Do you think we should life the two child benefit cap?

[Marshmallow4545]

I believe that the majority of people think that the cap should remain and child poverty should be tackled in different ways.

Personally I would like to see children on FSMs allowed free access to after school extracurricular clubs and activities. I would also provide more poor families with access to food banks and would look to stock these with a range of healthy and nutritious options either through donation or state funding if required. I would also look to recruit volunteers to offer advice on health and diet in these places. I would provide clothing and school uniform banks with high quality, second hand clothing that kids would actually want to wear. I have some branded 'fashionable' stuff my kids have grown out of that's still in great condition that I would happily donate.

All of the above in my view is preferable to lifting the cap and would be more effective in tackling the impact that child poverty has on the child.

So AIBU that the two child cap should remain and we should look at other more direct ways to tackle child poverty?

Child benefit has never been capped. It is the child element of UC which was limited to 2 children back in 2013 I think it was.

But then why have more children than you can afford? Having more than 2 children is a luxury lifestyle choice.

Which is already happening. I agree that we need to find a way to prevent as many children falling through the gaps.

The two child benefit cap disproportionately affects lower income families.
These families pour most of their incomes back into the economy. Lifting this cap would mean that money goes back into the economy.
The cap also isn't UK wide and is being mitigated by other governments.

I think the optics surrounding giving free after-school clubs to people who don't work when they are primarily paid for by those who do as necessary childcare would be terrible!

Personally I was always opposed to the cap and still am.

It's not ludicrous to suggest that if a person is confidently asserting that they have a practical and cost-effective solution for child poverty, they might have some evidence underpinning that confident statement. But the reality is you don't know - you have no idea if these plans are practical or cost-effective. You just have a vague idea that people aren't spending their child benefit on the right things, and that it would be better for other people to decide what their kids needs and provide those things directly.

You would do very well to stop sharing your uninformed opinions as facts and instead look at what is being said by the actual experts on child poverty - CPAG, End Child Poverty, Bernardos, The Joseph Rowntree Foundation etc., all of whom are in favour of lifting the two child cap.

It's child element of uc that is being spoken about. You are talking about £300 a month per child

But by including families with 3 or more children that may well change, as it’s very hard to work while having such a large family

Lots of people have made the sacrifice not to have a third child simply because they couldn't afford it

I also know a single mother with 9 children by 7 different dads and she lives off the system, never has worked and has no intention of it. None of her children have gone without, she is better off then the average person working, kids have designer clothes and she is out all the time or they have several take aways a week.

The whole benefit system needs an overhaul so that the people who actually deserve help get it and the people who are milking it don't

The people paying the extra tax will be big losers though. Many of those won’t have 3 or 4 dc. They live within their means even though it’s a struggle.

Basic need is not after school clubs! Dc on fsm often get school trips for free. They get PP money for educational help too. The families just above the cut off are the ones who get nothing and will have to cut back to pay more tax.

Our bigger issue is women not having dc at all. We don’t want more problem dc. We need more dc where parents can afford to raise them. Where’s the help to persuade them to have dc?

It's not an overwhelming majority, it's around 55% are working. I am assuming a lot of those working aren't working full time. Increasing the child benefit cap isn't going to encourage people to get jobs or contribute more to our economy is it?! If anything they are teaching us that the government will pay you for more reckless decisions. My last sentence is aimed at those who don't consider whether they can afford more than 2 children, not all people with 2+ who have found themselves in a difficult situation. This government is so soft.

Of course parents should be more responsible and not have children they can't afford but it's not the fault of the children that they have been born into a large family.

Because circumstances change. Because contraception fails. Because it brings joy to your family and you thought it would work out and it didn't. Because people make mistakes. Because abusive men rape or baby trap women. Because you could afford them but then you lost your job. Because it was twins. Because of a million other reasons which may or may not be sensible, but don't change the fact that once a baby has been born it shouldn't be made to live in poverty in one of the richest nations in the world as some kind of punishment to its parents for not making more fiscally astute choices.

Keeping the two child cap hasn't reduced the birth rate at all (and we don't actually want that either). It just forces kids into poverty. Whether or not you think people should have made the choice to have another baby, do you really think it's right for that baby to have to grow up in poverty because of the choices made by its parents?

But children's own parents are, in the majority of cases, the ones who know what their children need

Like more siblings they can’t afford to feed?

Yes, absolutely. It particularly impacts those from big families on free school meals.
It will make an enormous difference to many children. In terms of enough clothing without donations, better quality / more nutritional food and being able to actually buy food on a regular basis. School trips. Things to support their learning at school such as a Doodle Learning subscription. It will help social mobility and give children and families with 3+ kids a chance to breathe and not be constantly anxious about affording the groceries and panic when their kids need new clothes

Lots of people on MN pretend this is impossible but I have a whole section of my family who have, and continue to live like this. Multiple children, no jobs (bad backs) and running new cars every 3 years. One set of kids now old enough to be working, but just having kids instead. And so it continues.

Well of course they are, but they aren’t paying for it.

People are supremely good at asserting how other people’s money should be spent.

No. I don’t think the cap should be lifted. It’s going to cost £350b at a time when our economy is on its knees.

If Labour want to hand over to Reform at the next election then raising taxes to incentivise poorer families to have more children than they can afford is going the right way about it.

I was a single mum when my kids were 1 and 3. I worked FT my entire life. Included commute to. No need to say it was very hard but what kept me going was knowing I could provide more kids the extra that I considered important for their upbringing. The things that some posters seem to think as essentials.

Through working FT, I gained three promotions. I became a higher tax earner. I wasn't eligible for CB any longer. I contributed financially to our society and helped others in the way (at least I hope so!). What would have been my incentive though if ultimately, my kids would have got the same opportunities if I'd stopped work or only worked very PT? Where would I be now?

There has to b a distinction between essential and good. After school activities are not essential. Many kids in working and middle class families don't ever attend any and manage fine.

I suspect Labour are potentially doing this to try to get a portion of the public on side, and they are drip feeding it to the media to see reaction.

i also think it’s a bad idea, and there are better ways, and we should not be spending money we haven’t got to increase benefits. I suspect overall the public is going to be appalled. Other than those who benefit, but thay will be limited if taxes go up.

Yes, absolutely - don't know why I said child benefit!

It's not child benefit
There has never been a cap on child benefit
It's the child element of universal credit.

If they remove this then raise our tax I’ll be done. Already feeling completely mugged off.
Sick of working myself to death to fund everyone else getting more money while we get nothing yet are massively struggling.

This. If they raise taxes and lift the benefit cap in the same budget they’re really not reading the room.

Unfortunately there are some who are affected by the cap who with every incentive going still wouldn't give a toss about their child's welfare even if they were lifted out of poverty. I think it was well known that a lot of the free courses put on at sure start centres didn't attract the people they were meant to.

I agree there are way too many children in poverty, and that is absolutely not right. I don't know what the answer is but I'm not sure that just lifting the cap is the answer. I think a lot of work needs to be done to encourage those families that aren't incentivised to get out of poverty. Perhaps funded childcare places in colleges so parents can study to allow an option to progress out of poverty could be an option. I think there are possibly ways but I am not sure just throwing money at families is the only answer.