The focus of this paper is on the nature of the egalitarian policy objectives of the welfare state, and on the evaluation and assessment of social policies in the light of those objectives. This focus reflects the pervasive but often ill-defined presence of equality as an objective for social policy, without asserting that it is either unique or uncontested as an objective. The paper does not offer an evaluation of the success or failure of the welfare state in relation to equality; rather it is concerned with exploring what might be and is meant by equality as a target for social policy, with presenting some contrasting conceptions of equality, and with discussing the implications of the multiple meanings of equality for the way in which we think about issues in social policy and, in particular, about the impact of social welfare programmes.

Whilst quantitive and ‘positivist’ modes of comparative social policy can reveal significant structural factors involved in the making of welfare states, they too often ignore the role of human agency, intention and political processes. A critical-historical comparative case study of the introduction of ‘child endowment’ and of ‘family allowances’ respectively in Australia (1941) and in Canada (1944) reminds us of the interplay between structural constraints and human agency in the history of welfare states. Detailed analysis suggests that institutionalised arrangements in Australia after 1905 to resolve capital-labour conflict via arbitral and wage fixation mechanisms put the question of the adequacy of wages in meeting family needs and with it proposals for child endowment onto the public agenda as early as 1920. In Canada the absence of such mechanisms, and alternative welfare arrangements to deal with family welfare, combined to keep such proposals off the public agenda. After 1939 the development of ‘war economies’ in Australia and Canada created common contradictions for governments, trying to maintain both industrial peace and anti-inflation policies, which the introduction of family allowances in both countries were attempts to resolve. Consideration is also given to a range of political problems and contexts in both countries which this particular policy measure attempted to deal with.

Patterns of leaving home vary between classes in terms of the reason for the move, its timing, reversibility of the process, and the type of accommodation entered on leaving the family of origin. The association between leaving home and marriage is seen to be weakening as more young people move into single independent housing prior to marriage. The notion of transitional housing is raised, and it is argued that there will be an increasing demand for such housing, characterised by suitable accommodation for the single, geographically mobile young. The study draws upon evidence in the General Household Survey and the National Child Development Study.