IF THE government's determination to press on with cuts in single parents' benefits is a sign of its radical approach to welfare, then the disclosure today that it may tax or means test all state benefits suggests that Tony Blair's order to "think the unthinkable" is fast becoming holy writ.

But, just as the looming backbench rebellion over the cuts for lone parents indicates, the government may risk a backlash in the Commons over the proposals now emerging from a Treasury review of the welfare system.

More than that, as these include the threat of reducing the universal child benefit paid to millions of families in the middle-income group, it risks the fury of the voters of Middle England whose trust it has so eagerly sought.

Yet, though it cannot escape the political consequences of such a move, the government is, unquestionably, right to grasp the nettle of the country's soaring benefits bill which now stands at £100billion.

And of all the benefits, child benefit begs most reform, simply because millions of people do not need it. It is far better and fairer, surely, to claw back money from the better-off in order to give it to those who really do need help.

By the same token, it is wise and prudent to reduce the benefits bill so that savings may be ploughed into areas of public spending - such as the ever hard-pressed health service and education - where they might be used far more constructively.

The "unthinkable" evidently means restoring the welfare system to what it was always meant to be - a basic safety net through which no-one may fall.

But if few would contest that principle, the suggested measures that may put this into practice - such as cutting child benefit and making fraud-riddled housing benefit a flat-rate payment - are bound to cause howls from the disadvantaged even though they may not be really poor enough to feel the hurt.

If it is to take the heat out of the inevitable protest, the government must demonstrate the benefits of cutting welfare either by translating the savings into cuts in direct taxation or ploughing them into schools and hospitals.

Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.