Budget Ranting

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.



Budget Cuts image via Shutterstock

Budget Cuts image via Shutterstock


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



  1. July 13, 2015 / 11:17 am

    I totally agree with everything you have said. It is a disgraceful budget that punishes the most needy in our society, it is proof, in my opinion, that the Tory party do not care about anyone but their rich friends
    Mrs TeePot recently posted…Weight loss with Club Kylie: Week 2My Profile

  2. Gavin
    July 13, 2015 / 5:03 pm

    I think the plan of that part of the budget is to stop the people who don’t work and continue having kids they cannot afford, thinking the government will just keep paying them more money and give them bigger houses, to me that sounds a fair idea. 30 hours of free child care sounds a great idea, I can’t see why anyone would be against that? Making it expensive to go to University, again I agree with, as it means only people who are really interested in the course will go rather than just going to Uni for the experience, I don’t want it to be inaccessible for everyone, but paying towards further education sounds fair to me, after all you’re doing it for personal benefit. I’m sure you can point out unfortunate people who will be worse off from these budget proposals who try their hardest and deserve everything they get, but unfortunately it’s the ones who take the p-ss who make it hard for the rest of us. I’m not a tory voter myself, but like to see a bit of balance to these discussions.

    • July 13, 2015 / 5:41 pm

      Hey bro – while there may be a very small number of families who have very large families and rely solely on state handouts, I think they are so small in number that we should not be making policies based on them. One of my main problems with the three child thing is that it counts for those who already have three children too – and a change of circumstance could see any of those families suddenly in need of support. I think they say most people are only 3 pay checks from trouble should they lose their job, get sick, suffer marital breakdown or bereavement. I cannot bear to think that children may go hungry because we disagree with their parents having them!
      Re university – they are already paying – Betsy will come out with approx £40,000 in debt as things stand – and with the removal of grants for those in low earning families it would be another £10,000 minimum on top. I read discussions on mumsnet forums where better off parents are paying their kids fees and paying their accomodation – meaning kids from well off backgrounds often leave with less debt thN those from poorer backgrounds. We will barely be able to spare her the odd £20 to help out.
      The budget will see us worse off by £1350 a year according to the calculator on the BBC. Yet Andy works 40 hour weeks and I am also working part time. We are not being lazy, work just doesn’t always pay enough to make ends meet. I think the people who are genuinely taking the piss are few and far between.

      30 hours of free childcare is good – my concern with that comes from lack of access to it and whether nurseries can cope on the funding they get. Syd’s pre-school can only offer 15 hours – they don’t have the capacity for more. Other parents in my area have to split the 15 hours between more than one provider as they cannot get the hours any other way. So with that announcement my concern is more for how they can achieve it rather than the principle. Ramble over! Xx

  3. July 13, 2015 / 7:43 pm

    I’m still reeling from it all, to be honest! I can’t quite get my head around the fact that we are facing these kinds of changes, even though we knew it was coming as soon as those exit polls were released! To see Harriet Harman respond in that way too, really does leave you wondering who the hell is representing those of us who didn’t vote for this… I said, straight after the election, I feared for the future and that fear is still there, growing stronger as we begin to see just how many families, young people, and disabled people are going to be affected. It makes me so sad, I haven’t quite reached anger yet I don’t think…
    Amanda recently posted…Ten Years with EndometriosisMy Profile

    • July 14, 2015 / 6:50 am

      I am sad that many people seem to have bought the idea that anyone who needs help is lazy. It is just not true. Most of the people losing out in this budget are working just as hard as anyone else – their wages just aren’t enough to live on. I am angry that people have lost their empathy. And I am annoyed that no one is speaking up for us at the moment!
      Sonya Cisco recently posted…Budget RantingMy Profile

  4. July 13, 2015 / 8:41 pm

    I know that I am not directly affected, but this is like a tidal wave of kicking the vulnerable when they’re down, it seems to happening wherever I look worldwide, so much so that I find it hard to watch or listen to current affairs as I feel genuinely frightened about the future and the concentration of power, privilege and entitlement into the hands of a new super wealthy elite.
    Looking for Blue Sky recently posted…The caring stereotype and why it makes me madMy Profile

    • July 14, 2015 / 6:36 am

      I am with you. I look at the displays of contempt being shown to Greece, where other countries in a so called Union will watch the Greek people go hungry to protect their own interests and wonder what has gone wrong with humanity, and that’s without looking too far from home. I know Ireland has suffered too. i want to bang everyone’s heads together and remind them there are more important things than accumulation of wealth.

