The argument is straightforward. The two child cap is irrational, discriminatory and should go. The £2.5 billion required to get rid of it should be found. The Labour government should extricate itself from the political embarrassment of not doing so; another monkey off the back.

So far, so exceptionally straightforward. The obvious next question is where the £2.5 billion (and growing) will come from. This is not one which concerns opponents of the cap who, like all single issue campaigners, treat such concerns as someone else’s problem, which is their perfect entitlement. It’s not so easy for governments.

Before last year’s election, Labour committed itself to getting rid of the cap “when fiscal circumstances permit”. They then found fiscal circumstances considerably worse than anticipated along with, very properly, a clamour of competing demands, some more emotive than others.

Getting rid of an inherited piece of legislation is a lot more difficult than introducing it. The money has to be found from somewhere. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, abolishing the cap would cost three per cent of the working age benefits budget; another void to be filled by cutting something else.

Read More

On balance, I support the argument in the first paragraph for the reasons stated. However, I have no illusions about the fiscal balancing act which the Labour government faces and no belief in magic money trees. Getting rid of the cap may not even be the most effective use of billions to reduce absolute child poverty.

But heigh-ho … politically, the choice is binary –........

© Herald Scotland