The Two Child limit to benefit payments was introduced by the Conservative Government in 2017 and is supported by the current Labour Government. It prevents families from claiming Child Tax Credit or Universal Credit for more than 2 children in the household.
Council notes the recent research conducted by the End Child Poverty Coalition which has found that:
In Oxfordshire 10,850 children in 3050 households are currently affected by the two-child limit to benefit payments.
Council believes that the two-child limit is a cruel policy that should be scrapped.
Council resolves to:
Minutes:
The following motion was proposed by Councillor Kate Gregory and seconded by Councillor Bob Johnston.
“The Two Child limit to benefit payments was introduced by the Conservative Government in 2017 and is supported by the current Labour Government. It prevents families from claiming Child Tax Credit or Universal Credit for more than 2 children in the household.
Council notes the recent research conducted by the End Child Poverty Coalition which has found that:
In Oxfordshire 10,850 children in 3050 households are currently affected by the two-child limit to benefit payments.
Council believes that the two-child limit is a cruel policy that should be scrapped
Council resolves to:
The following amendment was proposed by Councillor Baines and seconded by Councillor Charlie Hicks.
Council notes the recent
research conducted by the End Child Poverty
Coalition which has found that:
In Oxfordshire 10,850 children in 3050 households are currently affected by the two-child limit to benefit payments.
Council believes:
· Reckless decisions by the former Government in supporting unfunded spending commitments has left a black hole in our nation’s finances.
· Governments and political parties should never commit to unfunded spending commitments, this threatens the stability of our economy.
·
Tthat the two-child limit
is a cruel policy that should be scrapped once the fiscal
environment allows.
Council resolves to:
Following debate, the amendment was lost with 14 votes in favour; 35 against and 0 abstentions.
Following further debate on the original motion, it was lost with 22 votes in favour; 28 against and 0 abstentions.