The recent episode of BBC Question Time has ignited discussions around the controversial Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) two-child benefit cap, which restricts financial support to families with more than two children. Because during the show, transport secretary Heidi Alexander accidentally hinted at what the Labour Party government might be planning to do.
And it sounds like it will create a two-tier system – where some parents are removed from it, while others are not.
The two-child benefit cap
The two-child benefit cap, introduced by the Conservative government in 2017, limits families to receiving extra financial support through DWP Universal Credit only for their first two children. Critics argue that this policy has cruelly stripped assistance from struggling families and contributed directly to rising levels of child poverty, affecting approximately 1.6 million children across the UK.
If the cap remains in place, it is estimated that 670,000 more children will face poverty in the coming years, a devastating statistic that underlines the significance of this debate. The Liberal Democrats, Reform, and the Green Party have called for its removal, with Lib Dem deputy leader Daisy Cooper branding it “heartless.”
In contrast, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch staunchly defends the cap, proclaiming it to be “right” and “fair.” She has imperiously dismissed the proposals from Farage and Labour leader Keir Starmer as mere political pandering, asserting:
I am saying what is the right thing to do – it may not be popular, but it is absolutely the right thing to do.
Keir Starmer’s recent statements indicate a shift in the Labour Party’s stance. Initially ruling out the scrapping of the cap, he has now signalled a willingness to “look at all options” regarding child poverty. This could be a pivotal moment for the party, especially as key ministers within Labour, such as DWP boss Liz Kendall, appear supportive of the initiative.
However, the potential £3 billion cost of abolishing the cap raises questions over the government’s fiscal strategy, especially amid rising national debt. Critics argue that the hesitance to act could exacerbate socio-economic divides, particularly as the government continues to grapple with its public spending strategy.
Low-income families, especially those with multiple children, find themselves shouldering the burden of what many perceive as a misguided austerity measure rather than a moral or fiscal necessity.
Heidi Alexander: giving the DWP game away?
So, what will Labour and the DWP do? Well, Alexander might have given the game away on BBC Question Time.
During an exchange on the two-child benefit cap, Alexander made it pretty clear she thought that a) parents who work have to make ‘tough decisions’ around how many kids to have – ergo people reliant on benefits should have to do the same. Alexander said:
I speak to people in… Swindon… many of them have said to me that they’ve limited the number of children they have because they can’t afford to have another child… they feel like they’re playing by the rules and being responsible…
Basically, Alexander was saying in no uncertain terms that people on benefits who have more than two children are not being responsible – because why should the state pay for their kids? As the Canary has been saying for years, this idea that chronically ill, disabled, and non-working people who rely on social security are not allowed to have multiple children because the state says so is nothing short of Eugenics.
Later on Politics Joe editor Ava-Santina Evans killed this point, noting:
I wouldn’t go into having a third child for £17 a week. It works out to be around £1,000 a year. I could think of other ways I could make money… Probably…
Not that Alexander would care. She went onto to give the biggest hint yet at what Labour might do about the two-child benefit cap.
Eugenics via politicians and the DWP
Because it clearly can’t have crips and scroungers breeding, the DWP may well instead do something else. Alexander noted that, specifically for Universal Credit:
I think that around the edges there are some really difficult issues. If you’re pregnant and you’re expecting one baby and then you have triplets, you’re acting entirely responsibly… the other example I would give is if you’ve had a larger family and your partner leaves you and you’ve only got one income.
Yup, she really did go there: some people on Universal Credit are more deserving than others. Alexander concluded:
That’s why the government is going to look at the evidence… and make a decision… about what is the most effective way to permanently reduce the number of children growing up in poverty.
You don’t even have to read between the line to see what Alexander was saying.
It seems from what the transport secretary said, that Labour might well be considering a two-tier structure to the two-child benefit cap. That is, it will put in place exemptions if you have three children and the DWP deems it no fault of your own – like the example Alexander gave about a partner leaving someone. It will probably include some concession for working parents, to stave of Nigel Farage and Reform’s attack on this issue.
However, as the Child Poverty Action Group previously noted:
There is no other country in history that has adapted social security policy to increase child poverty to reduce fertility or encourage abortion. It is a completely outrageous assault on liberty.
The two-child benefit cap has demonstrably done all those things.
Shame on Labour if it keeps the two-child benefit cap
As the Canary previously reported, after the Tories brought in the DWP two-child benefit cap, abortion rates among women who already had two or more kids increased rapidly. However:
The Canary analysed the birth rates for women by socioeconomic status; that is for the richest and poorest women.
Our research found that birth rates fell generally between 2017 and 2019. But we found the biggest falls were among the poorest households. For example, between 2013 and 2016, birth rates in four bottom deciles (10%’s of population) fell overall by 0.9%. Then suddenly, between 2017 and 2019, this accelerated to a 12.4% fall in birth rates. This fall also correlated with an 11.74% increase in abortions – and the poorest women were having abortions at over twice the rate of the richest.
What does this mean?
The Tories introduced a policy, via the DWP, to socially engineer certain groups of people to stop them having kids. This is Eugenics in all but name – and the evidence backs up that assertion. Now, it seems Labour will continue this – albeit with some concessions so they don’t look quite so evil. In reality, though, creating a two-tier two-child benefit cap is just as cruel – if not more so. For shame, Labour.
Featured image via the Canary
