No tracking. No cookies
Subscriptions
Subscriptions
Byline Times is an independent, reader-funded investigative newspaper, outside of the system of the established press, reporting on ‘what the papers don’t say’ – without fear or favour.
To support its work, subscribe to the monthly Byline Times print edition, packed with exclusive investigations, news, and analysis.
By voting against the two-child benefit cap amendment the new Labour Government is perpetuating systematic and institutional racism, as those who would be lifted out of poverty would largely be Black, ethnic and Asian children.
Last Tuesday, Prime Minister Keir Starmer suspended seven MPs from his party in an unprecedented response to a rebellion supporting a Scottish National party amendment to scrap the cap which child poverty charities and campaigners have widely criticised.
In a move to seemingly placate rebels, Starmer said, on July 22, that he may consider ending the cap, which had previously been described as unaffordable.
The cap limits state benefits – Universal Credit and child tax credits – to two children per family and was introduced by the Conservatives in April 2017 as part of a wider austerity programme.
Data from the ONS from 2022, demonstrates that 30.3% of all live births in England and Wales were to non-UK-born women, up from the highest proportion of live births to non-UK-born women seen since records began. The ethnic groups demonstrating higher birth rates included Indian, Pakistani, Polish, Bangladeshi, Nigerian, and Somali.
Poverty data shows that Pakistani and Bangladeshi households are more likely to be impacted with a 2024 House of Commons report showing that 56% of Bangladeshi households were in poverty, 48% of Pakistani households, 40% of Black British households, and 35% of Any other Asian background.
Data looking at children and ethnicity further highlights the issue, with 67% of Bangladeshi children experiencing child poverty, 58% of Pakistani children, 47% of Asian British and 45% of Black British.
While the current debate has focused on the 350,000 children that could be pulled out of poverty if the policy were to be scrapped, it paints an incomplete picture. For such demographics, the policy’s negative impacts will be particularly acute, setting a rocky trajectory for their employment and health outcomes.
The rise in right-wing political rhetoric cannot be overlooked in playing a role in the decision to maintain the policy. In particular, “the great replacement theory”, which proposes that the white British population will be replaced by non-white groups, is often present in right-wing narratives.
In recent years the census data has been politicised by the likes of Nigel Farage who in 2022, claimed that London, Manchester, and Birmingham had become minority white cities.
On 30 June, The Guardian reported on the implication of falling birth rates for the economy and how having children has become an unaffordable luxury, and last week it carried an article on how ‘price caps could help end IVF postcode lottery’. Why then, is there a contradictory policy capping child benefits at two children?
Surely in years to come, such a policy only serves to exacerbate falling birth rates, which means problems for an ageing population, and a care industry already at breaking point.
What the mainstream media has not discussed is how the continuation of such a policy comes at a critical time in British politics, when Reform UK has gained momentum and absorbed Conservative voters, and Labour has lost voters from the Muslim community.
It seems Starmer is not averse to disappointing Black, Asian, and ethnic voters, given his comments about Bangladeshi migrants – he singled out Bangladesh as a country where illegal migrants are not being deported to quickly enough – just days before the election; deselection of Faiza Shaheen prior to the election, and removal of the whip from the first Black MP, Dianne Abbott earlier this year.
Maintaining the two-child cap three weeks into Labour’s premiership is likely designed to position Labour more favourably to traditional Conservative voters, who have been documented to share anti-immigrant, and often, white nationalist sentiments.
Given the sheer number of Black, ethnic, and Asian children living in poverty and whose lives could be drastically improved, the decision not to scrap the policy signals a dangerous turn in British politics. One, where race and ethnic groups are increasingly neglected to appease growing populist sentiments, which are premised on the fear that whiteness is in decline.