Promoting Higher Birth Rates amongst British Citizens

Happy to take notes, comments, or suggestions.

This is a first draft at something I feel is becoming a larger issue in the country and is meant to spark discussion.

Happy reading.


Promoting Higher Birth Rates amongst British Citizens
A Comprehensive Policy Discussion
For Reference of: Great British Political Action Committee
Date: March 2025


Executive Summary
This paper presents a strategic framework aimed at reversing the decline in birth rates amongst British families. The proposal combines legal reforms, financial incentives, and cultural-educational initiatives designed to reinforce family stability and encourage childbearing within stable, two-parent households. Central to the framework are measures that enhance parental leave policies, improve access to affordable childcare and housing, and introduce targeted marriage and family-based tax benefits. The paper also outlines eligibility criteria based on long-term British citizenship and deep ancestral ties, ensuring that state benefits directly support native British family structures. Insights drawn from ARC Forum’s research underscore the importance of integrating socio-economic policies to foster an environment where family life can thrive.


Introduction
Recent demographic trends have shown a steady decline in birth rates among ethnic British citizens. Factors such as economic pressures, soaring childcare and housing costs, and evolving social attitudes toward family formation have contributed to this trend. In response, this paper proposes a targeted approach designed to incentivise family expansion among British citizens. By creating an environment where financial stability, legal security, and cultural support converge, the proposal aims to make raising a family not only feasible but also desirable.
The objectives of this initiative are clear: to enhance family stability by reforming existing legal and workplace policies, to boost economic incentives that reduce the cost burdens associated with raising children, to foster a cultural renewal through educational and media initiatives, and to preserve ethnic continuity by restricting benefits to long-term native British families.


Problem Statement
The declining birth rate among British citizens poses significant long-term socio-economic and cultural challenges. According to ONS data (Office of National Statistics, 2024b), the number of children born to British mothers decreased by 25% between 2008 and 2023 [Table 1]. This trend is further exacerbated by a marked decline in marriage rates, which in 2022 were 42% lower than in 1972 [Table 2], thereby undermining traditional family structures that have historically contributed to demographic stability. Contemporary families face high living costs and restricted access to affordable childcare, factors that delay or deter parenthood. Moreover, the current economic environment often necessitates dual-income households, as insufficient financial independence precludes the possibility for one parent to provide full-time childcare while the other remains the sole earner. Compounding these issues, existing maternity and paternity allowances are inadequate to support families during the critical early stages of child-rearing, and current welfare systems and workplace policies frequently neglect the unique needs of married couples, inadvertently favouring alternative household configurations that do not align with targeted policy objectives. This paper proposes a comprehensive mix of legal, financial, and cultural measures designed to enhance family stability and promote the sustainable growth of ethnic British families.


Analysis & Discussion
The proposed legal reforms are predicated on a comprehensive reappraisal of current parental leave policies and complementary measures to fortify family stability. For mothers, the proposal advocates extending statutory maternity leave pay to guarantee 100% salary replacement for a minimum of six months, followed by a phased reduction in benefits up to 18 months. Concurrently, the policy recommends implementing flexible return-to-work options – including part-time arrangements subsidised by governmental support – to facilitate a smoother reintegration into the workforce and ensure the retention of a stable, skilled labour pool. Research indicates that such comprehensive leave provisions increase the likelihood that mothers will resume their pre-leave positions, thereby reducing turnover costs and preserving valuable human capital (IMPAQ International and Institute for Women Policy Research, 2017).
For fathers, the proposal mandates a minimum of three months of fully paid paternity leave, augmented by financial incentives such as employer tax credits for organisations that offer extended leave options. This measure is designed to promote an equitable division of childcare responsibilities and enhance labour market inclusivity by ensuring that both parents remain connected to their employment. Moreover, the proposal includes a Hungarian-style tax reduction scheme for parents, which grants a specific tax credit for each child. In addition, a dedicated ā€œsole‐earner childcare tax creditā€ is recommended for families where one partner opts to take extended unpaid leave to care for children. Under this scheme, the working partner would be permitted to transfer a portion of the non-working partner’s unused personal tax allowance into their taxable income or receive a fixed tax credit per child during the leave period. For example, an analysis might propose a tax relief rate of 20–25% on the income loss incurred during the leave or, alternatively, a fixed credit equivalent to around 15% of the average annual income per child. Such measures would alleviate the financial disincentives associated with childrearing, support the stability of single-income families, and promote a more equitable sharing of caregiving responsibilities.

