The two child limit for benefits

jml812

There is a lot of confusion in the responses. It is not about 'child benefit' where there is no cap on the number of children, though there is a High Income Child Benefit Tax Charge. Starmer is talking about the two child limit for those on benefits.

This doesn’t seem to have got through, jm1812! Everyone without a high income can have Child Benefit, but those who are on other benefits, and therefore on low incomes even if in work, are the ones being denied extra payments for more than 2 children. I agree with those who don’t expect the Labour party to decide now what their plans will be. The disgust I have expressed is for those who don’t see that children of others (particularly the Undeserving Poor) need a good start in life to be healthy and useful members of society.

Wheniwasyourage

jml812

There is a lot of confusion in the responses. It is not about 'child benefit' where there is no cap on the number of children, though there is a High Income Child Benefit Tax Charge. Starmer is talking about the two child limit for those on benefits.

This doesn’t seem to have got through, jm1812! Everyone without a high income can have Child Benefit, but those who are on other benefits, and therefore on low incomes even if in work, are the ones being denied extra payments for more than 2 children. I agree with those who don’t expect the Labour party to decide now what their plans will be. The disgust I have expressed is for those who don’t see that children of others (particularly the Undeserving Poor) need a good start in life to be healthy and useful members of society.

Totally agree Whitewavemark2 every child deserves access to a good education, good nutrition and hopefully a stable and loving family.

Where the above is not readily available (for whatever reason) then the state should provide a safety net.

Franbern, benefits are actually for families like yours. Nobody minds paying taxes for benefits for people who fall on hard times. That’s what it is for. It’s people who are fit and healthy and have choices but don’t care who is paying for their life.

When I was young my parents didn’t get any family allowance, I was a single child. But society and government made a big push to reduce child poverty. I’m extremely annoyed that Starmer has changed the policy he presented when standing for the leadership

I repeat. The some attribute to Starmer, was also policy under Corbyn. It is and has been Labour Party policy.

The some Th policy some

My son (74) was a toddler when I got 5 shillings a week for the second child. quite a lot when wages were £5 Week. It was paid to the mother.

I think some of you need to do a stint at the job centre you might think differently!

DaisyAnneReturns

I repeat. The some attribute to Starmer, was also policy under Corbyn. It is and has been Labour Party policy.

I am not sure what you are referring to?

Lyndie

Franbern, benefits are actually for families like yours. Nobody minds paying taxes for benefits for people who fall on hard times. That’s what it is for. It’s people who are fit and healthy and have choices but don’t care who is paying for their life.

And how do you justify the time and staff costs necessary to tell the difference?

My parents received no Family Allowance as I'm an only child, my DH is also an only child, so his parents got nothing either.
We have one son, born in the 80's for whom we did get Family Allowance, but DS and DDiL get nothing for their son, as they are both over the upper earnings limit.
Yes, they're lucky to have the earnings they do, but they've both spent many years and a lot of money getting qualifications and experience to get themselves to where they are now!
To say I'm bitter about it is something of an understatement!

Ilovecheese

DaisyAnneReturns

I repeat. The some attribute to Starmer, was also policy under Corbyn. It is and has been Labour Party policy.

I am not sure what you are referring to?

Sorry Ilovecheese. People are talking about the fact that Starmer has "decided to retain" the two child limit for benefits as if this was something new. In fact it was exactly the same under Corbyn. It is Labour policy.

If Starmer’s view is to limit public spending then I can see that (sort of in the short term) but in the longer term the money spent would be better for the country. It would help at 12% of the poorest children. This over a time scale of 18 years. Those productive children would be a benefit. The more worrying aspect of this policy is population control by the backdoor. The government of any colour should not be advising parents how many children they should or shouldn’t have. Least of all I would not want the likes of the current incompetent members of the Tory party and the govt dictating how many offspring I should produce.

Doodledog you make some good points.
I can only reference to primary school.
I would like to see all children get a balanced breakfast and lunch every day at school

Yes that would be a good start, though riddled with difficulties in today’s world of coeliac/gluten-free/ UPF-free/vegetarian/ vegan/ omnivore, together with the food allergies (the ones which have been discussed under ^fussy eaters^).
Our local authority publishes a healthy eating menu which parents can see in advance to select which meals their child will eat on each day of the week. There are always two choices, meat or meat free, together with a salad bar. Some children still won’t eat healthily and would rather have their healthy or unhealthy lunch boxes.
I’m not sure about the balanced breakfast. They have cereal and toast/crumpets/ orange juice at before school club. How would you define a balanced breakfast?

a guarantee of access to broadband for homework, and similar ways found to ensure that they have a chance of an education
Yes! If Covid taught us anything it is how many children don’t have internet access or equipment!
When we handed out the limited number of iPads or laptops that we could, tied into the school administration, it also taught us how many complaints we could expect when children or parents couldn’t download games without the administrator’s password.

NHS dentistry? I don’t think that happens now, certainly not where I work.
Eye tests are done though. Medical checks like weighing children were very unpopular with many parents.

^proper provision for things like
Dyslexia and ADD that can impair progress^
Yes.
We have regularly had whole school training for understanding and working with dyslexia and dyscalculia.
I would hope all schools/parents do their best to get children assessed, but there is an increasing demand for a label and then the expectation that the child will be provided 1-1 support which will solve the problem which far outstrips the number of support staff in school and the number of experts who can diagnose, (except in private companies. For a price they seem to be able to diagnose any number of problems.)

