THE UK Government has caved in to demands to scrap plans to make their two-child limit on benefits retrospective.
Initially, from next month, the Department for Work and Pensions were to set to force the limit on all new Universal Credit claims, regardless of when any children were born.
But in a speech today, Work and Pension secretary Amber Rudd is expected to say that this is “not right”.
When it was first introduced by the then Chancellor George Osborne in 2015, the limit was supposed to be a way of encouraging people on benefits not to have more children.
However, the DWP wanted all families applying for Universal Credit from next month to be restricted, even if they had their children before the cap was announced.
READ MORE: Alison Thewliss: ‘Scrap the two-child policy for everyone’
Rudd is expected to say: “These parents made decisions about the size of the family when the previous system was the only system in place.
“So I can today announce that I am going to scrap the extension of the two-child limit on Universal Credit for children born before April 2017.”
She will add: “All children born before that date will continue to be supported by Universal Credit. This will help approximately 15,000 families a year.”
Rudd’s change of tack comes on the same day as a damning report from a cross-party group of MPs described the plan as “inexplicable”.
Frank Field, who chairs the Work and Pensions Select Committee, said it was “hard to think of anything more unfair than taking money from
families whose children were born before the policy was even thought of”.
Rudd is also expected to confirm her decision to end the “managed migration” of three million welfare claimants on to Universal Credit.
The DWP will instead set up a pilot scheme to move an initial 10,000 people onto the all-encompassing benefit in July.
Rudd will say: “The lessons from the pilot will inform our next steps, but there will be no overall delay.
“Universal Credit migration will be completed, as planned, by 2023. However I will consider carefully the results of the pilot, and its implications”.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel