SNP urges Starmer not to ‘punish' children by keeping benefit cap
The SNP urged the Prime Minister to end the limit amid reports it could stay as a result of Labour scrapping most of its welfare reforms.
The UK Government had attempted to save around £5 billion a year by cutting welfare, mostly for those claiming disability and health benefits, but U-turned following a revolt from MPs.
The move means the Treasury may not see any savings at all as the welfare budget is still set to rapidly rise in the coming years.
Media reports suggest the U-turn could see ministers keep the cap in order to save money.
The Prime Minister previously indicated he would only abolish the two-child cap, which prevents parents from claiming child tax credit or universal credit for more than two children, when it had the money to do so.
Asked in May whether he would scrap the policy, he said: 'We'll look at all options of driving down child poverty.'
The SNP, which will mitigate the limit in Scotland by 2026, has urged the UK Government to scrap the cap, which it says is pushing thousands of children into poverty.
The party said analysis from the House of Commons Library found that 2.3 million families could be lifted out of poverty if the UK Government matched Scottish Government policies.
These included the Scottish Child Payment, abolishing the two-child benefit cap and scrapping the so-called bedroom tax.
According to the House of Commons Library, these measures would lift 96,000 families in Scotland out of poverty.
The analysis also shows that over the past decade the number of children living in poverty in the UK has risen from 3.7 million (27%) in 2013/14 to 4.5 million (31%) in 2023/24.
That number is expected to rise to 4.6 million (33%) by 2029-30, according to the data.
SNP deputy Westminster leader Pete Wishart urged the Prime Minister to have a rethink on his welfare plans.
He said: 'Keir Starmer must not punish children for his disastrous mistakes over the Labour Party's cuts to disabled people.
'It is utterly shameful that as a direct result of Labour Party austerity cuts, child poverty is rising to record levels in the UK – and the Prime Minister is failing to lift a finger to tackle it.
'Scrapping the two-child benefit cap is the absolute bare minimum – and it should have been done on the Labour Government's first day in power.
'It's pathetic that senior Labour Party figures now want to keep this punitive welfare cut just to show rebel MPs who's in charge.
'Saving Keir Starmer embarrassment is not more important than tackling child poverty.'
Wishart urged Starmer not to 'drag his feet' on the two-child cap and to instead match the SNP's Scottish Child Payment with a similar policy for the entire UK.
He added: 'Thanks to SNP action, Scotland is the only part of the UK where child poverty is falling.
'Unless Keir Starmer urgently follow's Scotland's lead, his lasting legacy will be pushing millions of children into destitution.'
A UK Government spokesperson said: 'We are determined to bring down child poverty. We've just announced a new £1 billion package to reform crisis support, including funding to ensure the poorest children do not go hungry outside of term time.
'This comes alongside the expansion to free breakfast clubs and the move to make over half-a-million more children eligible for free school meals.
'We have also increased the national minimum wage and are supporting 700,000 of the poorest families by introducing a fair repayment rate on universal credit deductions.
'We will publish an ambitious child poverty strategy later this year to ensure we deliver fully funded measures that tackle the structural and root causes of child poverty across the country.'
Scottish Labour MP Gregor Poynton said: 'After nearly two decades, the SNP government have failed Scotland's children.
'The educational attainment gap between the richest and poorest kids continues to widen. Almost one in six young Scots are not in education, employment, or training.
'The SNP's housing crisis means 10,000 children are living in Scotland without a home to call their own. It's clear we need a new direction.
'Labour has taken action to tackle poverty in Scotland by increasing the minimum wage, giving a pay rise to 200,000 of the lowest paid Scots.
'Labour is bringing down energy bills for all, particularly for the poorest families.
'The UK Labour Government ended Tory austerity in Scotland and provided the biggest budget settlement for Scotland in history, meaning more money for our public services.
'The SNP government has the money, they have the powers, but they are out of ideas, out of excuses and out of time.'
Get all the latest news from around the country Follow STV News
Scan the QR code on your mobile device for all the latest news from around the country
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
36 minutes ago
- The Independent
Will Keir Starmer cave to pressure on the two-child benefit cap?
