Debate contribution: Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill: Legislative Consent Motion

Debate contribution by Mr Mark Durkan on 3 March 2026.

MLA

Mr Mark Durkan

Party at the time

Social Democratic and Labour Party

Date

3 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill: Legislative Consent Motion

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5434871

Read the official Assembly record

Text

This is a good day, and it is not just because it is my birthday. It is good to get the opportunity to speak today on the long-overdue removal of the two-child limit. It was a significant driver of policy on these islands in recent years, and the impact has hit hardest and been felt most severely here in the North. The SDLP vociferously warned that it would drive children into poverty and heap pressure on already struggling families. That reality has, sadly, come to pass. Parties here, with the exception of the SDLP, did not just vote for the Welfare Reform Bill, but, when doing so, handed powers to the Tories to do even more damage, and they did so with relish, nowhere more so than with this draconian, almost dystopian, policy, along with its odious rape clause. We opposed it then. We have campaigned against it since, and we welcome its removal now. However, the change must be managed properly. We cannot afford a poorly handled transition. Communication around the move to universal credit (UC) has been a bit of a quagmire in itself, from weak signposting to the new claims grant — to help — to the failure to clearly explain the mechanics of transitional protection. If that odious policy is to be undone properly, the Department must raise awareness to ensure that claimants fully understand how the changes will affect them. I welcome assurances from the Minister today in that regard. However, we know through experience that what is outlined in policy does not always occur in practice. As of August 2025, 17,600 children were not eligible for the child element of universal credit because of the two-child limit. The Minister gave some more recent figures on that. Lifting the policy will, undoubtedly, lift thousands of children out of poverty overnight and lift others a wee bit closer to having some degree of comfort. While we very much welcome that step, we cannot ignore some of the wee questions that remain unanswered. The Minister told me previously that officials were undertaking a larger piece of work to determine what the wider impact of removing the two-child limit will be on awards. Has that analysis been done and, if so, when we will see it? Members are being asked to consent to legislative change without having the full picture. That is not great governance. Sadly, however, it is a situation that we have become used to. My Committee colleagues and I raised the issue of transitional protections, cognisant that this change could result in an erosion of those protections. Has the Department quantified how many claims will be adversely impacted on as a result of the change? We must not repeat the mistakes of the past. Welfare reform was a disaster. It is good that all parties here worked to ensure that we got a mitigations package, but it is something of a tangled web. There is a confused picture of what is out there, between mitigation schemes, transitional payments and cliff edges. That brings me to the benefit cap mitigations. Recently, I asked the Minister whether he would extend benefit cap mitigations indefinitely to ensure that families are not forced to teeter along another cliff edge. His response, which he has reiterated today, was that it will be for the Executive to agree funding for those schemes, which are due to end in two years' time. Between now and then, we will be heading into — and, hopefully, coming out of — another election. We will have finished one mandate and moved into the next if, that is, we are lucky enough to even have an Executive. I know that a week is a long time in politics, but two years will go past in the blink of an eye. That deadline will come along far quicker than some might think, and families cannot be left in limbo. We have seen this debacle before, waiting until a minute before midnight and then scrambling around for an extension. That is not the actions of a proactive Government; it is more of a kind of crisis management. Families who live in poverty need certainty. We need a comprehensive, costed and funded anti-poverty strategy. We hope to hear more from the Minister on that in the near future. If we are serious about tackling child poverty, benefit cap mitigations must be extended indefinitely. We cannot allow anxiety to build, year after year. As I said, the removal of the two-child limit is great news and it is necessary, but we also need a bit more clarity on the transitional protections and a firm commitment on the benefit cap mitigations. As I bring my remarks to a close, I pay tribute to campaigners, particularly the incredible Cliff Edge Coalition and its component parts, for their passion, compassion and unwavering efforts to do what is right for our most vulnerable and for our society as a whole. Let us work alongside them to ensure that planning begins now, not in 2027, and definitely not in 2028. Let us lift children out of poverty but also ensure that we do not replace one grievously flawed policy with a new layer of uncertainty.

870 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 15:02 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification