Scottish Government names date for ditching two-child cap
Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville has said the cap – which was introduced by the Tories at Westminster – will be lifted on March 2, according to the Daily Record.
The two-child limit denies child allowances in Universal Credit and tax credits to third or subsequent children born after April 2017 and has been kept in place by Keir Starmer's Labour UK Government.
An associated so-called 'rape clause' grants exemptions for a child born as a result of 'non-consensual conception', which has remained highly controversial since it was put in place.
The Scottish Government pledged to mitigate the policy in its Budget.
READ MORE: Swinney: Independence the 'defining choice for this generation'
Under the SNP's mitigation plan, payments could work out at nearly £3500 for children affected.
Somerville has said the plan will mean there will be 20,000 fewer children in relative poverty next year.
She added it would be the fastest a Scottish social security benefit had been delivered.
She said: 'The Scottish Government has consistently called on the UK Government to end the two-child cap. Reports suggest that they are looking at the impact it is having. But the evidence is clear and families and Scotland can't wait any longer for the UK Government to make up its mind to do the right thing and scrap the cap once and for all.
'The Two Child Limit Payment will begin accepting applications in March next year. At less than 15 months from when we announced this in the Scottish budget, this will be the fastest that a Scottish social security benefit has been delivered.
'This builds upon the considerable action we have taken in Scotland, including delivering unparalleled financial support through our Scottish Child Payment, investing to clear school meal debts, and continuing to support almost 10,000 children by mitigating the UK Government's Benefit Cap as fully as possible."
READ MORE: UK must 'constrain Israel' after attacks on Iran, John Swinney says
Somerville added that the UK Government was still "holding back" Scotland's progress.
"Modelling published in March makes clear that if the UK Government act decisively on child poverty, they could help to take an estimated 100,000 children out of poverty this year," she said.
In April, analysis showed the cap has dragged 30,000 more children into poverty since Labour took office.
The Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) carried out research which also suggested 350,000 children would be lifted out of poverty instantly at a cost of £2 billion, while the depth of poverty would be reduced for another 800,000.
The organisation says 109 more children a day are pulled into poverty by the policy.
Due to the fact the two-child limit applies to third or subsequent children born after April 2017, it is effectively still being rolled out, with more and more children affected every day.
The number of children affected by the policy will continue to increase until 2035 when the first children born under the two-child limit turn 18.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Assisted dying, abortion, grooming gangs...Britain is morally deformed
I've a friend in a nursing home with very bad cancer. Physically, he feels OK, but there are hints of mental confusion. One afternoon we watched a quiz show on a blank television that wasn't turned on. It was proof, he said, that his mind couldn't be going because he got all the answers right. With the passage of Kim Leadbeater's Bill – save a stay of execution in the Lords – he suddenly looks like a candidate for assisted dying, and yet his suffering strengthens the case against. My friend, at this stage, is miserable less because of the tumour than because he's poor – can't afford a home care – and anxious because he wakes up in a strange place and imagines he's been kidnapped. He tells me he is at the centre of a plot by the state to kill the old by driving them mad. Though I assure him that no government is competent enough to pull such a thing off, I'm beginning to wonder if he has a point. Last week, the Commons voted to decriminalise abortion and legalise state-assisted suicide, the latest twist on 'cradle to grave'. Supporters spoke of humanising the law, of continuing the 'progressive' effort begun in the 1960s when abortion was first permitted. But there's a big contextual difference. Social liberalism in a time of economic growth was about increasing choice; today, in a period of austerity, it suggests narrowing options. Can't afford a baby? Terminate it. Worry you might burden the grandkids? Take a seat in the suicide pod. Of course this isn't what MPs meant by voting this way – but when you cut benefits for the elderly and cap them for children, and then make it easier to destroy yourself or your baby, it's hard not to infer a link. People keep saying to me, with a dash of British humour, that the state intends to kill us all to save money. Let's assume this is wrong. Let's call the speculation tasteless. Nevertheless, we have to account for why so many people feel this way, for the historic loss of trust. This is not some opioid-induced fantasy; human beings respond to cues. The third story in the grimmest week of Starmer's premiership was the publication of the Casey report, which confirmed that Asian men raped girls, and that officials declined to act because