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

Anyone could choose to have more than 2 kids and rely on the state if they wanted to. Most choose not to struggle on benefits if they don't have to, but the option is there should you wish to choose that lifestyle. If they can, you can.

If you are not on benefits and choose to have a third child, you don’t get a pay rise. Why should people on benefits be any different?

How would that work? Would parents be quizzed with intrusive questions about their personal lives and why they're on benefits? What if they're widowed/divorced and have never worked?

FWIW I think the cap should be lifted but all child benefit should be means tested, with the income cap set reasonably high. I think it's bonkers that households with two 6-figure incomes should be receiving a top-up from the state.

Quit your job, have 3rd baby, claim benefits. Since it seems to boil down to perceived unfairness rather than effectiveness of the policy, it's worth noting that this lifestyle is in fact available to anyone.

No absolutely not

If you are in need of it why go ahead and have further kids - in fact I think it encourages some.

I know certain faiths are against contraception too but why does everyone else have to pay?

We know there is a housing crisis and we also know that in general (I know not always) children will go on to live in the same manner as parents in terms of jobs, finance etc - where does it stop?

That doesn't make sense, they would still have healthcare and education paid for as a dc.

It might be better if there was a 2 child limit across the board.

I think the birth rate for a sustainable workforce needs to be between 2 and 3. A the moment it’s a bit small in the UK for younger generations to support an aging population - so perhaps there’s an economical argument for increasing it to 3?
I’m not wedded to that idea and haven’t considered it through fully!

That being said as a household we earn too much to receive child benefit and don’t feel able to afford more
than 2 children and I don’t think the child benefit would sway us.

Personally I don’t want to live in a country that emulates communist China. We need to maintain the population level, a falling birth rate already means we’ve dropped below replacement level.

Why do we need to maintain the population level?

Because we need enough people to continue functioning as a country, enough people to maintain and grow our economy and populate the services we depend on. Unless you’re happy to grow old in an ever more impoverished dystopia.

But what about automation and AI?

@noodlebugz just a quick mention that it's nothing to do with child benefit that's being discussed- that isn't affected- you get it for every child if you are under the specified income levels if working OR on benefits

it's the additional premiums you get 'per child' when claiming UC as part of your UC payment. At the moment you only get additional premium for first 2 children-

Not everyone impacted by this two child UC cap is a lone parent. There are low earning families with both parents working, earning minimum wage, that qualify for UC.

Overall I'm on the fence with this. I don't think you should deliberately have more children than you can afford, but not all children are planned, contraception fails sometimes, and abortion isn't an option for everyone. What if you had 3 children because you had a good household income and one partner is made redundant or becomes unable to work, and then the family needs UC to supplement the single income they are left with? Do they pick their least favourite child to social services? It's not black & white.

@Crikeyalmighty I have actually never properly understood that. Makes a lot more sense.

What I said isn’t that relevant then.

They should lift it. Research has shown it has not influenced people’s decisions about how many children they have. It limits a child’s future chances and has a negative effect on their well-being The data shows that the probability of having a third or subsequent child declined by just 0.36 percentage points (or 5 per cent) after the introduction of the two-child limit – equivalent to reducing the number of births by around 5,600 a year.

As long as we are all prepared to pay more tax, there is a good argument for lifting it.

I am not prepared to pay more tax if it is to subsidise parents who fecklessly have children they can't afford to raise.

Absolutely Not !
I am at the end of 11 years of paying a fortune to breakfast clubs and after school clubs.
I made the responsible decision of not having more children due to costs. Everybody is capable of knowing and understanding this, and if you are not capable if paying for your own children upbringing without thinking that this is the government/tax payers responsibility. Just don’t have them !

simple like this

by the way
everybody knows where the “child benefit” goes to these families that don’t work and just go on the dole!

they all take more vacations than the tax payers to begin with

So maybe we only want to do the limit if it doesn't cost us any additional tax? That doesn't work. Personally, I think it's fine the way it is, but everyone who thinks it should be changed needs to be prepared to fund it.

Surely by raising tax more wage earners that are just above the limit for receiving UC would be pushed towards claiming it.

People are still having children they can’t afford, they just have less money to support them. I’m just advocating that we don’t punish the children for their parents mistakes.

Very possibly. But it isn't as simple as saying "remove the limit", it needs to be funded somehow.

In truth, the UK is taxed below the level it needs to be for the level of public service that many desire. It seems the population want champagne service for lemonade money.

Nope - don't care about this issue much. Maybe I will after our new Govt starts to address the huge wealth inequalities pervading our society and starts to regenerate industry and growth in the long-forgotten reaches of our country,