Is this fair?

62% 38%

Doesn’t that man that 52% of the people claiming Universal Credit aren’t working because they don’t need to. They have enough money to live comfortably without having to bother.

I wonder why the 32% carry on?

No child asks to be born, has any control over how its parents behave or what size of family they chose to have.

As has already been posted on this thread.

38% of people needing to claim Univeral Credit are working. That says a lot about our low-wage economy, that working people need to claim benefits to survive.

No child asks to be born, has any control over how its parents behave or what size of family they chose to have.

Universal Credit amounts to around £75 a week per child.

Scrapping the two children UC cap is estimated to cost around £2.3 billion. It’s about the same as paying the Winter Fuel Payment. I figure if the government can return to paying all pensioner households £200 or £300 every year whether they need it or not (and only those individuals with incomes in excess of £35,000 will pay it back), then they can also do this small thing so that fewer child go hungry.

Around 40 million people in the UK pay income tax. If one subscribes to the notion that tax funds public spending (I don’t but it’s how most think of it) then it means every taxpayer paying around £1 a week to cover that £2.3 billion so that children don’t go hungry. The government has just paid me £200 WFP = £4 a week.

Some of the comments on this thread make me very sad indeed.

Francis Ryan writing in The Guardian:

There are moments in politics to celebrate and there are moments to not be complacent. Sometimes, it is both at once. Eight years of campaigning, court cases and a change in government have at last rid the country of the scourge of the benefit limit. Hundreds of thousands of children will be safer; their parents less afraid.

And yet the energy it took to get here and the backlash it has already provoked show starkly how progress is an uphill battle. Decency is not a simple sell. Prejudice and resentment are, sadly, much easier to spread. The most obvious of truths – that every child matters, that some things go beyond partisan point-scoring – are, to some, not obvious at all.

Cheer the victory today. Tomorrow, the fight continues. The two-child limit is at last abolished but the sentiment that created it is alive and well.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/nov/27/two-child-benefit-limit-abolished-budget

M0nica

But, but, but. What if the parents are in work, have a good income, a nicwe house and decide to have a third or even fourth child, then something goes badly wrong: an accident, an illness, unemployment.

How do you feel about the 2 child cap in those circumstances?

Yes, unexpected circumstances can happen to anyone, as I already said.

Sudden changes in circumstances can happen to anyone, loss of a job, illness, and of course a safety net should be there but it is defining the line between safety net and lifestyle choice that is the conundrum for Governments.

But, but, but. What if the parents are in work, have a good income, a nicwe house and decide to have a third or even fourth child, then something goes badly wrong: an accident, an illness, unemployment.

How do you feel about the 2 child cap in those circumstances?

Homestead62

Yet the vitriol on Mumsnet towards older people is phenomenal! According to most of them on there we are all rolling in it, big house, and multiple cruises and holidays, not to mention my £35.000 per year pension. Oh ma sides....I b***y wish!

This tax break on those on the new State Pension will upset them even more.

I do not understand a lot of the thinking behind some of the decisions this Government has made in successive Budgets.

I’m disappointed (🙈) that the initial plan to remove WFA for those above pension tax credit and start the process of reducing PIP was so badly managed

Some people believed cancer patients would lose pip and other benefits.

Had there been a proper process, with clear stats and information I suspect the majority of Labour mp’s would have supported.
The benefit bill isn’t sustainable.

I totally agree with the OP. When I was younger I took on extra work when I needed more money. People today know how to work the system but it’s the fault of the government. I have to admit the older I get the more right wing I’m becoming.

I'm not sure we have the lowest tax rates in Europe

Yet the vitriol on Mumsnet towards older people is phenomenal! According to most of them on there we are all rolling in it, big house, and multiple cruises and holidays, not to mention my £35.000 per year pension. Oh ma sides....I b***y wish!

Oh, thank you for explaining GG13, not something I have much experience of.

J52

“After the budget and the removal of the cap she was pleased to say their monthly income would increase by £900.” 5 children.