it might appear racist. This is mind-blowing stuff and shows how morally deformed our establishment now is. It has no coherent understanding of good and evil – in the difference between innocence and guilt – and in its yearning to look good by its own bizarre standard, it permits evil to flourish. In 2025, a person who prays outside an abortion clinic faces arrest. Meanwhile, a foreign-born, convicted rapist might avoid deportation by invoking their human rights. Religion, in fact, barely featured in the assisted dying debate, except to suggest that opponents might be acting under orders from the Pope. This fantasy pays a backhanded compliment to a faith that has been losing its influence for a very long time. As far back as 1937, Cosmo Gordon Lang, the archbishop of Canterbury, abstained in a Lords vote on divorce because he judged it 'no longer possible to impose the full Christian standard by law on a largely non-Christian population'. Christianity defined the West for so many centuries that its loss is experienced as the death of a fixed order, but we mustn't forget that Jesus was a revolutionary who overturned an even older system of ethics. Pagans, who largely felt life was meant to be enjoyed, thought the martyrdom-chasing Christians were nuts. One can see why. They taught that death is not the end, life is a test, and suffering is an opportunity to imitate the crucifixion. For example: the 7th century saint Cuthbert had a best friend, Herbert, and the two men dreamt of spending eternity together. But Cuthbert was a famously holy man, so would pass through purgatory to Heaven fast, whereas Herbert was just a very good man, so, they feared, might take longer – delaying their reunion. How did God fix the problem? He generously gave Herbert a long, painful illness, so that when he died on the same day as Cuthbert, his soul was so cleansed by suffering that they entered paradise at the same time. Weird, isn't it? Yes, but it also seeded into the West the idea that our life belongs to God, that He made us in his image, and this is a foundation for the principle that you can't take away another's life at will. This gradually flowered into rights for women or slaves, the peace movement and abolition of the death penalty. The problem with a commandment, of course, is that it's inflexible: it extends to unwanted foetuses and relatives in pain. Around the 19th century, we detached God from ethics, getting around the 'Thou Shalt Nots' and opening morality up to negotiation. Add individualism, toss in consumerism, and moral action today is contingent upon personality, economics, circumstance. Back when I was a socialist, before religion came into it, I wasn't comfortable with the idea that one unborn baby gets to live because its parents happen to be married and rich, whereas another is aborted because its mother is single and poor. Humanistic morality seemed surprisingly naive about the reality of the human condition, its appetites and deprivations. Looking at my friend in the nursing home, to what possible extent can one say he has 'agency'? I'm not sure he understands his diagnosis. The notion that he might have a chat with Kim Leadbeater, she with a smile and a clipboard in her hand, and make a rational choice to die next Wednesday afternoon is preposterous. The opportunity for error or manipulation is self-evident, yet many cannot, or will not, see it. For anyone who does choose assisted dying, I hope Christians respond with mercy. We are not in charge of Britain, haven't been for a long time, and I'm not sure I'd want to be. The best options left are to witness and accompany, to do the sometimes depressing, occasionally rewarding work of being with people when they go. I enjoy holding my friend's hand. I'd never have done that when he was healthy.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
Scotland 'should not be treated as afterthought' of HS2 project
Last week, the UK Government admitted the flagship infrastructure project had been 'no less than a litany of failure'. The Labour administration blamed the previous Tory government for the overruns. The link to Scotland for the project was cancelled in June 2022, with the route from Birmingham to Manchester scrapped by former Tory prime minister Rishi Sunak in 2024. READ MORE: UK providing 'political cover' for US and Israel after Iran attack Now, the scheme is running £37 billion over budget, and has been delayed beyond 2033. The UK's Secretary of State for Transport, MP Heidi Alexander, told the House of Commons last week: 'I'm drawing a line in the sand – calling time on years of mismanagement, flawed reporting and ineffective oversight. 'It means this government will get the job done between Birmingham and London. 'We won't reinstate cancelled sections we can't afford.' Alexander (above) also admitted there was 'no reasonable way to deliver' on the 2033 target for the first trains to run between London and Birmingham. The SNP are now urging the UK Government to look again at extending the line to Scotland, after taxpayers north of the border will have contributed to the project but see no benefit. Willie Coffey, SNP MSP, said: 'The fact the UK cannot construct a high-speed rail network - the norm in many countries around the world - speaks for itself. 