I can’t comment on music and drama at secondary level, except to say that my DGS seem to be doing well in dance, drama and music, the only issues being though instruments are loaned and that individual and group tuition is subsidised for less well off families, eventually the instruments have to be purchased by the families if the children want to continue. (An oboe and French horn are eye-wateringly expensive. A violin was cheaper)

there is no LABOUR policy they are Tories by another name ,The labour party id dead in Scotland and will only find a way back when they dump the puppet masters in WM and start working FOR Scotland and not against it ,
The Scottish child payment is £25 a week ,no "cap" child poverty agencies have praised it as a game changer against child poverty

It may be that they think there is a better way to help the poorest children Peaceful.

Germany has the same but more extreme problems in the drop in birthrate. Their rate of childlessness (proportion of childless women in all women between 45 and 49 years) rose from 17% in 2008 to 21% in 2018. (Federal Statistical Office of Germany)

In this country, so far, it seems that rather than childlessness, women are choosing to delay the time at which they have their children.

Two child families remain the most common family size (37%). However, there is a decrease in the figure compared with their mothers' generation born in 1949 (44%). This "two" child family is also decreasing having dropped from 2.8 to 1.92 over this period. ( UK Office for National Statistics).

It seems that women having large families are now very rare. The evidence for such families is often apocryphal, repetition or simply "what ifs". Our biggest problem seems to be the drop in birth rate.

It may be that Starmers comments about concentrating first on stability and reform, will bring forward different policies from the Labour Party in order to address these problems and childhood poverty, together.

Thank you for the clarification DAR.
Yes, Starmer agreed to carry on the opposition to the 2 child cap when he was standing for the leadership.

Molly, I'm no expert, but by breakfast I really mean something that means they are not going all morning hungry. Porridge or cereal and toast is better than nothing, and that, with a bit of fruit/glass of milk would be reasonably balanced and not expensive if bought in bulk.

I know children can be fussy eaters (my daughter was terrible) but I don't think it would do them any harm to have less choice, and eat it even if they didn't particularly want it, which they probably would if they couldn't bring in a lunchbox without prior consent. Vegetables and pulses are acceptable to most religions and sensibilities, and whilst there will always be someone who has intolerances and so on, with a 'take it or leave it' approach to lunch, the majority of children would be covered and policies could be drawn up to cover the rest, or the few relevant parents could send them with packed lunches as they will do now.

I really don't like the idea of Arts being only for those who can afford it. Music and drama (and poetry and things like scriptwriting) are very important, and if we want to watch/see/listen to Arts from a range of lifestyles we need to widen access to all of those things. I don't think that subsidising some families and not others is the answer though, as means-testing always misses out those who are deemed able to afford things, but who simply can't. They are often working families who then see those on benefits getting things that the (rightly or wrongly) feel are paid for with their taxes, and this causes resentments which are played on by governments.

Don't get me started on Dyslexia . I know things will have moved on since my daughter's day, and I do understand that everyone wants special treatment which is impossible to provide, but IMO she was let down by the system, which just didn't recognise it at all in our LEA in those days.

When I was a child (mid 60s -mid 70s) there was a school dentist (peripatetic) who did quick check-ups once a year or so, and referred where necessary to the NHS dentists on every corner. We also had the nit nurse, and I think boys were checked for descended testicles (if the rumours were true). Basic health checks could be carried out at various developmental stages, so that things like malnutrition could be spotted early, and vaccinations offered to those who'd missed them. My children may have had BCG inoculations at school. don't remember any of that happening at their school (which may be because I've forgotten).

In short, much more could be done to ensure that children are as healthy and well-developed as possible. Playing fields are being sold for building land, and that should stop, too.

I’m agree with the he two child limit and believe that many parents are feckless having more than they can afford. Parents must make do with what they get, after all you don’t tell the third child they are missing out you would just spread the money between them, some people would just put it into the household budget which is a bit dishonest. My family allowance went directly on clothes, food and necessities for my child.

GrannyGravy13

Dinahmo

Norah

GrannyGravy13

Not all families with two children get Family Allowance there is also an upper earnings cap.

As there should be, in my opinion.

We chose to have 4 children. What we didn't do was choose for taxpayers to support our children. I've always been sahm - I didn't expect taxpayers to support me in staying home, we did for ourselves. I consider my "pay" to be not paying childcare and doing husband's business books myself (not for pay).

Your husband may have put a "notional" salary through his books for you. Perfectly allowable to pay one's spouse.

We own our SME, definitely no notional salary I earn every penny of my salary.

You did write that you did your husband's books for nothing. And then you go on to say that you earn every penny of your salary from your SME. Which is it?

I responded rather too quickly. It was Norah I was querying, not you GG13.

Definitions of feckless - irresponsible, incompetent, inept and without purpose in life. I was/am not saying that EVERYONE who has more than two children is feckless. As others have said, things can go wrong. But there are some who fall within that definition and their children, however many they have, need to be cared for.

Ilovecheese

Thank you for the clarification DAR.
Yes, Starmer agreed to carry on the opposition to the 2 child cap when he was standing for the leadership.

As I said, it was Labour Party policy under the previous incumbent and he has, so far, continued with it. It's not, therefore surprising if he an announced continuation of this when standing for the leadership election.

Its just my opinion but I can't imagine him changing that stance until he knows more about the finances we are left with.
.

biglouis these " waste producers" ? Are they not currently, and in the future,paying their taxes to support essential services, driving the buses and staffing medical hubs and police stations? Are you not ever in need of these

Ive heard this rubbish argument before (so many times). Its the kind of thing my mother would have said and she wasnt very bright either.

Yes of course I "might" need someone to support me, as may you. In the meantime I am still subbing your children and your breeding activities and you are paying nothing equivalent that I want or can use.

Anyone who has a child does so upon my grace and my generosity.

All I can say is thank heavens we no longer have those, who consider themselves the great and the good, making decisions about the deserving and the undeserving poor.

We now have a basically points based system which is the same for everyone.