I am currently trying to decide which of my three children is my least favourite. This is so I can choose which one not to feed. Obvs I would like to feed them all, but under a Tory Government this is discouraged. Maybe I will alternate who gets to eat on a daily basis. Or actually I think what I will do is just not feed myself, so that I can make sure they all have a healthy meal. Yes. That’s my decision. And no doubt the decision that most people who end up being hit by the ‘no benefits for child number 3’ rule when it comes in. Lord knows what you do if you have 4 or 5 or more children. Shoplift I guess.
Fortunately for me, my eldest is old enough that the changes will not effect my family in that way (tho we will still find ourselves significantly worse off despite OH working full time and me part time), but I really feel for those who end up in that position. I guess if you don’t already have more than two children you can theoretically avoid it effecting you – but if you already have them then you could be screwed – as the small print seems to imply that this is not only for children born after that date, but also for families who circumstances change requiring a claim to be started after that date.
Oh I know. You shouldn’t have children if you can’t afford them, but stuff happens, contraception isn’t 100% effective and life doesn’t always stay perfect. Maybe you could afford 3, then circumstances changed. Maybe you had good jobs then got made redundant, got sick, got injured. Maybe you are a blended family where you have two kids each, and love has built a new family of four children.
Maybe happy families with more than two children will have to choose to separate in order that there is enough money to go around. And who decides who it is that has more than two children? If I have two with you, then bugger off and leave you all, can I have two elsewhere? Seems kind of unfair on the parent left picking up the pieces that they and any future partner don’t dare risk another child in case they should fall on hard times and need support, while the absent parent is free to breed as they wish.
And it isn’t just those falling on hard times. With rents/mortgages high, plenty of people with an income well over £20,000 a year still need help to make ends meet. Mind you, they are buggered by this budget whichever way you look at it – losing over £1,000 a year of much needed child tax credits anyway. People who work full-time being punished while big business and the wealthy are better off. So much for being the party of working people huh, robbing the working people of the ability to make ends meet is the truth of this budget.
And a future of social engineering, where nobody but the very wealthy dare have more than two kids, because even those of us who are comfortable now cannot guarantee we won’t fall on hard times in the future. Oddly we could do with a few more kids knocking about in twenty years time – as it is their taxes which will fund our pensions. In a society that is already top-heavy at the older end, I am not sure discouraging people from having children is that forward thinking.
I think any government who is prepared to unleash the harshest measures on the youngest members of society are unthinkably cruel. Whatever you may think of their parents choices and lifestyle, does that ever justify making children suffer? I am stunned that people are prepared to see children in poverty as a punishment to their parents. The sins of the father. Nasty Tory Party.
And this is just a small part of my rant this past few days. How they will make 30 hours of free child care work when in many places it is a struggle to find the 15 is one of them – how the nurseries will make end meet on the low funding I do not know. The removal of maintenance grants for university students from lower income families is just frightening the aspirations out of people. Reduction of benefits for the sick and the disabled? Really? Why not reduce the benefits to Amazon instead. Country wide benefit caps? Ridiculous, welfare should be paid by need. A single persons needs will fall well within the caps, a families may not – again it is children that will suffer. You cannot cap benefits without dealing with housing, as it is this spiralling cost that is leaving so many in poverty. And a ‘living wage’??!!?? – laughs in a somewhat hysterical fashion that this is anything like a living wage. It is all rubbish.
And am less than happy with Harriet Harman’s response too. Yes, you didn’t win – but to agree to some of this stuff is not why I voted Labour – and surely she is there to oppose, to represent the views of those who DID vote Labour, not to appease those who didn’t? Otherwise their vote counted twice – once for the party they voted for and again because the opposition are also representing their views in a bid to be liked more? Bit odd if you ask me. Who is speaking for me in parliament at the moment? Nobody. (All my egg like hopes are in a Corbyn shaped basket currently)
Anyway. In case you couldn’t tell I am cross. And saddened. And off for a biscuit while I can still afford them.
Love Miss Cisco XXX