Tackling child poverty may prove a vote winner for Farage
In news bound to make Keir Starmer nervous, voters in 121 Labour-held constituencies with high rates of child poverty are reportedly prepared to support Nigel Farage at the next election and hand their seats to Reform. This shock projection, via the Financial Times and More in Common polling, came less than a fortnight after the Reform party leader declared that he would scrap the two-child benefit cap. Could it be that limiting benefits to families with two children, a policy once so popular with the public, has lost its appeal?
Farage is winning over swathes of Labour's heartland in part because he has smelled a vote-winner: removing the two-child benefit cap may play to Reform's natalist agenda, but being seen to battle child poverty will make a fatherly Farage popular across the country's disadvantaged areas. While the government stalls on publishing its child poverty strategy, alarming stats have brought home to parents in the poorest areas just how badly their children are faring.
No matter their race, ethnicity, number of siblings or parents' party allegiance, children born in areas such as Blackpool or Knowsley (both with some of the highest proportions of disadvantaged neighbourhoods among local authorities) are less likely to achieve good developmental goals by the age of five.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
38 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
Changes to UC & PIP payments in full as Labour reveals bruising welfare bill concessions in bid to quell rebellion
BENEFITS SWITCH Changes to UC & PIP payments in full as Labour reveals bruising welfare bill concessions in bid to quell rebellion Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) BRUISING concessions to the government's welfare plans are being laid out by Welfare Secretary Liz Kendall following a humiliating u-turn. Changes to Personal Independence Payments and Universal Credit are being spelled out to MPs ahead of a crunch vote tomorrow. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 1 Cabinet MInister Liz Kendall reveals changes to benefits system after u-turn Credit: Alamy Ms Kendall told MPs: "Protecting existing claimants, whilst beginning to focus people on those with higher needs for new claimants going forward, strikes the right and fair balance." Outlining some of the costs, she said that the measures she outlined will cost £2.5 billion in 2029-30. But Sir Keir Starmer is facing a fresh backlash as 150,000 people will still be pushed into poverty by the end of the decade despite his benefits u-turn. Dozens of Labour rebels are yet to be convinced to back the Downing Street proposals despite the number being affected nearly reduced in half. The staggering estimate is less than the original forecast of 250,000 extra people left in relative poverty once their housing costs have been stripped out. But the current figures don't include any possible 'positive impact' from extra funds going in to support people with disabilities and long-term health issues. Labour MP Nadia Whittome said: "Even with the concessions, the government's own analysis forecasts that 150,000 people could still be pushed into poverty by disability benefit cuts by the end of the decade. 'As Labour MPs, we didn't enter politics to make struggling constituents poorer. We must stop this Bill.' The Prime Minister faced a major revolt with 126 of his Labour MPs threatening to wreck his flagship legislation and throw it out. But he made a partial u-turn allowing personal independence payment changes to only apply to new claimants from November next year. The same applied to Ministerial plans on the health-related element of Universal Credit. But the changes mean Chancellor Rachel Reeves will have to find more cash to meet the savings, first thought to be £3 billion. It comes after the u-turn on winter fuel payments which will leave a £1.5 billion hole in the public finances. The Labour leadership are still engaged in talking to the rebels to vote for the bill even though big changes were made. Backbench MP Clive Efford who has been a Labour MP since 1997 said he would still oppose welfare plans despite major concessions. When asked if he had changed his mind to back the government, he said: 'No, I've not, I'm afraid. 'There are still £3.5bn worth of savings that are required in these measures and we don't yet know the poverty impact that they will have.' A No 10 spokesman said: 'The broken welfare system we inherited is failing people every single day. "It traps millions, it tells them the only way to get help is to declare they'll never work again and then abandons them. 'No help, no opportunity, no dignity and we can't accept that. For too long, meaningful reform to a failing system has been ducked.' The terms of reference for a comprehensive review of the Pip payments led by Welfare Minister Sir Stephen Timms will also be set out. But it will not report for another year. It will be co-produced with disabled people, the organisations that represent them, and MPs. Sir Keir Starmer said last week that the changes now strike the 'right balance' despite the government earlier saying there will be no u-turns. He said: 'The most important thing is that we can make the reform we need. 'We talked to colleagues, who've made powerful representations, as a result of which we've got a package which I think will work, we can get it right. 'For me, getting that package adjusted in that way is the right thing to do, it means it's the right balance, it's common sense that we can now get on with it.' But despite the concessions Mikey Erhardt, from Disability Rights UK, last week accused the Government of 'playing politics with our lives', saying the vote next Tuesday must still be pulled. He said the changes will mean 'a benefits system where future generations of disabled people receive less support than disabled people today'. He added that the original decision 'prioritised balancing its books over improving the lives of disabled citizens'. Mr Erhardt added: 'Despite seemingly rowing back on some of the worst aspects of its plans, the Government is still attempting to slash billions of pounds from a system that doesn't provide enough support as it stands.' The MS Society said Ministers were simply 'kicking the can down the road and delaying an inevitable disaster'. They urged MPs 'not to be swayed by these last-ditch attempts to force through a harmful Bill with supposed concessions'.
