Ahead of the general election, figures close to Keir Starmer had briefed journalists on the importance of Labour’s first hundred days in government. There was a small window, they argued, to demonstrate the new government’s priorities to the country. This week, Keir Starmer did just that.
After seven Labour MPs voted for an amendment to the King’s Speech calling for the abolition of the two-child benefit limit, the Labour leader suspended them for six months. Given Labour’s recent history of arbitrary suspensions of the party whip, it remains to be seen whether the rebels — Zarah Sultana, Richard Burgon, Ian Byrne, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Imran Hussain, Apsana Begum, and John McDonnell — will be permitted to rejoin the parliamentary party once their suspension ends.
The rebel MP’s case for abolishing the two-child limit is a powerful one. Introduced in 2017 by the Conservative government, the policy limits families from claiming benefits for a maximum of two children. A record 1.6 million children are living in families affected by the policy, and it is widely recognized as the single largest driver of child poverty in Britain. Abolishing it would immediately lift 330,000 children from poverty. And at an eventual cost of just £3.4 billion a year, there is no quicker or more cost-effective way to combat child poverty available to the government.
By contrast, the arguments in favor of keeping the limit are far weaker. While the Conservative government that introduced the policy framed it as a disincentive against families having children they could not afford, the current government is not prepared to defend the policy on the grounds of social engineering. Instead, it insists that maintaining the policy is necessary to demonstrate its economic competencies, stressing that it would be irresponsible to make “unfunded promises.” At the same time, it refuses any tax rises on the wealthy to fund the abolition of the limit. Adding…
La suite est à lire sur: jacobin.com
Auteur: Karl Hansen
