Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill Committee: New Clause 3
73
Ayes
—
256
Noes
Defeated · Government won
284 did not vote
Analysis
Commons
Commons
**What happened:** On 23 February 2026, the House of Commons voted on New Clause 3 during the committee stage of the Universal Credit (Removal of Two Child Limit) Bill. The clause was defeated by 256 votes to 73. The government, with the full weight of the Labour and Labour and Co-operative parties voting no, blocked this amendment from being added to the Bill. **Why it matters:** The Bill itself removes the two-child limit on universal credit -- the rule that restricts child element payments to the first two children in a family -- a change the government says will lift over half a million children out of poverty. New Clause 3 sought to go further than the government's own proposal. Its defeat means the Bill will proceed in its original form, without the additional provisions the amendment would have introduced. Families with three or more children stand to benefit from the core Bill, but those pushing for more expansive changes to the benefit system did not secure them at this stage. **The politics:** The vote exposed a division between the governing Labour Party and a cross-party bloc of opposition MPs who wanted stronger action. The Liberal Democrats provided the largest block of aye votes with 53, joined by the SNP, Plaid Cymru, the Greens, the DUP, and one Conservative. Labour MPs voted unanimously against the amendment, holding the government line. The defeat of this and related amendments did not derail the Bill itself -- the Third Reading passed the same day by 361 to 84 -- but it reflects ongoing pressure from parties to the left of the government, and from some Labour backbenchers associated with previous rebellions, to move faster and further on child poverty.
Voting Aye meant
Support adding extra requirements (such as impact assessments or consultation provisions) to the bill removing the two-child limit, going beyond what the government proposed
Voting No meant
Oppose the additional requirements in New Clause 3, backing the government's approach to removing the two-child limit without extra conditions attached
329 voting MPs. Each dot is one vote; left-to-right by party. Grey dots in the centre are the 284 who did not vote.
Aye
No
Absent
Labour PartyWhipped No
0
260
102
Conservative and Unionist Party
1
0
115
Liberal DemocratsWhipped Aye
53
0
19
Labour and Co-operative PartyWhipped No
0
27
15
Independent
3
3
7
Scottish National PartyWhipped Aye
6
0
3
Reform UK
0
0
8
Sinn Féin
0
0
7
Democratic Unionist PartyWhipped Aye
3
0
2
Green Party of England and WalesWhipped Aye
3
0
1
Plaid CymruWhipped Aye
4
0
—
Social Democratic and Labour Party
0
0
2
Alliance Party of Northern Ireland
0
0
1
Speaker
0
0
1
Traditional Unionist Voice
0
0
1
Ulster Unionist Party
1
0
—
Your Party
1
0
—
The Bill removes the two-child limit from April 2026, lifting 450,000 children out of poverty and investing in Britain's future; it is the most cost-effective lever available to tackle structural child poverty.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (3,064 words) →
The two-child limit reflects fairness and personal responsibility; removing it is fiscally irresponsible at £3.5bn cost, undermines work incentives, and unfairly burdens working families who must make tough decisions about family size.Conservative · Voted no_vote_recorded · Read full speech (2,367 words) →
Removing the two-child limit is essential and cost-effective; however, the benefit cap must also be removed to ensure gains are not clawed back and all 150,000 affected children truly escape poverty.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (782 words) →
The Bill is welcome but incomplete; removing the two-child limit while leaving the benefit cap in place leaves 150,000 children in poverty and echoes 19th-century Poor Law logic that punishes the vulnerable.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,452 words) →
The Bill is necessary but narrow; the benefit cap is equally cruel and should be scrapped simultaneously; the government must collect and publish detailed data on families left behind by this limited approach.Green · Voted aye · Read full speech (883 words) →
The removal of the two-child limit is vital, but 141,000 children will still be held back in poverty by the benefit cap; the government must urgently address the cap and commit to a minimum income guarantee.Labour · Voted no · Read full speech (1,386 words) →
Removing the two-child limit in Northern Ireland will lift 50,000 children from poverty and 13,000 families to a better standard of living; it is the mark of a caring society to help those most in need.DUP · Voted aye · Read full speech (227 words) →
Removing the two-child limit is unquestionably right and will save families up to £5,000 per year; however, the Bill is narrow and must be accompanied by broader measures to address deep poverty and destitution.Liberal Democrat · Voted aye · Read full speech (808 words) →
Sources
Division dataUK Parliament Votes API
DebateHansard · Commons
Stance analysisAI analysis · Claude 4.x
LicenceOpen Parliament Licence v3.0