I don’t understand this calculation. It’s £26.05 for the first child and £17.50 for subsequent children.
According to Gov calculations £112 per month for first child and £74. 75 for subsequent children.
So £112 + 4x £74.75 ( £299). = £411
Not an insubstantial amount, but not £900.

You are posting about Child Benefit which is payed for all children.

RR has lifted the Universal Credit benefit which was capped at two children. Totally different benefits 🤷‍♀️

“After the budget and the removal of the cap she was pleased to say their monthly income would increase by £900.” 5 children.

I don’t understand this calculation. It’s £26.05 for the first child and £17.50 for subsequent children.
According to Gov calculations £112 per month for first child and £74. 75 for subsequent children.
So £112 + 4x £74.75 ( £299). = £411
Not an insubstantial amount, but not £900.

Oh my goodness, R. is wrong if she does and she is wrong if she doesn’t. Give her a chance, the others had 14 years.

The UK has the lowest tax rate in Europe, if you want a lower taxes think of the USA and then pay your health bills etc. The sick in some cases finish on the streets because they have had to sell their homes for medication.

So, yes kick out Labour and vote in, 3x millionaire, Farage who not only spent time in Russia and steered the UK out of the EU but is also friends with Trump.

Definitely in England Allira

GrannyGravy13

Allira

I'm not sure about food vouchers, unless they can be used discreetly.
I remember children being embarrassed because others knew who had free school meals and who didn't.

The food vouchers during the school holidays for those on free school meals come via an email with a code that is scanned at the checkout.

Good. Is that throughout the UK?

I always remember that boy who was asked by the Childrdn's Commissioner if he enjoyed the school summer holidays.
He said no, he didn't because he didn't get a dinner in the holidays 😥

How about if the government removed the third, and any subsequent, babies at birth?

Would that keep you all happy?

Allira

I'm not sure about food vouchers, unless they can be used discreetly.
I remember children being embarrassed because others knew who had free school meals and who didn't.

The food vouchers during the school holidays for those on free school meals come via an email with a code that is scanned at the checkout.

I'm not sure about food vouchers, unless they can be used discreetly.
I remember children being embarrassed because others knew who had free school meals and who didn't.

If the extra money could have been allocated in vouchers, eg food, uniform, clothing, school expenses, childcare, clubs, books even toys etc, could have gone directly to support the children, not increase the parents’ income eg food, clothing, school items.

I don't think the two child benefit cap should have been lifted. And certainly the 50-ish waitress in our local cafe didn't think so either, she was almost incandescent with anger that she (on minimum wages) was having to pay taxes to cover this allowance. RR might have been pleasing her back benchers but probably not the electorate.

GrannyGravy13

I stand by my opinion that benefits should be a safety net not a lifestyle choice

The example in the OP appears to be a ^lifestyle choice^

That's it exactly.

I did see that parent on the television and did wonder why they would add to their family if they couldn't feed the four they had without having to use food banks.

It is not the fault of the children, of course, and I'm sure everyone hopes they thrive.
It is why that is puzzling.

There are ways and means of preventing conception (free) (who knew!) but they are not infallible, as many of us might know. There are ways which are of course.

Is it fair on the children themselves to bring them into a world where your parents have to rely on others, ie working parents who might have limited their own families because that is the number they know they can afford?

Sudden changes in circumstances can happen to anyone, loss of a job, illness, and of course a safety net should be there but it is defining the line between safety net and lifestyle choice that is the conundrum for Governments.

No one on benefits should have an income higher than a person working full time.
I have seen an increase recently in people who only work part-time because for some reason they are allowed to claim benefits; they flatly refuse extra shifts, overtime and extra hours 'because I would lose my benefits.' (a delivery driver, a supermarket assistant and a teacher whose husband was re-training, as a teacher.) How are they allowed to do this?

Equally, I know people who have three jobs; who work every Saturday shift so they can share childcare to enable their partner to work, a farm worker who eventually couldn't cope with the hours demanded in a six day week to make a living wage and it took two men to replace him.
This is pure socialism; make all dependent on the State and do not reward enterprise.