The simple reason Nigel Farage has seemingly had a change of heart on benefits

“Politics,” runs a 19th century proverb, “makes strange bedfellows.”

As Reform UK calls for an end to the two-child benefit cap, this two-century-old saying is just as relevant as ever. 

Child poverty charities have long condemned the cap as “cruel,” “destructive” and “harmful”. Earlier this month, right-winger Nigel Farage joined them.

Scrapping the cap is “the right thing to do”, the populist firebrand told supporters. “We believe that for lower-paid workers, this makes having children just a little bit easier… It helps them.”

It may seem like a striking tonal shift for Farage, who has mocked benefit recipients in the past.

Read more:

• Scrapping two-child benefit cap ‘single most cost-effective policy’ to reduce child poverty
• I’m buying fruit and veg for my kids on ‘buy now, pay later’. The two-child benefit cap needs to go
• In Nigel we trust! How I learned to stop worrying and love Reform UK

“‘I’m too fat, I’m too stupid, I’m too lazy, I don’t get out of bed in the morning,’” he declared on a 2023 podcast, decrying Britain’s apparent “welfarism”. “‘I smoke drugs, give me money. I don’t need to work, the state will provide for me…’ we [the state] cannot afford it.”

So, what’s changed? Has Farage had a change of heart? Was he visited by the ghost of Universal Credit Yet To Come? Probably not, say experts. 

Professor Stuart Gietel-Basten, a UK social sciences expert at The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology describes it as a “political calculation” – a bid to capture the votes of former Labour voters while appealing to conservative “family values”.

“They [Reform UK] are thinking about constituencies with high levels of child poverty,” he told Big Issue. “But they’re also tapping into a pronatalist conservative trend – a call for people to have babies – that we’re seeing in the US.”

Hunting Labour voters

Introduced in 2017 as part of Conservative austerity reforms, the two-child cap limits support through universal credit and child tax credit to the first two children.

“Those in receipt of tax credits should face the same financial choices about having children as those supporting themselves solely through work,” said then-chancellor George Osborne.

It’s now the biggest single driver of child poverty in the UK.

In March, the United Nations urged the UK government to scrap the policy. That same month, the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) reported it pushes 109 children into poverty every day.

The government has delayed its child poverty strategy until autumn, reportedly while it looks for cost-savings that would allow it to remove the policy, or reform it (such as expanding benefits to third children). Meanwhile, Reform sees a chance to lure Labour voters.

“The simplest answer is the most obvious, right? Is this a cynical move?” Gietel-Basten says.

“A first instinct might be: Reform are going after red wall seats in the Midlands and North – places like where I grew up – and maybe they think, well, lots of people are affected… we’d like their vote. Pure political calculus. A practical idea, especially if you’re flexible with political ideology.”

More in Common polling shows 135 of 180 seats where Reform is expected to perform well have above-average child poverty. Labour currently holds 121.

Reform has been floating left-wing policies to attract disillusioned, low-income former Labour voters: nationalising the steel industry and half of utilities, £17 billion for the NHS to eliminate waiting lists (which experts say is “near impossible”), and a £250,000 non-dom fee to be “redistributed” to low-income people. It’s worth noting that this fee would exempt non-doms from taxes that generate far more than £250,000 apiece.

Yet the populist party’s stance on welfare remains contradictory, says Paul Copeland, senior lecturer of public policy at Queen Mary University of London. 

“In its 2024 manifesto, the party pledged to reduce welfare spending – despite the UK already having among the least generous payments in Northern Europe, many set below the poverty line.”

“The commitment to end the two-child cap appears opportunistic and inconsistent with Reform’s overall fiscal stance.”

Farage’s 2023 comments make clear his contempt for benefit claimants – especially those of working age. This hasn’t disappeared. 

“In Britain, if you can work, you should work,” reads Reform’s 2024 voter contract. “All job seekers and those fit to work must find employment within four months or accept a job after two offers. Otherwise, benefits are withdrawn.”

So Farage hasn’t abandoned his usual attack on the mythical “benefit scrounger”. Something else is at play.

Pronatalism?

Reform’s abolition of the two-child limit would apply only to “British” families, Farage said – not to “families who come into the country and suddenly decide to have a lot of children”.

This echoes rhetoric from the US, where Elon Musk has called the “collapsing birth rate” the “biggest danger civilisation faces”.

This is pronatalism – the belief that governments should encourage childbirth. It’s rising on the American right, mixed up with ideas about “cultural preservation” and “traditional values”. At its worst, it echoes ideas of the ‘Great Replacement’ – an extremist, deeply racist conspiracy theory that white people are being ‘replaced’ by non-white immigrants.

“We aren’t there yet in the UK but I don’t think we should underestimate this slavish adherence to America and Trump,” says Basten. “To me, it’s no coincidence Reform’s pronatalism echoes what we’re seeing in the US.”

Countries like the US, Hungary, Poland, Russia, Belarus and Italy have adopted explicitly pronatalist policies. These often involve conservative ideals: heterosexual marriage, stay-at-home mothers and “baby bonuses” for more kids. 

“Overseas, it’s been gender-conservative, heteronormative, and restricting sexual and reproductive rights – often with an ethno-nationalist, anti-migrant bent,” says Basten.

“That hasn’t taken off here much yet, but it may bleed over… it seems to be what Farage is implying.”

In 2023, Conservative MP Miriam Cates called for similar UK policies, blaming “cultural Marxism” for falling birthrates.

Likewise, Farage recently called for parliament to debate reducing the legal abortion limit from 24 weeks – though fewer than 1% of UK abortions occur after that point. This could signal an attempt to open up a new front in the culture wars.

Reform UK’s proposals are milder but rest on the same idea. Alongside scrapping the cap, Farage has called for tax reforms that would “make marriage a little bit more important” to give children “the best chance of success”.

The two-child cap is a moral stain on this country – and ought to be scrapped, says Gietel Basten. But pronatalists might be disappointed: it’s not clear that scrapping it will actually lead to people having more kids. 

“The idea that there were a substantial number of people in the UK who were having children purely to get a higher rate of universal credit – that doesn’t make any sense at all,” he said.

“For a start, the amount of money they would get would not be very much, the arithmetic doesn’t make sense. Similarly, since the cap was introduced, we aren’t seeing those numbers drop. What you’re trying to stop happening hasn’t stopped happening.

“People have children for a variety of different reasons. Benefits are not one of them.”

Likewise, Farage’s policies will not address the real barriers to people having more children: precarious work, the soaring cost of living, and gendered care burdens. 

His plans are too seldom subject to any real scrutiny, added Copeland. 

“Reform’s strategy often lacks coherence and is shaped by populist positioning than by sound economic planning,” he said. “The failure of much of the mainstream right-wing media to scrutinise Reform’s  contributes to the limited accountability of far-right populist narratives. A government led by such a party could risk repeating the kind of economic crash witnessed during Liz Truss’s brief tenure as prime minister.”

Do you have a story to tell or opinions to share about this? Get in touch and tell us more. 

Real stories. Real impact. Real change.  

No clickbait. Just trustworthy journalism that gets to the heart of big issues in the UK and beyond. Words drive real change.

If this article gave you something to think about, help us keep doing this work.  

Support independent journalism from £5 a month.