Further...
"The one element missing from your thoughtful leader about public views on welfare benefits (15 April) is that many of the public don't know the actual facts of who gets what benefits. The view of benefits is widely shaped by shameless political manipulation. For example, recent TUC research found that the public thinks 27% of benefit claims are fraudulent, whereas the actual figure is under 1%. The public also thought that the majority of payments go to unemployed people, whereas the actual figure is closer to 5%.
As Polly Toynbee has shown consistently over the years, when the public knows the facts they take a more compassionate view, as evidenced by the article in the Guardian today by Tom Clark (Big-state Britain? UK voters' sympathy for the poor, 15 April). I thank the Guardian for its ongoing considered publication of welfare benefit matters, but how can we use your findings to influence the national debate? How do we stop the debate from being hijacked by the unprincipled political chancers who now run this country?
Jan Hill
London"
And...
"The deceit with which the government's case for the benefit cap "is being peddled" is even greater than you suggest (Editorial, 16 April). It is not just "state top-ups to low wages" being ignored but also child benefit, which is received by parents on the median £26,000 wage. If the child benefit received by out-of-work families were excluded from the cap, so as to compare like with like, it would reduce the numbers affected by 40%-50%. The government uses its deceitful comparison between in- and out-of-work incomes to argue that the cap is fair. But there is nothing fair in deliberately reducing the benefit some families will receive to well below the amount that parliament has determined is the minimum required to meet their needs - a minimum that research shows is far from generous.
Ruth Lister
Labour, House of Lords"
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/apr/24/tracking-shaping-public-attitudes-benefit-spending