Should Labour abolish the two child benefit cap?

[changefromhr]

In two minds about this. Yes for those who find themselves on benefits after having more than two children (job loss, divorce etc) but perhaps not for those who choose to have more than two children when they have never worked (disabled families excepted).

https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/jul/11/uk-two-child-benefit-cap-affected-1-6-million-children-last-year-figures-show

Yet.

Labour don't want to be seen as "the benefits party" again.

It was a no pre GE and in first press conference. Reiterating it would be stuck to

I agree 100% with this. You cant give people in benefit raises, and not the actual workers.

Both

Just shows how stupid and selfish so many people are. Why do so many people feel the need to have 3 or more children. 3 seems to be the trendy number

Everyone's. I don't want to live in a society where we let children go without to teach their parents a lesson.
The kids are being born with or without the benefits. Why don't you want to at least try to give them a chance?

No. People who know me would be very shocked I had that view as I am left wing and all for a good welfare state. However, more working people than ever are in poverty. A person/couple who are earning just over the threshold to claim UC would be worse off than someone claiming benefits which isn't right. Everyone deserves a good quality of life but workers and children of workers should not be worse off than families who do not work.

I am happy to fund disability related benefits and to have no cap in this circumstance. I think if a family are making a first time claim all children should be paid for, for a limited time. People on benshould not choose to have more children until their circumstances improve.

I would love more children, but I cannot afford to. I am not ok with funding other people to have children they cannot afford.

People need to sort out their own lives BEFORE they have children, not expect the government to sort it out afterwards.

Okay, and what happens to those kids in poverty since their parents haven't listened to that?

The children don't get a say in that though do they...

No, leave it as it is. If it's needed there are benefits and I don't see why people that can afford to have more children get paid for it.

Yes they should because it means I can’t afford to expand my family with the limit on childcare

@JLou08 - yep me too- for exactly the same reasons - politically centre left- but I would rather specific help targeted directly at the children rather than just given to the family- no one is saying people can't have as many as they want - what is being said is the state will only support 2 for the purposes of UC calculation - so if you want a big family- better factor in savings, income protection insurance , keep your career etc -

No

Everyone on this thread just keeps on saying 'people shouldn't have more children they can't afford'

That's as may be but they do
And this policy has not deterred anyone in the slightest from doing so

I am not interested in whether the policy is morally right only in whether it is effective and this one isn't so it should go

Yes. We need to give children in our society the best upbringing possible. One day they will be looking after us and paying taxes. Why should children abandoned by the state and spending a childhood in poverty to then have to pay into it as adults? They are citizens of our country from birth.

Yes they should as we need more children. Half the population is over 50.
It’s a no brainer for that reason.

Absolutley not, 2 children max, if they choose to have more than two then they shouldn’t make the rest of us pay. I know it’s the children that suffer so I do feel for the kids in poverty because of their parents choices but we are an over populated world already, let’s not encourage people to just keep having endless amounts of children, the 22 kids and counting thing is a prime example, they state they don’t live on government hand outs which is great but they are! 22 school places which are funded by the tax payer, 22 doctors and dentist surgery places and any work to teeth and bodies that are needed, all paid for by the tax payer. I wonder if big families would be as big if we had a rule that say after 5 children, the rest have to have private school education and private medical care because I don’t think they would be able to afford it! But the tax payers have to pay for it instead

This.

All the comments about choices and taking responsibility and being accountable, we’re talking about children here. They didn’t choose to be born and aren’t responsible for their parents choices so why should they be held accountable. No child deserves to grow up in poverty.

No. You choose how many children you have and should also consider how many you can afford if circumstances change.

The two child cap should remain.

But however much money was thrown at some families the children would still grow up in poverty.

Which is why better infrastructure, healthcare, education, meals at school, is more important than endlessly increasing cash payments.

Then what is the solution because at the moment all I see is you advocating for a society where some people can’t have more than 2 children as they have to make decisions as to how much they can afford and another group who can have as many as they like and the state will pick up the tab.

Completely agree this would be a far better solution. As things stand kids are suffering because we blame them for their parents poor decisions. That can’t be right.