K's first big showdown with the Labour left in government came as a group of rebels voted for a King's Speech amendment calling for the two-child benefit cap to be scrapped. The ruthless prime minister, with the confidence of a man who had just led Labour to a landslide election win, suspended seven of his own MPs. Starmer wanted to instil fear in those who might not be on board with his agenda in the future that rebellion would have consequences. But a year on, Starmer is weakened. Labour MPs are emboldened after forcing their leader's hand over his controversial welfare cuts, and the two-child cap on benefits is likely to be next. Implemented by austerity architect George Osborne, the limit, which restricts parents from claiming certain benefits for more than two of their children, is hated across the Labour Party. Critics say the cap punishes children, with experts predicting 470,000 could be lifted from poverty if Starmer scrapped it. But how likely is it that the prime minister will give in to pressure and axe the cap? Bridget Phillipson on Sunday warned that future spending commitments – including on Labour's child poverty plans – had been made harder by the £5bn U-turn on welfare. The education secretary said ministers are 'looking at every lever and we'll continue to look at every lever to lift children out of poverty'. But, pushed on whether a change to the two-child cap was now less likely, Phillipson said: 'The decisions that have been taken in the last week do make decisions, future decisions harder.' Alternatives to scrapping the cap entirely, such as lifting it to a three-child cap, are also believed to have been floated in government. The Resolution Foundation has said increasing the two-child cap to three children could reduce child poverty by 320,000 by the next general election, costing £3.2bn per year by 2030. It said this would be 'preferable' to the current system, but that benefits should be allocated in line with need, which would require fully scrapping the two-child limit at a cost of around £4.5bn. The chancellor is already braced for tax hikes in the autumn Budget, having warned the cabinet last week they could be more painful than last year's punishing increases. And any move to scrap or alter the two-child limit would need to be paid for by more tax increases or spending cuts elsewhere. Downing Street figures have been pointing rebels demanding a change to the welfare U-turn they forced, arguing the £5bn cost of that has derailed any plans to scrap the benefit cap. But the argument has already sparked anger among left-wing MPs, with Labour's Jon Trickett saying: 'The suggestion that the Labour government will leave children in poverty because they couldn't take welfare benefits from the disabled is truly shocking.' Phillipson and work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall are currently leading a Child Poverty Taskforce, which was due to report in the spring, but has been delayed to this autumn to coincide with the Budget. The taskforce is looking at 'all the available levers we have across government' to deliver the 'ambitious' child poverty strategy promised in Labour's manifesto. Senior Labour figures have also reportedly warned that tax hikes are on the horizon after the benefits climbdown, with the chance of a change in the controversial cap looking increasingly remote. 'My assessment is that is now dead in the water,' a No 10 source told The Sunday Times. Even Starmer, who previously let it be known that he wanted to scrap the cap, ordering the Treasury to find a way to fund the plan, dampened expectations of a change last week. He said: 'I personally don't think there is a silver bullet… we have got to look at a range of things.' As long as Starmer is prime minister, he will face round after round of calls for the two-child cap to be scrapped. The question is, will he give in?
Scotsman
39 minutes ago
- Scotsman
How Labour's NHS reforms in England pose a real threat to the SNP
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Given the Labour government's performance in recent weeks, it was refreshing to hear some genuine vision in the Health Secretary's ten-year health plan for England and Wales. Don't get me wrong, I have questions about the deliverability. The lack of social care. The expense. But when Wes Streeting opened his speech by saying, 'there are moments in our national story when our choices define who we are', I knew we were about to hear something momentous. What I had not anticipated was that the 'Fit for the Future' Plan he was about to unveil for England would not only set out a new vision and direction for the NHS there, but throw down the gauntlet for the Scottish Government. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad On the anniversary of the announcement of a National Health Service by the Attlee Government, Streeting revealed what he claimed will be a reformed neighbourhood health service. That it was largely welcomed, sometimes cautiously, on all sides of the Commons speaks not just to the plan itself but to the widespread belief that major reform is needed if we are to safeguard one of our country's proudest achievements for the next generation. Getty Images Comparing waiting lists Of course, there were questions from the Tories on detail and from my own party, the Liberal Democrats, on how it will impact on social care specifically. We have long called for free personal care, based on the model introduced by the Scottish Liberal Democrats in government, better support for unpaid carers and help for those struggling with accommodation costs. But the general feeling was that this plan has the community-based approach and ambition which is required. And as Tory Shadow Health Secretary Ed Argar put it, we need it to stick. While that ambition might currently be contained within England by devolution legislation, there's surely no doubt it will invite comparison with Scotland as waiting times and other targets often do. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It's also likely that the pressure faced by the current service and staff in Scotland and the SNP's abject failure to produce the same sort of ambitious vision will be a major issue in the 2026 election. Learning from England Given that importance, it was disappointing the only contribution from that party in the debate in parliament was an self-congratulatory comment on our medicines agency. Surely those of us who have benefited from a health service and staff coping with unacceptable under resourcing and often crumbling facilities are entitled to expect better of our Holyrood ruling party. The SNP would now do well to spend time reading what Streeting has laid out. I have a sneaking suspicion that Labour in Scotland will want to promote something similar. They may well see it as the key to electoral success, as well as the key to securing the future of the NHS. In times of crisis especially, there is nothing wrong with looking across the Border to see what is possible elsewhere. We have often examined the work of European or Nordic countries for examples of how to tackle issues with housing, education and beyond. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad To refuse to look to our nearest neighbours for a health service cure would be churlish at best. And this time, it might just be terminal for the SNP.