The Sun
43 minutes ago
- The Sun
Changes to UC & PIP payments in full as Labour reveals bruising welfare bill concessions in bid to quell rebellion
BRUISING concessions to the governmnent's welfare plans are being laid out by Welfare Secretary Liz Kendall following a humiliating u-turn. Changes to Personal Independence Payments and Universal Credit are being spelled out to MPs ahead of a crunch vote tomorrow. 1 But Sir Keir Starmer is facing a fresh backlash as 150,000 people will still be pushed into poverty by the end of the decade despite his benefits u-turn. Dozens of Labour rebels are yet to be convinced to back the Downing Street proposals despite the number being affected nearly reduced in half. The staggering estimate is less than the original forecast of 250,000 extra people left in relative poverty once their housing costs have been stripped out. But the current figures don't include any possible 'positive impact' from extra funds going in to support people with disabilities and long-term health issues. The Prime Minister faced a major revolt with 126 of his Labour MPs threatening to wreck his flagship legislation and throw it out. Labour MP Nadia Whittome said: "Even with the concessions, the government's own analysis forecasts that 150,000 people could still be pushed into poverty by disability benefit cuts by the end of the decade. 'As Labour MPs, we didn't enter politics to make struggling constituents poorer. We must stop this Bill.' But he made a partial u-turn allowing personal independence payment changes to only apply to new claimants from November next year. The same applied to Ministerial plans on the health-related element of Universal Credit. But the changes mean Chancellor Rachel Reeves will have to find more cash to meet the savings, first thought to be £3 billion. It comes after the u-turn on winter fuel payments which will leave a £1.5 billion hole in the public finances. The Labour leadership are still engaged in talking to the rebels to vote for the bill even though big changes were made. Backbench MP Clive Efford who has been a Labour MP since 1997 said he would still oppose welfare plans despite major concessions. When asked if he had changed his mind to back the government, he said: 'No, I've not, I'm afraid. 'There are still £3.5bn worth of savings that are required in these measures and we don't yet know the poverty impact that they will have.' A No 10 spokesman said: 'The broken welfare system we inherited is failing people every single day. "It traps millions, it tells them the only way to get help is to declare they'll never work again and then abandons them. 'No help, no opportunity, no dignity and we can't accept that. For too long, meaningful reform to a failing system has been ducked.' The terms of reference for a comprehensive review of the Pip payments led by Welfare Minister Sir Stephen Timms will also be set out. But it will not report for another year. It will be co-produced with disabled people, the organisations that represent them, and MPs. Sir Keir Starmer said last week that the changes now strike the 'right balance' despite the government earlier saying there will be no u-turns. He said: 'The most important thing is that we can make the reform we need. 'We talked to colleagues, who've made powerful representations, as a result of which we've got a package which I think will work, we can get it right. 'For me, getting that package adjusted in that way is the right thing to do, it means it's the right balance, it's common sense that we can now get on with it.' But despite the concessions Mikey Erhardt, from Disability Rights UK, last week accused the Government of 'playing politics with our lives', saying the vote next Tuesday must still be pulled. He said the changes will mean 'a benefits system where future generations of disabled people receive less support than disabled people today'. He added that the original decision 'prioritised balancing its books over improving the lives of disabled citizens'. Mr Erhardt added: 'Despite seemingly rowing back on some of the worst aspects of its plans, the Government is still attempting to slash billions of pounds from a system that doesn't provide enough support as it stands.' The MS Society said Ministers were simply 'kicking the can down the road and delaying an inevitable disaster'. They urged MPs 'not to be swayed by these last-ditch attempts to force through a harmful Bill with supposed concessions'.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Burnham's defiance over benefits shows Starmer is doomed
