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

Debate contribution by Mr Gordon Lyons on 3 March 2026.

MLA

Mr Gordon Lyons

Party at the time

Democratic Unionist Party

Date

3 March 2026

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

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

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 5434890

Read the official Assembly record

Text

Thank you, Madam Principal Deputy Speaker. As I explained earlier, the removal of the two-child limit must be extended to Northern Ireland, and it is right that that is happening. Agreeing to the legislative consent motion will allow that important provision to be enacted across the UK. The abolition of the two-child limit will increase the amount of support available to families on universal credit with three or more children or qualifying young people. That is a significant change that will help our ambition to tackle child poverty. I will highlight a few concerns that Members raised during the debate. The first relates to transitional protection. The intent behind it was to ensure not only that claimants who move to UC are not worse off at the point of transition from legacy benefits but that their award equalises over time with that of claimants who do not transition from legacy benefits. That is why the transitional element was put in place. Following the removal of the two-child limit, households that are currently affected by the two-child limit will see an increase in their underlying UC entitlement. That is expected to reduce any UC transitional element that may be in payment. Our analysis shows that, as of November 2025, of the 1,580 households that are in receipt of transitional protection and that will be impacted on by the removal of the two-child limit, 1,050 of them will receive an increase in their UC award that is greater than their current transitional protection award. That will reduce their transitional protection award to zero, but their overall UC award will increase. The remaining 530 households will have their transitional element reduced, but their overall UC award will not change. I have asked questions about that and have been assured that nobody in Northern Ireland will be worse off as a result of the changes. The other question that more than one Member asked concerned communication. We have developed communications for affected UC claimants, not only to advise them but to support them to understand the changes that are coming into effect. That includes the Department's nidirect content being updated to explain the change and that subsequent reassessment of entitlement to UC will be automated. Alternative formats of communication are available on request, and all web content is considered to be in line with the accessibility regulations. Secondly, as UC is a digital systems benefit, claimants will receive direct communication through their UC digital journal, advising of the removal of the two-child limit. Messaging will also advise claimants to ensure that their reported circumstances are up to date, and explain that the exact amount of UC received each month still depends on their individual circumstances. Thirdly, from April 2026, social media messages will be issued to raise awareness of the changes that are being developed. Finally, telephone support teams will be on hand to answer any queries arising from the changes. I hope that that will allay some of the fears that Members may have in relation to those issues. This is not a debate on the anti-poverty strategy — I would welcome that very much — but Members have raised the issue. I completely agree that we need to have in place an anti-poverty strategy that will actually make a difference, will tackle the root causes of poverty and is affordable. We need to make sure that we put all those different measures on the table, weigh them against one another, decide which will be most beneficial, and, then, prioritise them according to the difference that they can make in the lives of the people whom we are here to represent. I am trying to push on with that work as quickly as I can with Executive colleagues. It is largely out of my hands. I encourage them, and I encourage you, as Members, to encourage those Ministers to come back with their feedback, so that we can have a proper discussion. There will be a dedicated conversation on that in the next few weeks, so that we can drill down into some of those areas. I agree that the measure that we are debating today is an important tool to help us tackle poverty. However, we can do more, and we must focus our efforts on the things that will get a return for the investment. I welcome Andy Allen's comments on the warm healthy homes fund, in particular. It is a no-brainer. It is one of the most important things that we can put money into. It is an investment not with a one-off benefit but with benefits that will recur each and every year. I am committed to doing what I can in that way. Today is beneficial. It is good news that we are able to start the process of making these changes. There will be consequences for the Executive to consider as part of the budgetary process: the gap that will now exist because of the benefit cap will have to be filled. However, we commit to doing that today by bringing forward and supporting the LCM. I commend it to the House.

855 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