The Guardian
41 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Lord Lipsey obituary
David Lipsey, who has died aged 77, was a significant and influential Labour party adviser, a political journalist and then a member of the House of Lords for 25 years. Early in his professional life he recognised that despite a passionate interest in politics and public affairs, he had no wish to become an MP. He was thus that rare creature who wanted to improve the lives of others without being necessarily bothered about advancing his own career. He became nevertheless one of the best connected Labour figures of his generation, and gravitated from being a speechwriter in Whitehall and Downing Street – where he wrote the party's manifesto for the 1979 general election – to a hugely successful career in old Fleet Street, before then being appointed to the Lords, as one of 'Tony's cronies', by Blair in 1999. Like his first mentor, the former foreign secretary, Anthony Crosland, he was a radical egalitarian, and always tried to put what he believed to be the best thing to do above any ideological consideration. He was clever, clear thinking, serious-minded and the most enormous fun. His centrist political stance was constant throughout his life: he once observed, somewhat dolefully, that he was at one time regarded in Labour circles as a proto-fascist for his rightwing views and then was subsequently held to be 'a dangerous lefty', yet without ever having changed his mind on much. As a 'jobbing peer' – his phrase – he was remorselessly busy and at one point calculated that he had a total of 22 different professional and unpaid posts. His many friends teased him about not having enough fingers for the pies with which he was involved. As a young government policy wonk he had set about ensuring that more Labour names were added to the civil service list of the so-called 'great and the good', people who were awarded exactly the sort of public appointments with which his own later years would be garlanded. In the Lords he listed his interests as including culture, media, sport, parliament, government, politics, health, medicine and social services. He served on three public inquiries: on the long term care of elderly people (1997-99), on the voting system (1997-98) and on the future funding of the BBC (1999). His minority report on social care would later bear a striking resemblance to the findings of Andrew Dilnot's review in 2011, accepted by the then government but never implemented. He regarded his work on voting reform as 'the greatest failure among a number of failures in my political life', blaming the decision to retain the current 'indefensible' system after the 2011 alternative vote referendum – resulting from the inquiry – on the ineptitude of the then deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg. As well as being a prolific essayist, he published a number of books including The Secret Treasury (2000), on how the British economy is run; In the Corridors of Power (2012), a highly entertaining memoir; and Counter Coup (2014), a Dick Francis pastiche on horse racing. He also jointly owned and raced horses and greyhounds, played a deceptively excellent game of golf and for four years in his 60s drove a sulky, the lightweight cart used in harness-racing in Wales, triumphantly winning on seven occasions. He was introduced to horse racing at Cheltenham by his godmother (who was less successful with her appointed spiritual task) and fell for it when Bolshoi emerged from fog to gallop home at 20-1. When he arrived in Westminster in 1972 – a 'callow, gauche, thin, neurotic geek of 24' as he described himself – he was among the first 'chocolate soldiers', political advisers then financed by the Joseph Rowntree Trust, who were the trailblazers for today's professional political class. With a first in philosophy, politics and economics from Magdalen College, Oxford, to which he had won a scholarship, and with two years' experience in the research department of the General and Municipal Workers Union (now the General, Municipal and Boilermakers), he was appointed to work for Crosland, then shadow environment secretary and one of the leading Labour intellectuals of his day. He became Crosland's eyes and ears, as well as his speechwriter and spokesman, in opposition and in government from 1974, winning the exceptional status of being trusted by the civil service and the media as well as by