For this Prime Minister – most people’s love and commitment doesn’t count

“Love is love. Commitment is commitment.” That was the tweet with which David Cameron announced the Tories new married couples allowance policy. But sadly it’s clear that for this Prime Minister most people’s love and commitment doesn’t count. The majority of married couples as well as the majority of families with children are all being left out. And it is a backward step that is badly out of touch with families’ lives today.

Think about why they have chosen this policy. It doesn’t tackle the cost of living crisis. Even two thirds of married couples won’t benefit. If you are both working on more than £10,000 a year – and most couples are now – then you can’t transfer your tax allowance and you won’t get any extra money.

Many hard pressed couples with children on low pay – perhaps juggling several part time jobs between them – won’t get anything from this plan. And it isn’t progressive. A one earner couple on £40,000 will get it, a two earner couple on £10,000 or £15,000 each won’t.

Nor is the married couples allowance designed to help children. Families with children have been heavily hit by Government policies (losing £7bn in things like child benefit and tax credits.) But this doesn’t solve that – the majority of families with children won’t get the married couples allowance either.

Married couples without children will be eligible – so long as one spouse stays at home. But most families with children – because they are working, widowed, unmarried or divorced – won’t.

Nor is it the best way to help women. Most working mums won’t benefit at all, even if they are married. If their job pays less than £10,000 then they may be able to transfer part of their allowance to their husbands – but that won’t make up for the tax credits of their own that they will have lost, or the soaring cost of child care.

In fact the married couples allowance will act as a penalty for mums going back to work or increasing their hours as the children get older, because the more they do, the more the allowance will be taken away. Just like the universal credit, this seems to be designed to penalise second earners trying to get back to work later on.

It isn’t the best deal for stay at home mums either. One earner families have been hit really hard by George Osborne’s policies so far. But £200 a year won’t make up for the £4000 a year they’ve lost according to the IFS. Nor will it help one earner couples who aren’t married.

And mothers are still more likely to lose out. David Cameron has cut the payments that go predominantly to women like child benefit and child tax credit – making it harder for many mothers (or fathers) to afford to stay home with their children when they are really small, and also taking away their independent income.

Married couples allowance isn’t the best way to solve that problem. It will be mainly paid to the working spouse instead.When we asked the House of Commons library to examine a married couples allowance, they estimated that in five out of six cases it would be paid to men. For stay at home mums in higher earning families who lost their child benefit altogether, the family won’t benefit at all.

It’s the same pattern every time. The Tories take a lot from the purse, put a little bit back in the wallet, and think that’s alright.But it isn’t. They have ripped up a principle supported by Beveridge when he established the Family Allowance – that independent income for women is important , especially if they are bringing up children. (And for the minority of families who experience domestic violence – independent income is even more important) David Cameron and GeorgeOsborne just don’t seem to get why it matters – which is why women have lost so much from Coalition policies, and feel so squeezed by the cost of living crisis. Little wonder David Cameron refused to describe himself as a “feminist” this week.

So if it doesn’t help support children, or women, or couples in work, what is the point of the married couples allowance?

The Tories want it to be a signal about the kinds of relationships they support, to show them standing up for “traditional values.” But who does that mean they are leaving out?

By choosing to reward only some married couples, the Tories have decided to shun the working couple, the widow or widower, the unmarried couple, the divorcee left looking after the children, and the single parent too. The Tories are saying some families are less deserving than others, and telling children that some kinds of families are better to grow up in.

It’s back to the nineties when the Tories stigmatised single parents working hard to manage. The partner who leaves and marries again – even for the third time – will be rewarded, but not the parent left behind holding the baby. Widows or widowers, left bringing up their children alone, are being told they are second class.

Nor is this even a positive signal about marriage. Earlier this year I argued strongly in Parliament for the equal marriage bill – exactly because I think marriage and long term loving commitments are important, and should be recognised for same sex couples too. But if you really believe marriage is an important modern institution to value love and commitment,you don’t make it mercenary or suggest people should getmarried for the sake of £4 a week.

Last week the Labour Party announced an energy bill freeze for all households, a 10p tax to help all basic rate taxpayers, and guaranteed more childcare – a one nation approachbecause we know that’s what families and a modern economy need. The Tories in contrast just don’t get the scale of the cost of living crisis and simply want to judge us all for our relationships instead. Gone is any pretence of accepting different kinds of families, supporting children, or helpingmothers in the modern economy. That’s not about love and commitment, Prime Minister, it’s turning the clock back – and it isn’t what a better Britain needs.