Forum Topic

Removing the cap on Child Benefit - a good way to reduce child poverty?

This is now very much on the political agenda. It was in in the LibDem and SNP 2024 manifestos but not in the Labour Party Manifesto. Labour  instead promised to develop an "ambitious strategy to reduce child poverty".

Sam Hearn ● 6d34 Comments

I'm not commenting on the rights and wrongs of immigration. Just on a major change in the birth rate in developed and developing countries. It could not happen without contraception. A fairly new innovation in human history that is having a profound impact of the demography of the majority of the world. Who knew, given the choice women don't want to have loads of children. You are correct, the only thing holding up our population and mitigating against a bigger fall in the birth rate is immigration.It may take a few generations to feel the impact, but it will come, unless there is a reversal in the continuing decline.Interestingly where governments have tried to reverse the trend; China lifting its two child cap, Poland introducing family friendly policies, it has failed. China's TFR is 1, Poland's is 1.1. Both lower than Britain. People seem stubbornly determined not to reproduce or to do so in a restrained way.

Kathleen Healy ● 2h

The growth in population is through immigration which is mainly people of child bearing age. The UK population growth is not the same as the ‘global trend’ you refer to. The UK, like Australia and NZ, needs young professionals to come and work here and have babies. We should have a system like Australia where they desperately want doctors and nurses and veterinary surgeons etc but if you are over 35 you would have difficulty getting in unless you are a senior consultant or  top rated surgeon.  And the Points System is long and drawn out and can years before you are allowed to set foot in Australia. You can’t just arrive and expect to be processed.

Steve Taylor ● 11h

Growing but aging. Increase accounted for by people living longer and immigration not birth rate.A global trend.

Kathleen Healy ● 1d

“ The UK's changing population. The UK population is currently growing. In the year to mid-2024, the population increased by 755,300 to an estimated 69.3 million people, representing the second-largest annual numerical increase in over 75 years. This growth is primarily driven by net international migration.  Recent Growth: The UK population grew by 1.1% in the year to mid-2024. England saw the fastest growth at 1.2%, followed by Scotland (0.7%), Wales (0.6%), and Northern Ireland (0.4%). Primary Driver: The main factor behind this population increase is net international migration, which is the difference between the number of people moving into the UK and the number leaving. Long-Term Projections: Projections from the Office for National Statistics estimate continued growth for the next decade, with the population projected to increase by 4.9 million between mid-2022 and mid-2032.”

Steve Taylor ● 1d

The birth rate falls when contraception is available and women can access education and have choices.Over population is to some extent a subjective concept. Population has grown over time. If resources grow in tandem; housing, healthcare etc. we don't feel the pinch. In the past we have needed immigration to support continued economic growth. Recently arrived communities tend to have larger families, which is holding up the birth rate to some extent, but that doesn't continue with the next generation.A larger population of old folk needs a lot of younger people to work, pay taxes. maintain productivity. The UK is going to be disproportionately old in the years to come. As is most of the world. A scramble to entice young people from abroad is likely. Or a Handmaids Tale scenario.

Kathleen Healy ● 1d

Gosh the reason poor countries have more kids is that the kids work to support the rest of the family and many do not survive, it used to happen in this country centuries ago. The UK is over populated hence all the challenges with NHS, housing etc time to say NO.

Jayne Thorburn ● 2d

There is a demographic time bomb ticking. The UK total fertility rate fell to 1.41 in 2024 down from 1.44 in 2023.In some countries its below 1. China is just above 1. India has overtaken China as the most populous country in the world, but its TFR is only just above 2, so not quite replacement.A few countries still have a high birth rate, mostly in sub Saharan Africa. But nothing that could fill the gap in massive countries like China and India.When the UK's economy was booming and had an insatiable demand for cheap labour, it could replenish from Ireland and the Caribbean, India and other former colonies. There is no country populous enough to provide young workers for an aging, shrinking China.Odd to think that, unless there is a reversal in the birth rate trend, aging countries may in a few years be fighting for the young people from  the few countries with a high birth rate.

Kathleen Healy ● 2d

And Kahn is the prize idiot because the wealthy and ultra wealthy in Richmond, Barnes, Putney etc will never vote Labour. He’s giving away money and they are laughing even though it’s only for Reception and year 1 and 2 kids. In any event it should be means tested and not given to all.

Steve Taylor ● 3d

Khan is playing to the gallery of the families who have the most school age children.Simples.

Keith Iddon ● 3d

Kahn giving away our money to people who can well afford to pay for school meals. Idiocy supreme.

Steve Taylor ● 3d

Steve, not private schools, they surely wouldn't expect their children to get free meals.

Janice Evans ● 3d

Do ALL children in London schools receive free school meals?

Steve Taylor ● 3d

Children in London Schools do have free school meals. The scheme provided meals to 287,000 children in its first year, at a cost of £135m (rising to £140m in the second year).

Sam Hearn ● 3d

It would be as ridiculous to give ALL kids free school meals as it would be to remove the 2 child benefit cap. In this time of Labour’s austerity the child benefit cap should also be means tested. Why should wealthy people get child benefits for their children who are no doubt in private schools?  It’s a total waste of tax payers money.

Steve Taylor ● 3d

What a crazy conversation the majority of parents are responsible and do feed their kids. Totally agree support those parents that can’t. I am sure today teachers are sensitive towards kids in poverty or from just rotten parents. Tough on teachers.