  5. July 14, 2015 / 5:33 am

    We haven’t been affected this time but generally as a family, we are worse off and yes you could (and people will) argue that you shouldn’t have children if you can’t afford them etc et, but we never set out to rip anyone off, we simply wanted a big family and yet we seems to be being punished for that. I am having to go back to work now which I didn’t want to do yet but we can no longer manage. The days of the SAHM are seemingly numbered which I think is really sad.
    Nikki Thomas recently posted…My Stinky New School by Rebecca ElliottMy Profile

    • July 14, 2015 / 6:34 am

      We have enough savings to allow me to stay home while Syd is in reception. But then I too will have to look for full time work – which I also don’t want to do. Being there for my kids after school and in the holidays is so important to me, but these days one salary is just not enough. Sadly the role of SAHP is just not valued as it doesn’t move any money about. What a shame no goverent can see the value of anything but money.

      • Gavin
        July 14, 2015 / 9:33 am

        Gavin here again, Sonya’s brother, maybe someone should blame our parents for giving us political opinions. I don’t want to sound mean here but I don’t really understand the above comment of “You could argue that you shouldn’t have children if you can’t afford them” I’m not sure there’s many things you should do if you can’t afford it, least of all children. I understand accidents happen and situations change etc, but if you’re actively planning to have a big family, surely you must realise you have to feed, clothe, house a big family, that’s pretty much the basics. Otherwise who do you think is going to pay for your family? I’m sorry if this isn’t a politically correct comment but it annoys me that people complain that the government won’t pay them to stay at home to bring up their children. I have 2 kids and while we never really planned a large family, the extra cost of additional children was part of the reason we didn’t have more. There’s only so much government money to go round, and while I acknowledge there’s probably lots of money wasted, I feel there’s many more worthy uses of our money, healthcare for instance, than paying someone more money so they don’t have to go to work. Sorry again, this is not aimed at anyone in particular, I just quite like this little island of ours, and it annoys me when people don’t value what we have.

        • July 14, 2015 / 10:05 am

          I happen to know that the commenter you are replying to is in receipt of no benefits at all – she is merely expressing sadness at the fact that one wage earner (even in a professional career as I know her husband is) is no longer sufficient, meaning that there is no option to be a SAHP anymore – many of us are trying to do the best for our families by one parent working part-time, to allow school pick-ups and flexibility in school holidays, but even that is starting to be not enough.
          I cannot bear to think of children going hungry whatever you may consider the sins of their parents. And if you think it is wrong for families to receive tax credits while one parent stays at home or works shorter hours to allow for caring for their own children, then do you not also think it is equally wrong to receive help with childcare costs while you go to work? Cant really see the difference between those two things in all honesty.

          • Gavin
            July 14, 2015 / 10:40 am

            That’s not what I said, and no I don’t want children going hungry whatever the situation. And no I didn’t say it s wrong for families to receive tax credits while one parents at home or work, we had tax credits while the kids were small while my wife was at home, and while she went back to work. What I don’t feel is right is if you are CHOOSING to have further children knowing you can’t afford it, and then moaning you don’t get enough help. Again I know things happen, but generally when you decide you want to have kids you sit and think about what you’ll do for money etc, and if you want another kid you again talk about the plan, who will stay home when etc. I understand some people want large families, and that is their choice, but I don’t understand and I say again “Choosing” to have a large family without knowing how you’ll pay for it?? Comments like above saying I chose to have a large family, then complaining they’ll have to go to work to pay for their own family annoys me, when there are people genuinely in need, who didn’t decide to be in need, who didn’t put themselves in need who won’t get as much help because the money is being spread too thin.

          • July 14, 2015 / 11:04 am

            But I don’t see where she said at any point she was expecting the government to step in, she just says she is sad that she will have to return to work at a point sooner than she would have liked. She is taking responsibility. That doesn’t mean she can’t feel sad about it does it? I think most people (or the people who are good at planning these things, unlike me obvs) no doubt start from a position where they can afford the family they are planning, but lets not forget that things have changed for people significantly in recent years – housing costs have spiralled beyond what could have been predicted and wages have slumped in comparison – plans made ten years ago may look very different today. We are not just talking about mythical children born after the cut off point, but at existing families who may find themselves in need in the future through no fault of their own. Anyway – I love you bro, and don’t want to fall out over politics. xx

  6. July 14, 2015 / 8:57 am

    Aaaagh! I have rarely heard such a ridiculous policy. People have three kids. And four kids and five kids. They choose to or it just happens. Those kids shouldn’t have to live in poverty just because the government has decided there are too many of them.
    And for all those people who think it’s right – why should they have to pay for my kids? Well my kids will be their doctor or their dustman. They will serve them in a shop or look after them in a care home. The adults of today have a responsibility to the kids of today because one day the tables will be turned.
    Sarah MumofThree World recently posted…Year 6 leavers’ playMy Profile

Leave a Reply to looking for Blue Sky Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CommentLuv badge