Access to affordable childcare constitutes another critical component of the proposal. The envisioned framework entails an expansion of state-funded childcare services to ensure that working parents in married households have access to subsidised childcare for children under the age of five. For families opting for private childcare, the proposal includes provisions for tax deductions to ease the financial burden. Additionally, those choosing home-based childcare would be eligible for a subsidised allowance equivalent to the cost of childcare services, with such benefits exclusively available to married parents. This targeted support reinforces the model of a stable, two-parent household.

Housing and family stability are also integral to this comprehensive approach. The proposal recommends the introduction of substantial first-time homebuyer grants aimed at supporting married couples, with larger financial incentives for families with three or more children. It further advocates for low-interest, government-backed mortgages to make home ownership more attainable, along with policies that promote the development of family-sized housing units and impose rent controls to ensure access to stable, affordable housing for families with young children.

Work-life balance remains a cornerstone of the proposal. It mandates that employers offer flexible work arrangements such as remote working, flexible hours, or reduced workweeks to accommodate the needs of parents with young children. Tax incentives are proposed for businesses that adopt family-friendly practices, including extended parental leave and on-site childcare. Additional support measures are planned for companies that facilitate part-time work arrangements without compromising career progression, thereby further encouraging parents to balance professional and family responsibilities.

Recognising the significance of stable, two-parent households, the proposal includes measures to promote marriage and discourage single parenthood when not necessitated by circumstance. The framework suggests enhanced tax allowances for married couples, supplemented by state-funded marriage preparation courses that provide both financial and educational support. Furthermore, it calls for a review of welfare provisions for single parents, with benefits limited to cases of widowhood or domestic abuse, and recommends longer waiting periods and mandatory family counselling in divorce cases involving children to underscore the benefits of family stability.

Beyond legal and financial measures, cultural and educational initiatives are integral to the proposal. The government is encouraged to integrate family life and relationship stability education into school curricula, emphasising the economic and emotional benefits of raising children within a secure family environment. In the media, support is urged for productions that celebrate traditional family values, bolstered by tax breaks and direct funding for documentaries and campaigns that highlight the positive outcomes of early and stable family formation. Public awareness campaigns will further aim to challenge prevailing narratives that portray professional success as inherently incompatible with family life, replacing them with evidence-based messaging that demonstrates the long-term benefits of early parenthood.

Eligibility criteria grounded in native ancestry and long-term citizenship are fundamental to ensuring that these policies directly benefit native British families. Under this framework, a married couple is deemed fully eligible for the enhanced benefits if at least one parent can provide documentary evidence confirming that three consecutive generations in that parent’s lineage have maintained British citizenship. Additional restrictions apply to recent migrants, naturalised citizens, and individuals with leave to remain. This approach ensures that the financial, legal, and cultural incentives are directed exclusively toward native British families, thereby preserving cultural continuity. For example, if ā€˜John Smith’ can document three successive generations of native British ancestry from his mother (His mother, Grandmother, and Great-Grandmother), then the entire couple would be considered fully eligible for the enhanced benefits, regardless of whether his spouse, ā€˜Mary Jones’, meets the same ancestry criteria. This approach ensures that as long as one parent in the couple can demonstrate the requisite native ancestry, the full range of financial, legal, and cultural incentives will be extended to the family unit, thereby preserving cultural continuity.