Jayne Thorburn ● 4d

We will have to agree to disagree.

Keith Iddon ● 4d

I think it wrong that parents be assessed for a child to get a meal, and agree with other reasons mentioned, so across the board.

Janice Evans ● 4d

I'm sure they do!

Andrew Jones ● 4d

I know what you mean about stigma,as I was the only kid in the class of 44 who  had to call out 'free dinners' ever morning as the teacher took the register.That was until my dad found out.He accompanied me to school the next day and hed a 'meeting'with the teacher is a small,seperated  storeroom at the front of the class.My father emerged,looked at me and said 'See you later son' and Mr.Watson emerged ashen faced a little later and  never had to call that out again at register.I am sure teachers nowadays have different rules and expectations.

Keith Iddon ● 4d

I am not sure there is a bottomless pit of money for taxpayers to feed every child.I would provide this for every family assessed to be in need of it,perhaps broaden the qualifying criteria a little but I don't see it as a responsiility of taxpayers to pay for the food of children from richer families.When my family returned from abroad in 1968,I was 9 and my father could not get work for a few months and I received free meals at school for that time.When my father found work,that concession ended.It is not the job of the state to make people dependent upon it in my opinion,but to provide conditions where people can depend on the efforts of their own work to provide as much as they can for themselves.I don't see how it can provide everything for everybody at every stage of their life,especially in a democracy where governments change every few years.Parents are the ones who bear the greatest responsibilty to see that their child has enough food,but the state should help where needed.

Keith Iddon ● 4d

Also, offering all kids school meals potentially removes any stigma there might exist if they were only offered to kids whose parent or parents is/are in receipt of benefits.

Andrew Jones ● 4d

Because they will be the ones earning and paying taxes in 15 years time when we're all getting our state pensions, using the NHS etc. etc.?

Andrew Jones ● 4d

Why?

Keith Iddon ● 4d

Yes, give all kids free meals.

Janice Evans ● 4d

Yes, give the under privileged kids free school meals. Don’t give the irresponsible parents more and more money to spend on fags and booze and encourage more breeding.

Steve Taylor ● 4d

I'm told that many children actually eat their packed lunches when they get to school and then don't have anything to eat at lunchtime. This doesn't mean they haven't eaten anything before they left home!  When I was young we had to wait until breaktime for milk and a biscuit and then it was always good to have a hot lunch.  We were hungry again by the time we got home and would have a sandwich several hours before supper. We were lucky we didn't have both parents who had to work the very long unsociable hours some parents do and so weren't latch-key kids.It's so very important for children to be able  to concentrate on school lessons and learn to the best of their ability and since they can't do this well when they are hungry it is so much better for everyone everywhere if this isn't the case.I can understand why there should be a cap on numbers per family and  this is one of the subjects that should be discussed regarding citizenship and personal responsibility in schools so that children are more aware of life's choices before they leave school.  However many families aure blended.

Philippa Bond ● 4d

Simple answer is NO, i am all for looking after kids that the parents can’t be bothered too, give them free school meals, uniforms, found extra curriculum activities, fund school trips and the like. Happy for money to actually be spent on the kids not the parents they should work doing something if only to set a positive example to them. Giving money to parents has been done before and it did not work.

Jayne Thorburn ● 4d

“ they'll soon get the message and stop bothering.”That’ll be good. The population is growing fast enough. With illegal immigrants coming in at 130,000 a year now, if they have 4 kids each, the UK will have more than enough people.

Steve Taylor ● 5d

'If people want kids they should pay for them, not expect the state to shoulder the cost.'But it's 'the state' that benefits from people having children, to maintain a functioning population and the rest, so the state should pay for them. If people are increasingly blamed and made to feel guilty for having children, they'll soon get the message and stop bothering.

Peter Evans ● 5d

“ Access to better education and contraception and other preventative health care both here and abroad seems more effective.”Absolutely!  If people were better educated they would know that if you can’t afford to feed and clothe a child you shouldn’t have them. Removing the two child cap would just encourage irresponsible people to breed more and more. It would also be a USP to criminal gangs encouraging more illegals to buy tickets for their dinghies to cross the channel to Benefits Britain. This country cannot afford to offer more child benefits and it cannot afford to house and feed more illegal immigrants.

Steve Taylor ● 5d

Married couples tend to stick together during their siblings informative years, before the 7 year stitch begins to surface.I personally agree with a 2 child cap, and am against Khan's directive giving primary school children free school meals.Is the cost of a bowl of porridge, or a bowl of cornflakes, or an egg on toast for each sibling raised in London really beyond a family home?If people want kids they should pay for them, not expect the state to shoulder the cost.A compassionate government will always have provisions for those FEW children who are not being properly cared for at home.

Denis I. Fox ● 5d

Agree Philippa, that response smacks of wanting women to return to the kitchen and keeping them 'barefoot & pregnant'. Sounds about right for Farage and his cronies.

Vanessa Smith ● 5d

That seems rather outdated.  Relationships fall apart with or without a marriage certificate.  Access to better education and contraception and other preventative health care both here and abroad seems more effective. Wealth has always come and gone and can be measured in different ways.

Philippa Bond ● 5d

Interestingly, beasty Nigel Farage will do away with a 2 cap child allowance for married couples.This would grant the parents desire to have more children without inflicting an extra tax burden on them.It would also benefit the children by giving them (hopefully) a more stable upbringing by having their parents together.

Denis I. Fox ● 6d