his minister, with whom he was wholly in accord. He ran Crosland's unsuccessful campaign for the Labour leadership on Harold Wilson's resignation in 1976, and when his candidate came bottom in the poll sought distraction at Wimbledon greyhound stadium, acquiring his subsequent lifetime's devotion to both the dogs and the sport. He accompanied Crosland to the Foreign Office, and on his unexpected death in 1977 joined James Callaghan's Downing Street team. He regarded this as an honour, if less of a pleasure than his previous post, since 'Uncle Jim' Callaghan had what Lipsey called an ambiguous relationship with academic intelligence, which others saw as a tendency to bully. He was known affectionately as 'the Man from Uncle'. In the aftermath of Labour's loss of the 1979 election, Lipsey became industrial correspondent of New Society, before joining the Sunday Times in 1980, first on the political staff and then as economics editor. He returned to New Society as editor and chief executive in 1988, seeking unsuccessfully to save the magazine's independence before it merged with the New Statesman. He then helped found the Sunday Correspondent, of which he was one of the joint deputy editors during its brief life from 1988 to 1990, winning plaudits for the clout, contacts and classy staff he brought to the new publication. From 1990 to 1992 he was associate editor and acting deputy editor of the Times, a post he found difficult because of a clash of temperament with the then editor, Simon Jenkins, but thereafter he thought he had 'died and gone to heaven' during seven years on the Economist. As the political editor for four years from 1994 he wrote the Bagehot column, for which he won an Orwell prize in 1997; until joining the Lords he was public policy editor. Lipsey was a visiting professor at the universities of Ulster (1993-98), and Salford (2008-12), a visiting fellow at London School of Economics (2002-04) and at Harvard (2011). Among a wide range of other financial, media, artistic and sporting organisations reflecting his many interests, he was on the council of the Advertising Standards Authority (1999-2005), chaired Make Votes Count (1999-2008), the Social Market Foundation (2001-10), the British Greyhound Racing Board (2004-08) and the Campaign for Straight Statistics (2009–12). Born in Stroud, David was the elder of two sons of Penelope (nee Rawson) and Lawrence Lipsey. His father was a Canadian non-practising Jew who came to the UK to join the forces in the second world war, fought at Monte Cassino, and settled in Gloucestershire, having met his future wife. He made a comfortable living from a business recycling kapok stuffing and later manufacturing furniture, and David went to Wycliffe preparatory school before becoming a boarder at Bryanston school. His parents were thoughtful and interested in politics, and introduced their sons to the subject by taking them both to Labour and Conservative party meetings in the 1959 election. The family were escorted from the hall at the Conservative meeting when Lipsey senior heckled the candidate about the cost of the controversial Blue Streak ballistic missile project. David subsequently stood for Labour in the 1964 and 1966 elections at school and joined the party aged 17. He was head boy at Bryanston and before going to Oxford spent a year teaching English as a second language in Bradford. He went to the city as a party member and left as a fully fledged socialist. Lipsey founded a newspaper, the Federalist, while at school and in a curious coincidence interviewed Crosland, then education secretary and committed to abolishing public schools. Asked if his policy extended to prep schools, the minister replied that it did, and his young interviewer reported him as responding that they were 'stinking breeding grounds of sodomy'. Years later Lipsey, the political adviser, would come across a Crosland speech and realise that he had misheard the last word; it should have been 'snobbery'. He married his second wife, Margaret (formerly Robson, nee Fazakerley), whom he met through Streatham Labour party, of which he was the secretary from 1970 to 1972, in 1982; he was married previously to Elizabeth, his girlfriend from Gloucestershire and at Oxford. He is survived by Margaret, their daughter, Becky, and two stepsons. David Lawrence Lipsey, Lord Lipsey, journalist, political adviser and parliamentarian, born 21 April 1948; died 1 July 2025