'While we know HS2 won't have any stations in Scotland, with the way things are going it'll be lucky to have any stations in England either.' Coffey pointed to claims made during the 2014 independence referendum that a Yes vote would jeopardise Scotland's opportunity to benefit from HS2 'only to find that promptly after the referendum the connections to Scotland were ditched'. READ MORE: Douglas Alexander refuses to set out route to Scottish independence 'This is nothing new sadly, 30 years ago we were promised that Scotland would be connected to the Eurostar - but that was dumped despite Scotland's sizeable contribution to paying for the creation of the Channel Tunnel,' he added. "Promises broken and public money squandered is par for the course for Westminster. It's clear we need to get Scotland's finances and transport investment out of the hands of Westminster and into Scotland's hands with independence." It comes after new HS2 Ltd chief executive Mark Wild said the 'overall situation with respect to cost, schedule and scope is unsustainable' in a letter to Alexander. He said costs would continue to rise if ministers did not renegotiate engineering contracts awarded in 2020. Wild also said that the testing phase alone would be likely to take three years, rather than the 14 months that had been previously assumed. The Department for Transport has been contacted for comment. The £3bn Scottish link to HS2 was quietly dropped by the then-Tory government just 30 minutes before the result of a no-confidence vote on Boris Johnson was announced. When Sunak cancelled the Manchester leg at the 2023 Tory party conference, he said the money would be diverted to other public transport projects and roads in the North of England and the Midlands.
The Herald Scotland
3 hours ago
- The Herald Scotland
John Swinnney: 'World must pull itself back from the brink'
He said he agreed with the UN Secretary General on the need for an end to the conflict through diplomacy. Mr Swinney said: 'The conflict in the Middle East has escalated to an intensely more dangerous and alarming level as a result of the US intervention overnight, which risks spiralling into disaster for the region and the wider world. 'The world finds itself at a profoundly dangerous moment and must pull itself back from the brink.' READ MORE: He added: 'It is vital that the UK Government takes any and all steps it can through diplomatic channels to insist upon that. We also call on Iran to return to negotiations.' United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said earlier on Sunday he was "gravely alarmed by the use of force" by the United States against Iran. 'This is a dangerous escalation in a region already on the edge – and a direct threat to international peace and security," he said. He added that there is a 'growing risk' that this conflict could 'rapidly get out of control – with catastrophic consequences for civilians, the region, and the world'. Mr Guterres called on member states to 'de-escalate' and 'uphold their obligations under the UN Charter and other rules of international law'. He said: 'At this perilous hour, it is critical to avoid a spiral of chaos. There is no military solution. The only path forward is diplomacy. The only hope is peace.' The First Minister's response to the developments in the Middle East came after Sir Keir Starmer urged Iran to return to negotiations. UK minister Douglas Alexander said the Government 'has been putting contingencies in place' as the region braces for any potential retaliation from Iran. US President Donald Trump said early on Sunday that three key nuclear sites in Iran were 'completely and fully obliterated' in the military strikes. The US is thought to have used B-2 stealth bombers to drop bunker-busting munitions on the sites – including the deeply-buried Fordo facility – as well as 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from submarines. The US-UK base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean is not thought to have been used in the operation. The Prime Minister had earlier said Iran should 'return to the negotiating table', noting the region remains 'volatile'. He said: 'Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. 'Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat.' Former Scottish first minister Humza Yousaf was critical of the Prime Minister's response. He posted on social media: 'An awful statement from the PM, which ignores our collective responsibility to uphold international law. 'Supporting illegal military action in Iran, and gas-lighting us about an imminent nuclear threat, is hauntingly reminiscent of the lies told in the run up to the Iraq war.' During a protest march in London, Mr Yousaf had earlier accused the UK Government of 'abusing' anti-terror laws against the Palestine Action group, which vandalised two aircraft at RAF Brize Norton. Trade policy minister Mr Alexander, who is the MP for Lothian East and a former international development minister, spoke to the BBC's Sunday Show. He said: 'I understand that people have woken up this morning to the news that was breaking overnight with a real sense of concern. 'I want to assure your viewers that the British Government has been putting contingencies in place. 'There have been a whole series of meetings, I and other have been attending Cobra meetings in the course of the week.' He said plans are being put in place to move UK nationals in affected countries to safety, stressing the UK 'took no part in this military action'.