Proposed Recommendations
In summary, the paper recommends a multi-pronged strategy that includes the adoption of comprehensive parental leave and childcare policies, the implementation of targeted housing and financial incentives, and the introduction of work-life balance measures that support family stability. It further suggests that cultural and educational programs be strengthened to promote traditional family values, and that clear eligibility criteria based on ancestral ties be established to ensure that benefits support long-term native British family structures. Each of these components is designed to work in concert, creating an environment where the decision to have more children is both financially viable and culturally reinforced.


Conclusion
This paper has outlined a holistic approach to promoting higher birth rates among British citizens by integrating legal reforms, financial incentives, and cultural support measures. By focusing on enhancing family stability, reducing the financial burdens associated with raising children, and reinforcing traditional family values, the proposed strategies aim to create a supportive environment in which native British families can thrive. While the proposals will require thorough legal, ethical, and political review, the integration of targeted incentives with robust educational and community support represents a promising pathway toward revitalizing the native British population.


References & Appendices

IMPAQ International and Institute for Women Policy Research (2017). Paid Leave and Employment Stability of First-Time Mothers Issue Brief-Worker Leave Analysis and Simulation Series 1 PAID LEAVE USE AMONG FIRST-TIME MOTHERS. [online] Institute for Women Policy Research, pp.1–9. Available at: https://iwpr.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/IMPAQ-First-Time-Mothers-4.pdf [Accessed 18 Mar. 2025].

Office of National Statistics (2024a). Marriages in England and Wales - Office for National Statistics. [online] Available at: Marriages in England and Wales - Office for National Statistics [Accessed 17 Mar. 2025].

Office of National Statistics (2024b). Parents’ Country of Birth - Office for National Statistics. [online] Available at: ONS (Unfortunately, I can only include 2 links, feel free to message me for further links)

This document draws on insights from the ARC Forum research paper Choices: Family Matters, (Unfortunately, I can only include 2 links, feel free to message me for further links)

This may be an unpopular opinion but one of the reasons for low birth rates is abortion. I believe there were 250,000 abortions in 2022. There have been millions of abortions since the Abortion Act of 1967. All those babies could have grown up to have children of their own.

Then, young people are encouraged to sleep around and not to commit to one person in marriage, where children would be produced. Even those who want to marry often can’t afford to buy a house anymore and there is a great shortage of rental properties, so many young people still live with their parents and can’t start their own families.

I would prioritise young people from this country to get a house or flat.

3 Likes

So I actually had a conversation with a friend about this yesterday after asking him to take a read of this before submitting it. I completely agree with you (I am an Orthodox Christian myself, so how could I agree with abortion?), but what I said to him is that we need to walk before we run. Whilst I and others completely disagree with abortion, there are still many people that agree with it for various reasons. It would be a very unpopular move to outright rid it (unfortunately). So this takes in cultural steps to make it unnecessary in the first place and then when it becomes the unpopular opinion, it can be looked at as a separate issue.
This is also the reason why I have mentioned incentives for helping young people getting on the housing ladder and also why I went with the ancestral routes dating back roughly 100-years (3 generations prior to the applicant).

All the points you have made are perfectly valid, I agree with them, but it has to be about perception and practical routes. For example, I was having a conversation on Monday with one of Rishi Sunak’s advisors who was telling me the reason that they didn’t do many things were because of optics, things the Conservatives could not do because they’d be demonised in the press, but Labour could do them with little to no issue (IE. Welfare reforms, NHS England, etc.).

So with this, having educational reforms and incentives to avoid these sorts of behaviours in the first place and then looking to reform current legislation in the future when it becomes less of a radical idea seems the logical and sensible choice to me.

Yes, that’s why I didn’t suggest any policy regarding abortion. I just mentioned that it is greatly lowering birth rates, which is becoming a problem.

Education is important. Abortion causes many women, maybe not all, to experience trauma, guilt, shame and mental health issues for some years. There is counselling available for some of these women.

2 Likes

I’m interested/worried about the long-term effects of all of this. Namely, my instincts tell me that financial grants are great as a short-term fix, but not as a long-term solution.

