Keir Starmer has suspended seven of his own Labour Party MPs for rebelling over the two-child benefit cap. John McDonnell, Richard Burgon, Ian Byrne, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Imran Hussain, Apsana Begum, and Zarah Sultana were punished after they backed a motion demanding the removal of the two-child limit on benefits introduced by the previous Conservative government.
The benefit cap restricts payments to the first two children born to most families. Why a Labour government would oppose feeding hungry children seems baffling. Until, that is, you consider that this is Starmer’s right-wing Labour government.
Starmer’s first test
MPs voted 363 to 103 to reject a Scottish National Party (SNP) amendment to scrap the cap, giving the government a majority of 260.
However, in addition to the seven who voted with the amendment, more than 40 Labour lawmakers recorded no vote. That shows the level of unease within the party at the measure.
Liverpool MP Kim Johnson said she had voted with the government “for unity” but warned that the strength of feeling within the party was “undeniable”.
The SNP’s Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said Labour had “failed its first major test in government” by choosing not to “deliver meaningful change from years of Tory misrule”. He continued:
This is now the Labour government’s two-child cap — and it must take ownership of the damage it is causing, including the appalling levels of poverty in the UK.
Sir Kid Starver
The popular nickname for Starmer, Sir Kid Starver, is once again making the rounds on social media:
Right for Labour to continue punishing *children* for having parents whose circumstances led them into relying on benefits usually through no fault of their own. Shame on you, shame on Dear Leader Starmer for punishing MPs who put country before party #SirKidStarver https://t.co/IANaeHc09a pic.twitter.com/246nL0Lr9b
— Mrs Gee 💚🇵🇸 #Collective (@earthygirl011) July 24, 2024
It hasn’t taken long for Starmer to settle in:
It's taken #SirKidStarver's @UKLabour less than 3 weeks to shit on the working class.
Let that sink in.
— Kev (@KevStringer1) July 23, 2024
At least the new prime minister’s domestic and foreign policies are aligned:
#SirKidStarver is a c*nt.
Pass it on. pic.twitter.com/OxX3JyrD7O— Citizen M (@MiaSertima) July 23, 2024
The BBC’s political editor Chris Mason summarised Starmer’s actions:
A prime minister with a narrower majority, a less emphatic win, would perhaps not have dared act so boldly. But with a colossal majority, he has the scope to act ruthlessly, and put down a marker for the months ahead.
Embedding poverty
But, what’s the actual impact of keeping the policy in place?
The two-child limit on benefits is one of the biggest policy drivers of child poverty.
The majority of families receiving universal credit are in work, and many are struggling for reasons beyond their control – such as a family break-up, the death of a partner, or someone losing a job amid the cost-of-living crisis.
The Resolution Foundation found that two in five large families – families with three or more children – are affected by the benefit cap. They also found that in 2018, 70,000 families were affected by the two child limit. However, by April 2024 450,000 families were affected by the benefit cap. They continued:
The Foundation’s analysis shows that if the policy were abolished today, it would lift around 490,000 children out of poverty.
Let’s not mince words, here. When families are affected by the two-child benefit cap that means children are going hungry. It means families can’t afford to feed themselves. It’s as simple as that. And, either the prime minister cares about that or he doesn’t – and clearly he doesn’t.
Dissent
The suspension of MPs who believe children shouldn’t be forced into poverty has, of course, not gone down well with other MPs. Nadia Whittome said:
The government’s approach to party discipline has been appalling. No MP should have lost the whip for their vote this evening, especially on a policy that almost everyone in Labour opposes.
If “almost everyone” does actually oppose the policy, then clearly they’re putting politics before people. Whittome continued:
Our party has a huge majority. If it is to govern from a position of strength, it should be able to tolerate disagreement without making threats and employing the most severe punishments.
This does not breed a healthy culture. If MPs are unable to stand up to the frontbench when they think they’re wrong, the government is more likely to make poor decisions.
A healthy culture is something Starmer has long abandoned during his leadership with the purging of left-wing members.
Joke country
Meanwhile, because Britain is a joke of a country, the King will be receiving a near-50% pay increase. That means Charlie will have an extra £45 million income. Money is not the problem. Politics is the problem. We have a political system full of politicians that take their turn in the hot seat to facilitate the sinking of thousands of people around the country into avoidable poverty. There’s a new nasty party in town, it appears.
Additional reporting by Agence France-Presse
Featured image via YouTube screenshot/Evening Standard