What exactly is Andy Burnham playing at? With the Government's welfare cuts vote on a knife-edge, the mayor of Greater Manchester has told Labour MPs to reject Sir Keir Starmer's concessions and bring the whole Bill down on Tuesday. Burnham knows that a defeat in Parliament, or even a narrow victory, would punch a hole in the floundering ship of Sir Keir's authority. Significantly, Burnham was echoing a rejection of the welfare cuts policy by Sir Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London. Burnham and Sir Sadiq are the two most powerful elected Labour politicians outside Parliament. The fact that they are being so disloyal to their party's leader will quite rightly lead to speculation that they think they could do a better job. But where Sir Sadiq has insisted (however truthfully) that he is 'not at all' interested in becoming Labour leader - insisting a woman should succeed Sir Keir - Burnham has never ruled out a tilt at the Labour leadership. When he ran for his third term as mayor, his comments about Labour's future were revealing. He said: 'I'm not going to say that I'm going to rule [a leadership bid] out. I mean, having been in Westminster all of those years, and now having done this for almost six years, I feel I know a lot of the changes the country needs.' King of the North Of course, for the so-called King of the North to become Labour leader, let alone prime minister, he would first need to return to Parliament as an MP, which would mean winning a by-election. Is there a realistic prospect of that happening? Burnham was re-elected as mayor of Greater Manchester in May last year, meaning his third term in the job is due to come to an end in 2028. Conveniently enough, that is just over a year before the next general election is due. He could, of course, resign as mayor before his term is up, giving him more time to rebuild Labour and turn around its fortunes nationally. Labour's National Executive Committee has the power to shortlist or directly select candidates for by-elections if it chooses to (circumventing the usual process of candidates being chosen by local members), meaning Sir Keir and his chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, along with candidate selection guru Matt Faulding, would have an effective veto over Burnham being chosen as a candidate. That would cut off his route to a leadership bid. But what if Sir Keir decides to stand down before the next election? The Prime Minister has already started making excuses for bad policy decisions that sound a lot like the outpourings of someone who is realising the demands of the job are too much for him. His mea culpa offerings over the watering down of the welfare cuts Bill can only serve to encourage anyone eyeing up his job. He told The Sunday Times that he had been too 'distracted' by world events to get to grips with the crisis unfolding over proposed cuts to disability benefits because he was 'heavily focused' on the crisis in the Middle East. This, he said, was 'context rather than an excuse'. Only last week Sir Keir told The Observer website that he 'deeply' regretted saying that Britain risked becoming an 'island of strangers' because of mass immigration, which some people had compared to Enoch Powell's warnings that white Britons had become 'strangers in their own country' because of immigration. Sir Keir said he should have read through the speech properly and 'held it up to the light a bit more'. Again, this amounted to an admission that he is struggling with the immense demands of the job. Add into the mix the fact that Sir Keir keeps having to reverse high-profile policies such as the hugely damaging winter fuel payment cut. You wouldn't be alone in drawing the conclusion that Sir Keir simply doesn't understand politics, and if voters can see that, you can be sure that Andy Burnham can see it too. Anyone with an instinctive grasp of politics surely smells blood, and Burnham may well be encouraging rebels in the sure knowledge that once Sir Keir's authority is shot, it will be open season for further rebellions on everything from the two child benefit cap to public sector pay rises and beyond. Sir Keir's position could, in time, become untenable. Mr Burnham ran for the Labour leadership in 2010, when he was beaten by Ed Miliband, and again in 2015, when he came second to Jeremy Corbyn. Being a two-time reject, as well as being a veteran of the Blair years and a member of Gordon Brown's cabinet might count against him, but the flip-side is that Burnham has experience of government, has run major departments (most notably as health secretary) and has achieved enough in Greater Manchester to be re-elected twice. As Labour's equivalent of a prince across the water, he is also untainted by the chaos and failure of the Starmer administration, meaning he is perhaps the one person who could turn around Labour's slumping poll ratings and fight off the threat of Reform UK. Burnham is also only 55, seven years younger than Sir Keir. The accepted wisdom in Westminster has long been that Wes Streeting, the Health Secretary, will be Labour's next leader. At the start of the decade he was being groomed to take over as leader from Sir Keir because Sir Keir was expected to lose the 2024 general election to the Boris Johnson juggernaut, before Johnson ran off the road and took the Tory Party's 2024 electoral chances with him. But timing is everything in politics, and Streeting has been the coming man for so long that his time may now have passed, particularly if he fails to effect genuine change and improvement in the NHS. It is not impossible that with the public turning against Labour, the party might realise that its only chance of staying in power lies with a clean break from the Starmer regime, and Burnham might be the only credible politician who fits the job description.
