IT IS unacceptable for one of the world’s wealthiest nations to fuel child poverty through the two-child benefit cap and Labour must act swiftly to drop it, campaigners charged today.

The policy was introduced by George Osborne, heir to a 17th century baronetcy, in 2015.

Dubbed a “sibling penalty,” it prevents parents from claiming universal credit or child tax credit for more than two children. 

Over 4.3 million children are in poverty across Britain. 

A study by the End Child Poverty Coalition (ECPC) found a strong correlation between areas with high child poverty rates and the percentage of families affected by the cap.

On Sunday, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said that she would not make an “unfunded” pledge to scrap the scheme and that removing it would cost £3 billion a year.

But ECPC research highlights that child poverty already costs Britain £39bn a year, and the Resolution Foundation suggests that abolishing the cap would lift 490,000 children out of poverty.

ECPC chairman Joseph Howes argues that scrapping the policy would actually cost £1.7bn and that it would be “the most cost-effective way to reduce the number of children living in poverty across the UK.”

Today, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson, who will co-lead a new task force on child poverty, suggested that removing the cap will be “considered” as one of the levers for lifting children out of poverty.

But speaking at Farnborough International Airshow, Prime Minister Keir Starmer failed to repeat the suggestion, saying that there is “no silver bullet” to end child poverty.

He said that there was a “complicated set of factors” to consider including pay, benefits, work, housing, education and health, which is why Labour set up the task force. 

The SNP’s Westminster leader Stephen Flynn branded the task force a “cynical attempt to kick the issue into the long grass” and has tabled an amendment to the King’s Speech to scrap the cap. 

Labour MP for Liverpool Riverside Kim Johnson has also tabled an amendment to call for an end to the policy, which affects some 1.6 million children. So far it has been backed by 29 MPs.

If chosen by the Speaker, it will go to a vote this week.

Shelley Hopkinson from anti-poverty charity Turn2us said: “Any serious strategy to tackle child poverty must start by scrapping the two-child limit. 

“Every child deserves an equal chance in life, but this harmful and stigmatising policy compounds inequality for thousands of families across the UK.”

Neha Mahendru, Interim CEO at The Childhood Trust, said: “The existing benefit cap has had a detrimental impact on children and young people, exacerbating financial hardship and limiting access to essential services and opportunities.” 

She urged Labour “to act swiftly and decisively in scrapping this harmful policy.”

Oxfam domestic poverty lead Silvia Galandini said: “Families across the UK are struggling to afford food, heating and housing, and will continue to do so if this cap remains in place. 

“It is utterly unacceptable that in one of the richest countries in the world, we allow this policy to continue to fuel child poverty.” 

She called on the government to “seize the opportunity to right the wrongs of its predecessors.”

Barnardo’s chief executive Lynn Perry said: “Growing up in poverty has a devastating impact on so many parts of a child’s life, from their education to their mental and physical health, which have far-reaching consequences into their adult lives.

“We urge the government to ensure resource will be made available in the autumn to implement the recommendations of the taskforce — including an end to the unfair two-child benefit limit.

Mr Howes pointed out: “We don’t limit education to two children per family, or stop a third child from receiving hospital treatment. 

“Yet when families really need support we currently deny them the financial help they need.”

After Ms Phillipson’s remarks, a Downing Street spokesperson denied that it was planning on changing its position, telling reporters that Labour “weren’t going to make spending commitments without being able to say where the money was going to come from.”