Yes, we can make childcare cheaper and we can make financial incentives to encourage single-working-parent households, but all that does is increase the money in the system going after the same goods, which the market will respond to by raising prices and creating the same problem we have now. Ostensibly, this is what has happened with the need for two-earner households, more and more families switched for the monetary benefit of having two earners, and as this happened it became increasingly mandatory to have two earners to be able to afford to live.

As such, I think that this is only a plaster that may cover the wound for a decade or so, but soon after the wound will reopen unless we keep pouring more and more money in.

I think that you also fail to address another gleaming issue, the commercialisation of relationships, especially via things like dating apps, pornography, and OnlyFans… All of these encourage people to stay single for longer, tell them that they can always do better, find someone better, and should leave the moment that something that they don’t like happens. There is a fake over-abundance of opportunities presented to people and this is one of the biggest issues leading to declining fertility.

IMO, (and yes, this is going to be puritanical) to increase the birthrate, we have to enforce by law what was once enforced by social stigma. Outlaw pornography and porn-adjacent things, make fornication a crime punishable with prison time, end no-fault divorce, and think about restricting women from the workplace (my liberal precepts scream out against this, but my logic tells me that it works).

After that, we can think about implementing economic incentives for having children, maybe even political ones (you gain half a vote for each child you have with a person you are married to?).

1 Like

I think you make some great points and some that I had not considered. I also agree that this is a plaster and not the stitches that are needed but, I think until we can sort something long-term (either, as you suggested, moving away from liberalist values to ban things, or as I put with education of younger people to ensure that these current values decrease over time) we do need that plaster.
Through this, we can force long-term thinking about how we ensure that the population naturally starts growing and the government (ever in it’s 5-year cycle) and becomes more hesitant to bring in people from other cultures to make up the difference.

This is a draft approach that looks at things from one side, which is why I said I am open to discussion and happy to seek input from others.

I think that this is a fair response, I am just concerned that ā€œthere is nothing more permanent than a temporary government program,ā€ as the saying goes.
I think that short-term measures have to be built into a longer-term strategy because otherwise, we end up playing a game of political football tweaking these short-term things and not actually solving the real issue.

I completely agree, between that and MP’s only thinking of their next general election, nothing ever gets done. I always quote Nick Clegg saying we’re not going to build nuclear because it will take 10 years (and then 10 years later the energy crisis hit).

Maybe some parts need to have deadlines in place that can be extended if need be while we look into longer-term solutions. As I said before, education is a massive factor in my mind and if we can ensure the next generations don’t have the same mindset as the current ones, we can phase out the current issues.

Obviously, there are also other factors as to why marriage (and therefore children) is disincentivised (some mentioned, others not) and we need to focus on closing those factors in long-term solutions so that short-term solutions can be phased out.

Hi Jake,
Thanks for raising this important but neglected topic. If you are not already aware of his work, I strongly suggest you, and others, look at the research and writing of demographer Paul Morland. It’s worth searching for his name on your chosen podcast provider as he’s given some excellent recent interviews (see Triggernometry and Louise Perry’s ā€˜Maiden, Mother, Matriarch’. The takeaway is that there is no single ā€˜silver bullet’ to solve this problem. As you suggest, a range of policies is required. The most important overarching one, however, is to create a culture that is pro-natal. Having children has to be seen as cool and pro-social. In that, role models are important as is popular culture, which has for too long presented the family and parenthood as a problem to be solved.

2 Likes

Hi,

I’ll definitely take a look into his work! I am always open to research that I can use to improve my own work (helpful for both this and my university work), so thank you for the suggestion!

Once I’ve had a look, I may well come back to update this post.

Have a great day!

Jake

This.

I’ve read enough on the topic to agree with this. In countries like Mongolia, for instance, motherhood is highly valued by society. Mongolian mothers who have 4 or more kids receive presidential awards. As a result their fertility rate is well above replacement levels.

