Walthamstow MP Stella Creasy and Leyton and Wanstead’s new MP Calvin Bailey joined the vast majority of their Labour colleagues in striking down the SNP motion last night, reports Marco Marcelline

Labour MPs in Waltham Forest have defended their decision to vote against scrapping the two child benefit cap. 

Walthamstow MP Stella Creasy and Leyton and Wanstead’s new MP Calvin Bailey joined the vast majority of their Labour colleagues in striking down the SNP motion last night, which sunk by 363 votes against to 103 for.

The two-child benefits cap was introduced by the Conservatives in 2017. It limits state benefits – Universal Credit and child tax credits – to two children per family.

Research from the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) shows that removing the cap would lift at least 300,000 children across the UK out of poverty, and mean that 700,000 other children are in less deep poverty.

Labour’s manifesto before the election stated that the party did not believe the country’s finances were yet in a position to commit to abolishing the cap. 

The Institute for Fiscal Studies has estimated that abolishing the cap would eventually cost the government £3.4billion a year, which comes to roughly 3% of the total budget for working-age benefits.

Speaking to the Echo, Calvin Bailey said he voted with the government because “nothing [since election] had materially changed that warrants a change of position” from what was in the manifesto. 

While admitting that the manifesto “does not go as far” as the party would like, Calvin defended his decision on the basis that voting for the SNP motion would have constituted going against the manifesto he stood on. 

The Leyton and Wanstead MP, who made his maiden speech to Parliament earlier today, described the SNP motion as an example of “politicking” that had the aim of “creating division” in Labour. 

Accusing the SNP of “absolute duplicity” in putting forward the motion, he said: “They haven’t [abolished] the two-child benefit cap in Scotland. This vote was done to divide us.”

The Scottish government does not have powers to abolish the benefit cap at source as that is reserved to Westminster but it can effectively end the cap by paying out discretionary payments to affected families, covering their shortfall. 

Speaking in parliament, SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn said his party already pays money to mitigate the bedroom tax, and the Scottish government would have to reduce spending on other services if it mitigated the two-child benefit cap. 

In the first major test of the new government’s authority, seven Labour MPs including former shadow chancellor John McDonnell decided to join the SNP, Liberal Democrats, Green Party and independents in voting for the motion. 

They were controversially suspended from the party whip as a result, prompting outcry from the socialist flank of the party. 

Bailey said it was “sad” that the seven suspended MPs would no longer be able to join their former party colleagues in lobbying and pushing for progressive policy changes, but added it was not surprising they were now sitting as independents.  

He continued: “Voting for the motion is a symbolic act. Those MPs have let their constituents down because it means they are not going to be in the room with us while trying to lobby for [Labour policy] changes.”

In a public statement shared following local criticism from constituents, Creasy explained that her vote yesterday was “not to keep the cap but [was] against a vote of no confidence in the government”, since the SNP motion “declined to support the King’s Speech – the programme for the first parliamentary session for the new government – as a whole”. 

The Walthamstow MP added that she voted against all three “no-confidence” motions yesterday that were put forward by the Liberal Democrats, the SNP, and the Conservatives. A Labour-led motion on the two-child policy benefit cap was put forward by Liverpool Riverside MP Kim Johnson but was not picked for a vote by the speaker. 

Her statement read: “I’m very much opposed to the continuation of the two child benefit cap and have spoken out on this matter frequently. From the impact it has on child poverty to the fact that it requires those who have experienced sexual assault to disclose this to be exempted [from it], I don’t think it has a place in our welfare system. 

“I also don’t think we should plan for the welfare system to be the response to child poverty as would like to see our economy generating jobs and incomes which mean families are not put in this position in first place – that’s why I’ve been working with colleagues in the Labour party to raise both issues and pushing for ending child poverty to be at the core of the new government’s priorities.”

The Echo asked Creasy’s office for her thoughts on the decision to suspend the whip for the seven Labour MPs but we did not receive a response in time for publication. 

Locally, the move was criticised by Arran Angus, from the Waltham Forest Liberal Democrats, who said the borough’s Labour MPs “have failed more than 6,000 vulnerable children in their constituencies who desperately need to be lifted out of poverty.”

He added: “This should be a priority for any new government, but sadly we see the Labour government continue what the Tories started in 2017. The only London MPs who voted to end the cap without being thrown out of their party were Liberal Democrats.”

Conservative MP Iain Duncan Smith, who represents Chingford and Woodford Green, abstained on the SNP motion yesterday. He was vocally supportive of the cap before it was introduced in 2017, telling the Guardian in 2014 while he was Work and Pensions Secretary that the move would “save significant money and helps behavioural change”.

Speaking in parliament last week his Conservative colleague Suella Braverman raised eyebrows when she called for the cap to be reversed, saying that parties should “come together in the spirit of compassion and common sense” and abolish it.

No news is bad news 

Independent news outlets like ours – reporting for the community without rich backers – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts. 

The audiences they serve know less, understand less, and can do less. 

If our coverage has helped you understand our community a little bit better, please consider supporting us with a monthly, yearly or one-off donation. 

Choose the news. Don’t lose the news.

Monthly direct debit 

Annual direct debit

£5 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else, £10 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else and a print copy posted to them each month.  £50 annual supporters get a digital copy of each month's paper before anyone else.

More information on supporting us monthly or annually 

More Information about donations