LABOUR have voted to keep the two-child benefit cap in an extraordinary demonstration of the party’s reversal of its opposition to the policy.
Keir Starmer’s party voted down the SNP’s amendment to the King’s Speech calling for the policy to be axed.
The SNP heaped scorn on Labour for voting to keep the policy, saying the party had "failed its first major test in government".
Just seven Labour MPs backed the SNP amendment – none from Scotland. The vote was defeated by 101 votes to 361 in favour of keeping the policy, which saw Labour MPs join the Tories in the “no” lobby.
No vote was recorded for just one Scottish MP, Katrina Murray, while all others voted to keep the cap.
Westminster leader Stephen Flynn (above) said: "Labour MPs had the opportunity to deliver meaningful change from years of Tory misrule by immediately lifting thousands of children out of poverty – they have made a political choice not to do so.
“This is now the Labour government's two-child cap – and it must take ownership of the damage it is causing, including the appalling levels of poverty in the UK.”
READ MORE: Scottish Labour MP says 'contact your MSP' in copy-and-paste two-child cap email
Save the Children last year calculated scrapping the policy was the "most cost-effective way to reduce child poverty", though the charity's estimated cost was lower than other organisations', including the Resolution think tank.
It is the first demonstration of Labour’s changed stance on the policy since the party returned to Government earlier this month.
The party had previously opposed the policy, with deputy leader of Scottish Labour Jackie Baillie (below) having once compared it with China’s “one-child” limit.
Labour have insisted they remain opposed to the policy in principle but that they cannot fund the estimated £2.5 billion it would cost to scrap it.
Analysis published before the vote found that the typical cost of the two-child cap to families in Scotland this year is £287.92 a month, or £3455 a year, for families with three children, and £575.84 a month, or £6910 a year, for families with four children.
In total, some of the poorest families in Scotland have lost a combined £454.8 million in financial support since the policy was introduced in 2017/18, the data shows. Across Britain, families have lost a total of £8.05bn in support.
READ MORE: Alba urge SNP to scrap two-child cap in Scotland using Holyrood budget
Flynn said his party would continue to “campaign vigorously for the cap to be abolished at the earliest opportunity”.
He added: “It is the very worst of Westminster's welfare cuts, and every day it remains more children suffer.
“The Labour government has a moral duty to go much further and faster to tackle child poverty.
“Scrapping the cap is the bare minimum we should expect. In order to eradicate child poverty, the UK government must take much bolder action, including matching the Scottish Child Payment UK-wide by raising Universal Credit by £26.70 per child, per week at the UK budget.”
The two-child-limit restricts the support provided through Tax Credits and Universal Credit to two children per household. It applies to all families, whether or not they are in work.
READ MORE: Grangemouth oil refinery rival plans to sell more fuel once Scottish site closes
The Child Poverty Action Group said last year that the policy was one of the biggest drivers of rising child poverty and that most families affected by it were in work.
It was introduced by the Conservatives in 2017 as part of a package of swingeing cuts to the welfare budget.
One exemption to the policy is the so-called "rape clause" which means mothers can claim for a third child if they can prove the child was conceived through rape.
Campaigners have said the requirement to prove this is invasive and traumatising for rape victims.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel