Jamie Stone calls for two-child benefits limit to be scrapped in Budget
Far north MP Jamie Stone had added to calls for the UK government to scrap the two-child limit on some benefit payments.
Keir Starmer’s Labour government has come under increased pressure to drop the limit, which experts say is adding to child poverty.
The cap, which was introduced in 2017, stops claims being made for more than two children for universal credit or child tax credits.
Labour has said it cannot commit to changing the policy currently as it cannot afford it until the economy grows. The party retained the position through the election campaign and after coming into power.
But Mr Stone, the Liberal Democrat MP for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, has supported a parliamentary motion calling for the limit to be removed in the Budget.
Statistics from the Department of Work and Pensions state that 1.6 million children are affected by the two-child benefit cap. The cap also imposed employment barriers on parents who have less income available for childcare costs as a result.
The Liberal Democrats have urged the government to announce the removal of the cap in the first Budget. They argue that lifting the cap is the most cost-effective way of immediately taking 300,000 children out of poverty, while helping to make costs more manageable for parents.
Mr Stone said: “The two-child benefit cap creates avoidable poverty for children and families across the country.
“The Liberal Democrats are calling on the new government to scrap this policy to not only help thousands of children, but to also help parents find better employment opportunities.
“Whilst I acknowledge that Labour have set up a Child Poverty Commission, it doesn’t take a commission to realise that we need to lift this cap.
“The Liberal Democrats feel strongly that this needs to happen urgently which is why scrapping the cap will be in our King’s Speech amendment.
“Not only is this the most cost-effective way of alleviating poverty, we also have a moral obligation to change this unnecessary policy.”