2 Likes

I Like the idea but the problems facing the UK need quite significant reform, The best approach to this would be something more comprehensive and radical, The Biggest drain on the state is healthcare costs for preventable illness, fraud and migrants.

Reduce the size and scope of the NHS, the savings from that can go into health food subsidies, school and healthcare vouchers + not only what you have suggested in the post but a lower base tax rate for life based on the amount of children.

While NHS changes will be perceived negative at first, behaviour will change in the population making them less reliant while the additional take home pay each month will quickly change public opinion.

1 Like

You are partially correct in your comments on migrants. The largest single expenditure is healthcare and the NHS, costing approximately Ā£190 billion. However, the government’s most significant overall expenditure is welfare (now including illegal migrants costs rather than being covered under the foreign aid budget) at Ā£314 billion.

While I agree that the NHS and healthcare require significant reform, this policy was developed in isolation, without considering other factors. Primarily, it was designed as a long-term solution to address declining British birth rates and to reduce the government’s reliance on increased migration.

That said, I do see merit in exploring healthy food subsidies, as well as school and healthcare vouchers, but these would likely be better suited under a separate policy rather than within this proposal."

1 Like

I would argue that women being forced to have an unwanted child due to abortion not being an option would also lead to regret, resentment, mental health issues and also potentially neglect or worse abuse of a child.

That is why choice is so important and why it would be so unpopular.

Bringing unwanted children in to the world may solve a low birth rate issue but would raise so many others that would be so much worse. Not to mention the illegal abortions that would become common again.

Abortion isn’t the issue, the points that the OP has made however very much are.

1 Like

Banning pornography is not going to prevent people having the idea of staying single for longer and leaving when times get tough etc. Those ideas are pushed on social media not through adult content. Social media has also led to the need for dating apps to meet people. It is the number one drug of society these days, people are socially awkward and anxious and real human interaction is on the decline because of it.
Pornography is the easy media to blame but you are missing the real issue at hand. Would you be prepared for a ban of that too? Or would you want heavy regulation? Who would decide what is appropriate?

It starts to sound very 1984.

1 Like

What do you mean when you say

I interpret you to be suggesting that all that matters is the conscious pushing of the idea, that is not the case. People do not hear that they are perfectly good and happy on their own and then accept it. Sex, or sexual activity, is a biological imperative. People naturally seek it out, and pornography creates an artificial outlet for it. It is a vice that makes singleness easier, and that is one of its less harmful social issues.

I have very mixed opinions of social media. It has done a terrific amount of good in terms of democracy, transparency, and spreading important information. But it has also done a terrific amount of harm. The TikTokifacation of society, the dwindling attention spans of people who need to be fed their next 60-second endorphin hit, one after the other. Let us not forget Mizzy and his ilk are a direct result of social media.

In all honesty, I think that serious conversations about the harm of social media vs. the benefits that it brings needs to be had. Because social media is a cancer within our bodies, but it might be a surprisingly beneficial one, even if it is killing us.

Iā€˜ve read a lot in to the site statistics and polls of porn viewers and all reflect that as many if not often more viewers of porn are married or in relationships. That suggests to me that it isn’t playing a huge part in making life a little too convenient for the single.

When you look at statistics and polls regarding social media use and its negative effects on couples and their sex lives it is noticeably more damaging. With the absence of taboo surrounding its use as there is with porn and the fact that it has a much wider demographic it is having a much more noticeable effect on the sex lives of our population.

So what I am saying is that the banning of porn would be an infringement of the right to privacy and freedom of expression with little reward.

I would argue that it would put us on the slippery slope of controlling society.

I agree in much of what you have suggested.

I think it would be beneficial to introduce real life skills into our curriculum including that of childcare and conversation around how to have healthy relationships.

I don’t believe the popular narrative that single parents choose to be so because it is financially beneficial in the most part. I think that for the majority it is a culmination of poor decisions based on lack of knowledge and or role models. Would people be less reckless if they had nothing to fall back on? Possibly. We definitely don’t have a culture of choosing our partners and potential parent to our children here in the UK as other cultures do. At one time I would have said that was more unique to the working class but I think it transcends class these days. In other thriving cultures they consider prospects, values, future plans etc. Here it often seems an after thought. Not only does it encourage better and longer lasting partnerships not but healthier parenting too which of course instills that in the next generation. How can we teach that again?

