SNP by-election candidate Katy Loudon has committed to introducing a Private Member’s Bill to abolish the two-child benefit cap and rape clause within the first 100 days of becoming an MP, if she wins the backing of voters in Rutherglen and Hamilton West.
The policy, introduced by the Tories and backed by the Labour Party, has hit 1620 children in the constituency according to the Child Poverty Action Group, and a total of 80,936 across Scotland.
Loudon has said that if the Labour Party in Scotland is serious about tackling child poverty, it will have “no reservations” about publicly backing the bill.
It comes as the SNP published new research, commissioned from the House of Commons Library, which shows scrapping the two-child benefit cap, and the bedroom tax, would cost a fraction of the £12 billion that Labour shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves (below) has ruled out raising by taxing the wealthy to fund cost of living support for families.
Previously, Reeves claimed she couldn’t scrap the cap or the bedroom tax because: “It’s not something at the moment we have the finances to afford to be able to do.”
The cost of scrapping both policies is estimated to be between £1.85bn and £2.7bn for 2023/24.
Loudon said: “Within the first 100 days of becoming an MP, I pledge to introduce a Private Member’s Bill to abolish the abhorrent two-child benefit cap and rape clause.
“This is a simple, yet crucial, act that would show constituents I am willing to not only stand up for them, but protect the most vulnerable in our society.
READ MORE: Why Flower of Scotland should be our official national anthem
"If the Labour Party in Scotland is serious about tackling child poverty they should have no reservations about publicly backing my plans to introduce this bill as an MP.
“Voters in Rutherglen and Hamilton West must be in no doubt that a vote for the SNP is a vote to reject cruel Westminster policies such as the two-child cap, tackle the cost of living crisis, and deliver an MP who only answers to their constituents in Scotland – not Westminster.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel