A landmark change to welfare rules, announced as part of the recent budget, is set to transform the lives of hundreds of thousands of families across the UK. The Labour government has officially ended the controversial two-child limit on benefits, a policy long criticised for pushing children into poverty.
Immediate Impact on Child Poverty
The move, enacted by Chancellor Rachel Reeves, has been celebrated by backbench MPs and committee chairs for its direct and profound impact. Helen Hayes and Debbie Abrahams, chairs of the education and work and pensions select committees respectively, issued a joint statement. They declared the change would "immediately lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty and stop even more being drawn into it."
Labour MP Ruth Cadbury went further, stating that the Chancellor was lifting nearly half a million children out of poverty with this single decision. The sentiment was echoed by Antonia Bance, MP for Tipton and Wednesbury, who said on Bluesky she had worked to end the limit since her election and praised ministers for acting to give every child the best start in life.
Political Calculations and Reactions
The decision, announced in the budget on 24 December 2025, appears to have significant political dimensions. One Labour frontbencher suggested the policy helped secure support from the Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP), buying the Chancellor "time and respect" for the government's wider agenda. Announcing the change, Chancellor Reeves stated: "Today we delivered the budget. Now, we've got to win the argument, and we've got to win the argument every single day."
However, the move has drawn fierce criticism from the opposition. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch attacked the budget, claiming it delivered only "higher taxes and out of control spending." She argued the Chancellor had chosen to impose a "jobs tax", abandon welfare reform, and spend money the government doesn't have, making her position "untenable."
A Defining Policy Shift
The abolition of the two-child limit marks a decisive shift in social security policy. For its supporters, it represents a long-overdue correction to a policy they view as inherently unfair. The core argument is that financial support for a child should not be determined by their birth order within a family.
The immediate consequence, as framed by its proponents, is clear: a substantial reduction in the number of children living below the poverty line. The debate now moves to the wider economic argument, with the government needing to defend its fiscal choices against claims of unsustainable spending from its critics.
