Owner-occupation is now an important source of wealth for many people. Housing has experienced price appreciation much in excess of most other assets over the last 20 years and, at the same time, owner-occupation has expanded dramatically. This paper first discusses the impact that this growth in popular wealth holding has had on the overall distribution of income and points to its great importance for all groups except the very wealthy. The importance of housing wealth to the individual is also discussed. Despite the importance of housing wealth, both at an individual and at the broader level, there is virtually no evidence on the transmission of wealth between generations for the mass of people with moderate wealth. This paper rectifies this by analysing the patterns of inheritance of housing wealth for a sample of estates in Glasgow. The evidence shows that wealth left by owner-occupiers is typically passed to a very small group in the close family. The amount of money received can be quite substantial, but tends to go to those in the same or the following generation, that is, people already in middle or old age themselves. Thus, housing inheritance is not likely to be passed directly to young, first time buyers, but to people who already have an established housing career.

Social assistance in many countries is administered locally. Centralised, uniform schemes, such as those which operate in Britain are often assumed to guarantee, or at least to enhance, territorial equity, that is the equal treatment of individuals with identical needs irrespective of where they live. This assumption is examined with respect to the system of single payments—lump sum payments to meet exceptional needs—which existed prior to the 1988 social security reforms. Although much of the geographic variation in the volume of awards which used to exist is explicable in terms of variations in the level of need, territorial inequity is demonstrated to have occurred in what was a nationally administered and closely regulated scheme. The reasons for the inequity seem in part to have been due to variations in office work flow and working practices, welfare rights activity and unidentified processes linked in some way to the regional administrative structure of DHSS.

The Netherlands are of considerable interest to students of comparative social policy, because Christian democracy and not social democracy is the leading political force. This article analyses the history of the Dutch system of social security in terms of political forces and their power resources. In particular, it considers the reasons for the comparatively high level of social security development in the Netherlands. The various approaches which have been adopted in much current research in comparative social policy are critically discussed in the context of the Dutch experience.

Social security provision for young people has been cut back by a succession of reforms since 1980 culminating in the almost complete withdrawal of income support from 16 and 17 year olds by the Social Security Act 1988. Conservative government policy seems to indicate a desire that families assume greater responsibility for young people until either they find work or reach their mid-twenties. It is assumed that until young unemployed people reach this stage they are dependants, to be treated as such by the social security system (and, to a large extent, by the training schemes). But the twentieth century has seen a progressive growth of young people's independence and expectations of it among young people and their families. The enforced dependency produced by recent government policy runs counter to this trend. More importantly, it may be having a profound effect on the progress of the transition to adulthood.