‘Bah humbug politics and the cruelty of the two-child limit’

The removal of the two-child limit announced by Rachel Reeves at this year’s budget cements the government’s commitment to tackling child poverty.

I am overjoyed that this cruel policy has been abolished. It won’t make a difference to my life: I’m a mum to one boy, and work full-time, but I celebrate it for the poverty reducing measure that it is. It was a punitive and discriminatory policy, which harmed some of our most vulnerable members of society – children.

A social security system should be a safety net, to help people when they need it, and to support when circumstances require. I spent five years solely relying on benefits when my son was going through chemotherapy and two bone marrow transplants, which left me unable to work. Children are our future and we need social policy provisions that enable them to thrive. The removal of the two-child limit does not come into force until April 2026, so families affected must still manage another winter and struggle through. But at least there is a glimmer of hope that the following winter might be easier, though I know that might be cold comfort to families currently struggling.  

READ MORE: ‘The Tories sneer at ordinary Brits — Labour is determined to lift them up’

Unfortunately, certain mainstream newspapers and some opposing political parties do not share my sentiments. They have criticised its removal, even though the two-child limit has caused record breaking levels of child poverty since its introduction in 2017.

The response from opponents of abolishing the two-child cap has been straight out of A Christmas Carol – a resounding “Bah Humbug” that Ebenezer Scrooge (prior to his epiphany) would have been proud of. There has been a return to the rhetoric of a “Benefits Street Budget,” neatly referencing ‘poverty porn’ and exploitative TV programmes which ran during the peak of austerity under the coalition government of the early 2010s.

The residents who featured in these programmes were some of the most vulnerable people in society and were dealing with a range of difficult issues. Sadly, some of them have since died because of their issues. It is deeply insensitive and offensive to label the removal of the two-child limit a “Benefits Street Budget.” If benefit claimants were an ethnic group, this level of negativity directed at them could be considered a hate crime. So why is it different for those facing poverty and receiving support through social security? Some of the hatred and vitriol meted out by some politicians and the media should be called out for the hate speech that it is.

Subscribe here to our daily newsletter roundup of Labour news, analysis and comment– and follow us on Bluesky, WhatsApp, X and Facebook.

The amount of misinformation around the removal of the two-child limit is astounding. Newspapers have been gleefully reporting how much extra families will be receiving. Certain politicians have been giving interviews about how unfair it is that families will get extra money. These accounts often side-step the reality that the majority of families affected by the two-child limit already have someone in work, and that the sister policy to the two-child limit – the benefit cap remains in place. 

The benefit cap is also responsible for causing high levels of child poverty. Evidence shows that it is families who are disproportionately affected by the benefit cap and so if we are to eradicate child poverty then it needs to be removed too. 

The families who will be affected by the removal of the two-child limit are likely to be in lower-paid jobs, they might include our carers, shop assistants, or delivery drivers – the very people who were delivering front line services to UK society during the Covid-19 pandemic. In 2020, the then ruling Government encouraged the nation to clap for people such as these, who, alongside NHS workers, were working on the front line. In 2025, some of these same key workers are now derided and ridiculed simply because their low wages mean they need support from our social security system. 

The politicians and newspaper editors opposing the removal of the two-child limit should hang their heads in shame. They are purposefully and knowingly creating hate and division in the UK. It is absolutely shocking that anyone can be in favour of a policy which punishes – and is cruel to – children. The rhetoric echoed by opponents of the removal of the two-child cap carries the message that people should ‘not have children they can’t afford.’ Within this narrative, they seem to forget about the actual children and the devastating consequences the two-child cap has wrought on them. It is a rhetoric completely devoid of compassion.

Share your thoughts. Contribute on this story or tell your own by writing to our Editor. The best letters every week will be published on the site. Find out how to get your letter published.

The current government has successfully created the foundations for reducing child poverty with the removal of two-child limit. They now need to build on this to permanently eradicate child poverty. As for the opponents of the removal of the two-child limit, we can only hope they have a Christmas epiphany worthy of old Scrooge himself.

• • SHARE: If you have anything to share that we should be looking into or publishing about this story – or any other topic involving Labour– contact us (strictly anonymously if you wish) at [email protected].
  • SUBSCRIBE: Sign up to LabourList’s morning email here for the best briefing on everything Labour, every weekday morning.
  • DONATE: If you value our work, please chip in a few pounds a week and become one of our supporters, helping sustain and expand our coverage.
  • PARTNER: If you or your organisation might be interested in partnering with us on sponsored events or projects, email [email protected].
  • ADVERTISE: If your organisation would like to advertise or run sponsored pieces on LabourList‘s daily newsletter or website, contact our exclusive ad partners Total Politics at [email protected].