I see you have mentioned the discouragement of single parents excluding instances in which there has been domestic abuse or death but this doesn’t factor in the number one cause of single parenting and that is one of (usually the father) abandoning the family. Are we to punish the mother who will be left to bear the brunt of the responsibility? How would we force the abandoning parent to stay and would that not lead to more problems than it would solve?

I do feel that broken families has led to much our problems in society today but I really feel that in the absence of emotionally mature and healthy parents which seems to be a pandemic of its own these days it must start with education.

Gone are the days of marriages of convenience and I think that we are better off for it. I hope not to return to that. The only benefit was a future workforce and is that what we want to continue to be whittled down to? Surely we can encourage happy, healthy marriages and children who go on to prosper?

1 Like

Education is something I started to touch on, but I agree real life skills would definitely be an advantage. If children and teens can be taught the benefits of a healthy relationship and how to raise a family, I can see no downside (as long as it is done correctly, the education system is a different beast to be tackled but I am looking at other subjects right now so I’ll add it to the list).

As to the benefits of single parenthood, I can see both sides of the argument. There is a big argument that benefits can in some cases substitute a second parent financially along with childcare cost in the case of divorce.
I do agree about the poor life choices and definitely the comment about role models. Having a good role model in life can make all the difference and I think divorce rates and/or single parenthood pulls that opportunity away from many children. Likewise, single parent households have been seen in studies as a factor in crime later in life. So ensuring having a two-parent household and good role models would help with that factor later down the line.

Your comment about choosing partners seems a more difficult issue to handle (outside of educating how to pick a partner either at home or in school). I’m not sure how that one would be solved without major cultural shifts. We aren’t a culture of choosing potential partners for our children, nor do children really listen to parents in the area of love. So if you have any suggestions, I’d be interested to read them.

As to abandonment, it is a hard one to deal with. I understand what you’re saying on one side, but on the other the proposal is specifically targeted at married couples. I see abandonment as more of a not tied down phenomenon and it would be unwise to give loopholes in that regard. The point of the proposal was and is to encourage marriage before having children, this would inherently bypass the issue of abandonment (unless I am misunderstanding your point, in which case please correct me).

I can only say I agree (as I mentioned in passing previously).

I think whilst it does benefit the workforce, it also benefits the UK culturally. Having a homogeneous culture that imparts the benefits of marriage and having children is what the church used to instill. If we can get back to that, I think a lot of issues can resolve themselves and maybe bring back the idea of choosing a life partner more wisely as you mentioned earlier.

I think that one of the problems with accepting advice from parents is that you only value that advice if you have seen it in action. I would hazard a guess that most of us that do not make good choice regarding a life partner have not experienced healthy parents whether they be married or separated.

A few points I think would be helpful.

Instilling self worth in our children. Even councilling in a guise to some degree through mentorship. Not to molly coddle but because people who value themselves tend not to place themselves in harmful relationships.

Strict internet controls on under 16s. No social media etc.

Our children are taking to unhealthy role models on the internet. Can we provide them with real life examples in real life? Whether it be at school or in extra curricular activities (which we definitely need more of). Trusted mentors aside from teachers that build relationships that encourages the more difficult conversations by normalising them.

Honest conversations about how the modern media distorts expectations of relationships.
Education surrounding what real love actually is. Media aimed towards our teens either points towards love at first sight or meaningless encounters. It needs to be communicated that in reality it’s shared values, emotional maturity, trust and not just looks, attraction and sexual gratification.

Anonymous forums that are heavility monitored that allows self spaces for discussion that some find too difficult to have in person.

A few things that come to mind.

It would still be a tough task but healthy adults breed more healthy adults.

If it was that easy I’m sure we would have by now.