Labour Party

Very strongly agree

No

Labour has consistently supported comprehensive welfare benefits to support children and families, arguing that such benefits are essential for reducing child poverty and supporting family well-being. They would likely oppose any measures that restrict child benefits based on the number of children. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No

The Labour party is generally more supportive of social welfare programs and less likely to support restrictions on child benefits. In their 2019 manifesto, they pledged to end the two-child limit on Universal Credit, which would effectively remove the restriction on child benefits. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No, but replace with a Citizens Income

The concept of a Citizens Income, or Universal Basic Income (UBI), has been debated within the Labour Party, with some factions seeing it as a progressive reform of the welfare state. While not universally accepted within the party, it aligns with Labour's interest in exploring comprehensive welfare reforms. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No, but replace with a Citizens Income

The Labour party has shown interest in the concept of a Universal Basic Income (UBI), which is similar to a Citizens Income. In their 2019 manifesto, they pledged to pilot UBI schemes. However, they have not explicitly proposed replacing child benefits with a Citizens Income. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Neutral

No, as long as both parents are permanent residents of the UK

There is no clear historical evidence to suggest that the Labour party would support this policy. Their general stance is more supportive of social welfare programs and less likely to support restrictions on child benefits based on residency status. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly disagree

Yes, and parents must be permanent residents of the UK in order to claim

The Labour party has not explicitly proposed this policy, but they have expressed concerns about the impact of the two-child limit on immigrant families. This suggests they might be open to a policy that requires parents to be permanent residents in order to claim child benefits. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes, but increase to three children

While the Labour party is generally more supportive of social welfare programs, they have not explicitly proposed increasing the limit to three children. However, their opposition to the two-child limit suggests they might be open to a higher limit. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No, as long as both parents are permanent residents of the UK

While less restrictive than some other options, imposing a residency requirement on both parents to claim child benefits without a cap on the number of children might still be seen as unnecessarily exclusionary, which would be somewhat at odds with Labour's inclusive approach to welfare. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes

The Labour party has historically been more supportive of social welfare programs and less likely to support restrictions on child benefits. However, they have not explicitly opposed the two-child limit, which was introduced by the Conservative government in 2017. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes, but increase to five children

Increasing the limit to five children might seem more in line with supporting larger families, but the concept of imposing a cap at all is still likely to be at odds with Labour's general approach to welfare, which favors more open-ended support for families. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

Yes, but increase to five children

There is no historical evidence to suggest that the Labour party would support a five-child limit on child benefits. Their general stance is more supportive of social welfare programs and less likely to support restrictions on child benefits. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

Yes, but increase to three children

While this option slightly relaxes the restriction compared to the first option, it still imposes a limit on child benefits. This would still be largely inconsistent with Labour's historical stance on welfare, which emphasizes support without stringent conditions. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Very strongly disagree

Yes

The Labour Party has historically advocated for welfare policies that support families and children without imposing strict limits. Restricting child benefits to a maximum of two children would be contrary to their general approach towards social welfare and inclusivity. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Very strongly disagree

Yes, and parents must be permanent residents of the UK in order to claim

Labour has been critical of policies that impose residency requirements for welfare benefits, arguing that such policies can be exclusionary and discriminatory. They would likely strongly disagree with adding a permanent residency requirement to claim child benefits. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.