A majority of Isle of Wight councillors agreed to a motion opposing the Labour Government’s controversial two-child benefit cap earlier this week.
Full council backed Councillor Michael Lilley’s proposal calling on County Hall leader Councillor Phil Jordan to write to Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Prime Minister Keir Starmer, outlining the council’s ‘strong belief’ the policy should be scrapped.
Cllr Lilley’s submission also requests Chief Executive Wendy Perera write to the Island’s MPs, asking them to throw their weight behind the ‘campaign to end the two-child limit’.
Not all of the chamber supported the move, however, with Councillor Geoff Brodie (Independent) saying it would ‘achieve absolutely nothing’.
In a House of Commons vote last summer, Isle of Wight West MP Richard Quigley (Labour) voted against an SNP amendment to the King’s Speech calling on the cap to be abolished, while his east Wight counterpart, Joe Robertson MP (Conservative) abstained.
Neither parliamentarian, both still councillors, attended yesterday’s County Hall meeting.
The Liberal Democrat representative for Ryde Appley and Elmfield’s motion also says the council should ‘explore ways to support families impacted by the two-child limit across the Island’.
Example policies given include ‘free school meals and community capacity resilience, the Household Support Fund and other grant funds as part of the council’s approved anti-poverty strategy’.
Cllr Lilley told the chamber:
“If you look at all the organisations like the Child Poverty Action Group, Action for Children, all the major children’s charities – they all have done research into this.
“That if this particular cap was actually removed, thousands of children would be brought out of poverty.”
Councillor Warren Drew, a Conservative who represents Ryde South East, said:
“I appreciate that it was a Tory policy to introduce the two-child cap limit. It was something I disagreed with then, it’s something I disagree with now.
“But I think it’s important to remember that the fiscal and policy environment in which that was introduced was where there were other benefits and payments.
“I would certainly agree with Cllr Lilley in terms of the reduction in things like Personal Independence Payment (PIP) which I find disgusting, that the current government are currently mooting.
“I think we need to be very proactive in supporting anyone who is a child, anyone who has a disability – it’s a fundamental principle I know this council supports that if you are, by no fault of your own, in a situation where you need support, you should have it.”
Cllr Brodie said:
“I would love to see it (the cap) abolished and I’ve said to Richard Quigley who is my MP now that if I’d been in his place as a Labour MP…I would have been one of the suspended Labour MPs who voted against not lifting it at the start of this government.
“I spent 12 years as a Labour councillor, 35 years as a Labour member, I’m ashamed of that party now.
“This motion will achieve nothing, absolutely nothing. I’ve written similar sorts of things – they’re a waste of time, a waste of pen and ink – all these letters.
“This is not the way to address it, the way to address it is by actively putting real pressure on your MPs.”
Speaking to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg last year, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said she could not promise to remove the cap and would not make ‘unfunded commitments’.
She said:
“If you ask, are we going to lift kids out of poverty? Absolutely we are.
“And look at some of the things we are committed to do and that we will do: free breakfast clubs for all primary schools so that all children get a good breakfast in the morning and to help their mums and dads be able to take more hours at work or to get a job, the creation of 3000 additional nurseries with 100,000 places…the New Deal for Working People to turn the minimum wage into a real living wage, banning exploitative zero hour contracts.
“These are all things that have a material impact on child poverty.”
If the parents can’t afford to keep 2 kids then don’t have them. Why should tax payers pay for their extra offspring.
Because sometimes after having kids life steps in the way and plunges people into redundancy, ill health, single motherdom, widowhood etc. If everyone needed a crystal ball to see into the future, no one would have any kids at all, unless they were extremely rich, privileged and entitled. Which one are you then?
Very true.
Some families have more children to get more benefits
larger home etc etc.
Completely agree, it’s the parents that have the kids that put them into poverty. If the cap is removed, they will just go and have more.
Perhaps our so called councillors who are of the hard left variety would like to make up the difference from their own pockets.
I think you must mean hard right ones…they’re usually the ones with the deepest (but sewn up) pockets.
They could take a pay cut and claim less expenses.
Maybe if the personal allowance was increased to a proper living standard benefits/handouts wouldnt be needed, People would be able to support their own family without needing breakfast clubs, free dinners, foodbanks etc
Personal allowance should be £20,000.00 a year.
I am not sure why a local autority is trying to meddle in central government policy. Shouldn’t the MPs be doing that. But that aside, given that all the rationale behind the introduction of Family Allowance which became Child Benefit no longer being the case, is it not time to scrap the whole thing and save the cost of the administration. I am all for alleviating child poverty but paying Child Benefit to all, including the richest parents in the country is ridiculous. People chose to have children, they sshould be responsible for supporting them. I can’t imagine getting government help for the cost of petrol beause I chose to drive a car.