Lord Altrincham (Con)

My Lords, the Child Benefit and Guardian’s Allowance Up-rating Order 2026 sets the weekly rates from 6 April 2026. As the Committee will know, this instrument increases the weekly rates of child benefit and guardian’s allowance by 3.8%, in line with the rise in the consumer prices index between September 2024 and September 2025. As the Minister outlined, from 6 April 2026, child benefit for the eldest child will rise from £26.05 to £27.05, a rise of £1. For subsequent children, it will rise from £17.25 to £17.90, a rise of 65p per week. Guardian’s allowance will increase from £22.10 to £22.95, an 85p rise per week. We do not oppose this order. It is standard practice to uprate these benefits in line with inflation, and it is right that families and guardians who rely on this support should see their payments maintain their value in real terms. However, uprating alone cannot substitute for a serious and coherent approach to welfare reform. Child benefit is paid to more than 6.9 million families, supporting 11.9 million children. These families are part of a substantial proportion of all households across the United Kingdom. This makes it one of the most widely accessed forms of benefit in the UK, and guardian’s allowance, while smaller in scale, plays a crucial role in supporting vulnerable children. Given that scale, the absence of a broader reform strategy is concerning. A system of this size must be sustainable, targeted and fair, both to those who depend on it and to the taxpayers who fund it. The Government’s retreat from broader welfare reform raises real concerns about long-term sustainability. Turning to inflation, we must consider the economic climate in which this 3.8% uprating is taking place. Inflation has risen from 1.7% last year to 3.8%, a marked acceleration that is being felt in households across the country. Families are disproportionately exposed to increases in essential costs. Energy bills are an inescapable expense, particularly for larger households. Food prices inevitably carry greater weight where there are children to provide for. Clothing expenditure is cyclical and unavoidable as children grow. When inflation is concentrated in essentials such as energy and food, the lived experience for families can feel far sharper than the aggregate CPI figure suggests. Uprating benefits preserves nominal value but does not necessarily ease the real pressure where cost increases are most acute. We must therefore ask whether the Government’s wider fiscal and regulatory decisions have contributed to the renewed inflationary pressures that families now face. Concerns remain about the cumulative impact of higher taxation and regulatory burdens, including those associated with energy policies, on businesses and households alike. When businesses face higher input costs, those costs are frequently passed on to consumers, and the result is sustained pressure on family finances. In short, this order performs its narrow and necessary function: it uprates child benefit and guardian’s allowance in line with CPI. It does not alter policy, nor does it address the structural questions surrounding welfare reform or the economic environment in which families are living. With those observations, I conclude.