Do other European countries have the two-child benefit cap like UK?

The two-child cap, introduced by the Tories in 2017, was supposed to make things fairer. It was supposed to mean that “families in receipt of benefits [would] face the same financial choices as those supporting themselves solely through work”.

This was, from the outset, absolute nonsense, presuming as it did that all parents could be neatly categorised as either striver or skiver, that each was in possession of a crystal ball and that people’s family-building decisions are significantly influenced by punitive policies of the government of the day.

READ MORE: Labour manifesto projects £2.5bn surplus – so scrap two-child benefit cap, SNP say

Anyone deciding whether or not to have a third or subsequent child was expected to look far into the future and assess whether their circumstances might change, for better or worse. If they were unemployed or on a low income (perhaps temporarily, while looking after their first two children), they were to forecast their future earnings while assessing the long-term viability of their relationship.

If they were living comfortably, they were to weigh up whether job loss, divorce, bereavement, ill health or other misfortune might push them into poverty.

In the event of an unplanned pregnancy they were expected to do all this very quickly and, presumably, opt for abortion if the sums did not add up. The message was clear: if things don’t pan out the way you expect, tough. You should have thought about that before having the extra kid.

How many of those parents could possibly have predicted the many factors that might affect their earnings during the span of a childhood? They would have had to foresee an unprecedented global pandemic, Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, the cost of living crisis and then, for good measure, Liz Truss crashing the UK economy. Their spreadsheets would have to factor in sudden, huge increases to fuel bills, mortgage payments or rent. The notion is simply preposterous.

Former prime minister Liz Truss lasted less than two months in office

So far, the cost to Starmer of changing his tune on the two-child cap has been negligible. Indeed, it might even have helped Labour to gain support from disillusioned Tories who wanted to teach their party a lesson but certainly didn’t want to support any fertile spongers in the process.

But if he retains the cap, Starmer will be casting a vote of no confidence in his ability to remain in government for any length of time, because the true costs of scrapping the policy are far outweighed in the long run by those of retaining it.

“The very high financial cost of child poverty demonstrates that investment in an effective anti-child poverty strategy is likely to pay for itself,” argues the Child Poverty Action Group, which says scrapping the two-child cap would be the single most cost-effective way to reduce child poverty.

Second on its list is the removal of the overall cap on the total a household can receive in benefits – a policy that often interacts with the two-child cap.

READ MORE: German city makes official move for Scottish twin after being charmed by Tartan Army

The Larger Families project, which investigated how families with more than two children were coping with the benefit cap and/or two-child limit, published its final report last year. It found the two-child limit was “based on assumptions that clash with everyday experiences of families” and that many parents were not even aware of it when their third or subsequent children were conceived, so by definition their behaviour was not influenced by it. The team found no evidence of increased employment among affected families, and that the impact of poverty on parents’ mental health served as an additional barrier to work.

The researchers also conducted comparative analysis of social security support for children across the EU, and found that only three member states had any cap on support based on family size. Of those countries – Spain, Cyprus and Romania – none restricted benefits after just two children. By contrast, 17 out of 27 EU countries were found to have more generous support per child as family size increased. Far from being punished, parents were given extra help.

Keir Starmer has kept the Tories' two-child benefit cap in place

Other European countries do not form their welfare policies in response to clickbait headlines in newspapers like the Daily Mail. Starmer must be reminded at every opportunity that the UK is a grim outlier in seeking to punish children for having too many siblings and living in households where life hasn’t gone to plan.

If Starmer is in this for the long haul, he should be planning for the future of the children being born today. The UK birth rate is far below replacement rate, yet most of the political noise is about cutting immigration, not ensuring today’s young people have safe and affordable housing in which they can potentially raise families.

The world is more uncertain than ever before, and no-one can be sure they won’t ever need a safety net to catch them if they fall. Starmer says he can’t afford to repair the gaping holes in the UK’s. The truth is he can’t afford not to.