When the Tories introduced the cap did that mean anyone with more than two children at the time immediately lost their benefits for the xtra children or was it for new applications from a certain date?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] The Labour Government
- Thread starter Super Steve Earle
- Start date
Only for children born after 2017.
Thanks for clarifying so the parents of children born before and under 16/20 are still getting their entitlement?
The wording says that if they were getting tax credits at the time, they will continue. Not sure whether this means if they were born before 2017, and now fall into the tax-credit bracket they can start a new claim. Quite a lot of exceptions as well.
2 child limit | Low Incomes Tax Reform Group
From 6 April 2017, a two child limit policy was introduced to child tax credit which limits the amount of child tax credit awards. This page explains
fly high
Well-known member
Proper child benefit is capped on income, if one parent in a household earns more £50k they lose it completely but then if both parents earn £45k each they get the lot. Universal credit per child is different and is limited to 2 children. Tax credits are another matter and yes limit is currently set too high but with mortgage/rental costs, plus food and energy so high at what point do you draw the line? Who decides the limit?
Not quite, it's a sliding scale. For the last tax year you start to lose it all if one parent earns more than £50k and lost it all at £60k. From this tax year it's £60k to £80k.
Rdodge30
Well-known member
- Dec 30, 2022
- 532
It’s ‘Wrong - Daily’ not wrong Bailey
drew
Drew
Have to say I assumed the same. We haven't had child benefit for 4 years anyway so didn't dig deep into the detail.
Reeves to appoint Covid corruption tsar to claw back billions of waste | Rachel Reeves | The Guardian
Chancellor understood to believe £2.6bn of public money lost to fraudsters during pandemic could be recouped
amp.theguardian.com
All for this, first thing they should do is refund everyones lockdown fines with any money clawed back.
Rdodge30
Well-known member
- Dec 30, 2022
- 532
I don’t think it’s time to abandon whipping MP’s at all. There has to be a party line or you have chaos. To vote against your own government on the very first King’s speech of a parliament is absolutely asking for trouble and no doubt John McDonnell is pleased with the result, I imagine if it wasn’t the 2 child cap it would’ve been something else in the very near future. Interesting that he only had 6 on board though - even more interesting that Diane Abbot wasn’t one of them. Rebecca could very easily have abstained which would have had exactly the same result (zero) and would have signaled equally that she was not on board with the party line …although the party line as I understand it is to review the 2 child cap anyway?
This was political hooliganism from McDonnell and co and Sir Keir has quite rightly slapped a severe penalty of 6 months on the offenders. The only person responsible for Salford no longer having a Labour MP I’m afraid is the MP herself who must’ve known this would happen
I think you make some fair points. Means testing for all benefits is fair. If you don’t need financial support from the taxpayer then why should you get it? This then saves money that can be put to good use elsewhere or, my own personal campaign, can be used to give MORE support to those at the bottom end of the rung that desperately need it.
I don’t think anyone would be happy with a Chinese style legal limit on how many children you can have but I am not convinced that the taxpayer should support you to have as many as you want (though the taxpayer will be for at least the next 18 years of that child life anyway).
The problem with the 2 child cap however, is that the child can suffer because of the financial irresponsibility of the parents that knew they could not afford to have more children. The strong argument for reinstatement is that the children are suffering as a consequence not the (quote from elsewhere) ‘feckless’ adults
Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
- Oct 20, 2022
- 6,018
Thanks
That is a strong argument for scrapping the cap not reinstating it (it is already in place) - I don’t know how you deal with ‘feckless’ irresponsibility but taxpayers end up footing an enormous bill for the irresponsibility of adults daily who commit crimes, who are addicted to alcohol or drugs, who have obese-related diseases or just fcuk up their kids mentally and physically so they simply fail to thrive as ‘grown ups‘. Education, better access to family planning, better access to housing? Better basic/universal minimum wage? Not sure there is a cure for irresponsibility but won’t be reckless over-spending of limited public funds and it shouldn’t be enabled by social care policies either.
Multi-birth already comes under one of the exceptions to the rule so one can presume in a fair sytem, it would if the cap for universal credit and child tax credits were for example to be scrapped temporarily but reinstated for all 3+ children born after 2025.
Two Child Limit Exception
Turn2us jargon buster definition of Two Child Limit Exception
www.turn2us.org.uk
Last edited:
If MPs were allowed to vote however they wanted on every issue, the government would struggle to get much done.
Yes, she's there to represent her constituents, and if that is indeed how her constituents wanted her to vote on the issue, then she's still been able to do that - but as an independent, not as a Labour MP (for 6 months). If she had stood as an independent in the election, would she have got in, or was her win somewhat down to being the Labour candidate? She can't have it both ways.
If you stand as a party candidate then you have to accept that there are times you have to follow the party line, or at least abstain. The first vote that the new government takes part in is obviously one of those times, they need to show unity.
Twins are classed as an 'exception' to the cap - so that's been addressed.
Yes indeed to your second point.
Mellor 3 Ward 4
Well-known member
It was in the Labour Party manifesto.
If RLB didn't like it, or agree with it (or with KS's and the LP's stance on Gaza) it was quite possible for her to stand as an Independent at the GE.
She didn't (probably because in her constituency Labour would always win and she didn't want to lose her job/salary/pension) so she stands for Labour and then in the first vote, votes against her Party.
KS did the right thing IMO.
aolstudios
Well-known member
This ^
Multiplied by seven
Machiavelli
Well-known member
Do you make these accusations to everybody that has a job? Do you have a job?