ngland’s Children’s Commissioner has spoken of the “huge moral case” for supporting younger individuals after stories the Chancellor is contemplating real-terms cuts to advantages, which charities have described as “unthinkable” for the poorest households.

Dame Rachel de Souza stated now's “a really big moment for us as a nation to support our children and back our children”, when requested about the potential for Jeremy Hunt breaking with custom by not elevating welfare funds according to inflation in his autumn monetary assertion to unencumber money for tax cuts forward of the following election.

The Child Poverty Action Group branded the prospect “simply unthinkable” whereas Action for Children stated such a transfer may “be a tipping point for many families living in poverty”.

The charity’s chief govt Alison Garnham described it as asking the poorest households “to pay through benefit cuts for balancing the books/paying for tax cuts”.

In a press release, she stated: “With child poverty rising and kids already having to endure hunger, there is no credible or moral case for a real-terms cut in benefits.”

Read More

In an interview with the PA news company, Dame Rachel stated she “absolutely will” be making the case to Government of the necessity for extra and higher assist for kids.

She stated: “Of course I’m going to ask the Chancellor for more money for children. I’ll be making that case very, very clearly.

“For me there’s a huge moral case that we need to support children, just as we need to support everyone in the country, but for me children are at the centre of that.”

Asked if not elevating welfare funds according to inflation would end in kids struggling, she stated: “I think children are. I think the Government has, post-pandemic, put more money into services for children but the need is even greater.”

I believe it’s a very massive second for us as a nation to assist our kids and again our kids

She added: “I think it’s a really big moment for us as a nation to support our children and back our children.

At the weekend, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak declined to rule out real-terms cuts to benefits.

Benefits are usually raised in line with September’s consumer price index measure for inflation.

But reports suggested that Mr Hunt could point towards forecasts that inflation will be far lower in April, when the payments hike would come into effect.

Speaking to broadcasters at the G20 summit in New Delhi, Mr Sunak said there is a legal process that is worked through “every year to do benefits uprating and a whole host of other things”.

“And those decisions are announced at the autumn statement, that’s entirely normal,” he stated.

As the Prime Minister sought to “reassure” these scuffling with the price of residing, he pointed to the additional assist already put in place to assist with power funds and different payments.

“So people should be reassured that that extra support is there for the most vulnerable in our society at a time which I know is difficult and that’s why we have to bring inflation down,” he stated.

Imran Hussain, director of coverage and campaigns at Action for Children, stated: “Failing to raise benefits in line with inflation would be a real terms cut and would be a tipping point for many families living in poverty, who are desperately clinging on despite soaring prices and stagnating wages.

“The Government’s 2019 manifesto committed them to using the tax and benefit system to reduce child poverty, not to increase it.

“Since 2010, the real value of benefits has fallen behind both inflation and earnings. That’s not right or sustainable. Increasing the child element of Universal Credit by £15 a week and scrapping the benefit cap would lift 320,000 children out of poverty.”