10 days of the birth,
and then at frequent intervals during their early years. It has
recently begun to target its longer term services on higher risk
family situations. In addition, responding to cultural diversity
is becoming more important as well as working with ethnically, racially,
and religiously diverse families with very young children.
Health visiting has been and continues to be at the heart of the
British child health service.
Return to Top
|
Housing Benefits
Housing benefit is a means-tested, non-taxable benefit (both income
and asset-tested), which provides help with paying the rent for
private or public housing for people with low incomes. A Council
Tax Benefit is a means-tested benefit which provides help towards
the tax raised by local government. For those receiving social assistance
(Income Support, or welfare) housing benefit is the full amount
of the rent and council Tax Benefit is the full amount of the tax.
For those not receiving assistance, the housing benefit is a portion
of the rent linked to the individual's income.
|
Youth
Young people under age 25 or a young lone parent aged less that
18 may qualify for certain benefits more easily than a couple. They
receive a priority for housing benefits, are entitled to free health
care, and can qualify for welfare payments from the age of 18, or
16 if pregnant or if they have a child; these policies are viewed
by some as creating a work disincentive and an incentive to teens
to get pregnant.
There is strong interest in reducing teen pregnancy and the government
has announced a goal of halving the rate by 2010.
There is interest in reducing school exclusion and drop-out rates
among 16-18 year olds from low-income families, who are not in education,
employment, or training, and improving participation and achievement
in learning. Two new initiatives (ConneXions and Educational Maintenance
Allowances) have been established to achieve this by providing financial
assistance and other services to these youths.
The United Kingdom was one of the
fourteen countries participating in the OECD thematic review, From
Initial Education
to Working Life - Making Transitions Work. For more detail on
the transition to working life in the U.K., see OECD's background
report on the United Kingdom.
Click here to view in pdf format a table on the Ages
at which children are legally entitled to carry out a series of
acts in the European Union. See Youth
Policies section for definitions of terms used.
|
Reconciliation of Work and Family
Life
One major part of the British Employment Relations Act, implemented
in October, 1999, is a policy package designed to encourage family-friendly
employment policies. This package includes regulations designed
to eliminate discrimination against part-time employees, make part-time
workers eligible for a pro-rated portion of all social, non-wage
benefits, and to encourage flexible working time arrangements. There
is also an effort to expand eligibility for maternity and parental
leaves and to establish a right of employees to reasonable time
off for family emergencies.
Return to Top
|
References
Bradbury, Bruce and Markus Jantti, Child Poverty Across Industrialized
Nations. Florence, Italy: Unicef, 1999.
Bradshaw, Jonathan et al. Policy and the Employment of Lone
Parents in Twenty Countries. York, Eng: University of York,
1996.
Bradshaw, Jonathan et al. Support for Children: A Comparison
of Fifteen Countries. London, Eng.: HMSO, 1993.
Davies, Bernard, From Voluntarism to Welfare State: a history
of the youth service in England, Volume 1: 1939-1979. Leicester:
National Youth Agency, 1999.
Davies, Bernard, From Thatcherism to New Labour: a history of
the youth service in England, Volume 2: 1979-1999. Leicester:
National Youth Agency, 1999.
Depatment of Social Security (DSS) (UK): contains information about
policy initiaitives, research and statisitical information and supports
information geared for use by the public (e.g., various tables on
family allowances, etc.). It includes information on pensions, child
and family benefits, an online child support collection agency,
etc. http://www.dss.gov.uk/index.htm
Family Policy Studies Centre, London, Eng. Family Briefing Papers.
Kamerman, Sheila. "Early Childhood Education and Care: An Overview
of Developments in the OECD Countries", Paris, France: OECD, 1998.
(A briefer version was printed in the International Journal Of Educational
Research, Vol. 33,2000).
OECD, Initial
Education to Working Life - Making Transitions Work. Paris:
OECD Publications, 2000.
Piachaud, David and Holly Sutherland. How Effective is the British
Government's Attempt to Reduce Child Poverty?. London, Eng.: London
School of Economics, CASE Paper 38, March, 2000.
David Raffe, et. al., Thematic
Review of the Transition from Initial Education to Working Life:
Background Report United Kingdom (OECD with permission by
the Department for Education and Employment, the Scottish Office
and the Welsh 0ffice: 1998).
Ringen, Stein.et al "Family Change and Family Policies: Great Britain",
in Sheila B. Kamerman and Alfred J. Kahn, eds. Family Change and
Family Policies in Great Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and the United
States. Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University Press, 1997.
|
Notes
- Francis Castles, eds. Families of Nations: Patterns of Public
Policy in Western Democracies. Brookfield, USA: Dartmouth Publishing
Co. , 1993.
- Britain, like the U.S., Canada, Australia, New Zealand follows
the model that has been variously characterized as the "Anglo-American"
"family of nations" or the "liberal market countries", or the
"residual welfare states" or the "minimalist" welfare states,
or the countries stressing social assistance as the dominant social
policy. The countries following this pattern have developed their
social policy on the foundation of the English Elizabethan Poor
law. The focus is on differentiating out categories among the
poor warranting different types of treatment. The goal is to reduce
poverty rather than to reduce inequality; and the primary strategy
is a combination of means-tested cash benefits and supportive
and behavior-changing service interventions. The limitations of
the model is the narrow political base of support.
- Stein Ringen, et al "Family Change and Family Policies: Great
Britain", in Sheila B. Kamerman and Alfred J. Kahn, eds. Family
Change and Family Policies in Great Britain, Canada, New Zealand,
and the United States. Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University Press,
1997.
- Bruce Bradbury and Markus Jantti, Child Poverty Across Industrialized
Nations. Florence, Italy: Unicef, 1999.
- Ceridwen Roberts. "United Kingdom", in Family Observer, 1999,
p. 40
- Family Policy Studies Centre, Family Change: Guide to the Issues,
Issue Brief # 12. London, Eng.: Family Policy Studies Centre,
2000.
- OECD, 1999. OECD in Figures.
- Family Policy Studies Centre, Issue Brief # 12.
- Howard Glennerster, "United Kingdom's Social Policy: From an
Old Social Contract to a New?" London, Eng.: London School of
Economics. Processed. 1997..p. 24.
- Sheila B. Kamerman, "Early Childhood Education and Care: An
Overview of Developments in the OECD Countries", Paris, France:
OECD, 1998. (A briefer version was printed in the International
Journal Of Educational Research. 2000.
- Helen Barnes, et al. Child Support Reform and Low Income Families.
London, Eng.: Family Policies Studies Centre. 2000.
- Family Policy Studies Centre, Family Briefing paper 8, Child
Support Reform.
Return to Top
|
Contacts
Washington Embassy
Embassy of United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland
3100 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20008
Phone: (202) 588-6500
Fax: (202) 588-7870
Ministry
Public Affairs Department
Department of Social Security
The Adelphi 1-11 John Adams St.
UK London WC2N 6HT
European Union Family Observatory National Representative
Ceridwen Roberts
Family Policy Studies Centre
Tavistock Place 9
UK London WC1H 9SN
Phone: 44-171-388 59 00
Fax: 44-171-388 56 00
Email: fpsc@mailbox.ulcc.ac.org
Website: http://www.fpsc.org.uk
|
|
|
|

|
|