the brilliantly leaping gazelle

Maybe it’s me, possibly because I’m brain damaged, possibly because I’m not in the least bit affected either way, or possibly I don’t venerate children in the same way that our society seems to. More likely it’s a combination of all three.

Whatever it is, I can’t work out why Not Hardies statement to the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg last Sunday that Labour if won the next election he would keep the controversial two child benefit rule was so deserving on the criticism it received. I mean obviously I can, just as much as I can see why some called it controversial but to me, these people are living in a different world, imagining we still live in a world of plenty and not of food banks.

Quick recap time. According to ‘The Guardian’, the rule prevents parents from claiming child tax credit or universal credit for any third or subsequent child born after April 2017. It was introduced by the former chancellor George Osborne in his austerity drive with the aim of encouraging parents of larger families to find a job or work more hours.

Am I missing something here? If you were on universal credit (UC) or claiming child tax credit (CTC) for two children and had just conceived a third after July 2016 but before April 2017, then yes, I can see why you’d be angry. You’d only have yourselves to blame, but you’d be right to be angry at yourself, given as how the change was announced in the Budget of 2015, indicating how it was to implemented in April 2017.

Unless I’m very much mistaken, what this means is that anyone already claiming UC or CTC for two or more children, then deciding to have yet more children after the announcement was made and the implications made clear have only themselves to blame. The government made their position clear, gave well enough warning and if people are so bereft of common sense as to not practice proper birth control or else to access effective preventative measures to terminate the foetus, well the government can hardly be held responsible for that. Condoms, the contraceptive pill, the morning after pill and abortions are available. We’re not America.

According to ‘The Guardian’, ‘ Abolishing the cap would cost £1.3bn a year but would lift 250,000 children out of poverty, and a further 850,000 would be in less deep poverty, according to campaigners. The End Child Poverty coalition says removing the cap would be the most cost-effective way of reducing the number of children living in poverty.’ What about the cost to the planet in all of this?. The weather is getting warmer, our energy needs are increasing and we can barely meet demand as it is. In winter the weather is getting colder, which again increase our energy needs, which we’ll be even less likely to meet demand if poverty campaigners, no matter how well intentioned, advocate measures that will only plunge more people – not just children – into poverty.

Net Zero by 2050? What could possibly go wrong, aside from increasing unpredictable energy supplies occasioning not only travel instability but also decreased agricultural output and higher food prices? I know the ‘The Guardian’ needs to perpetuate the myth to its readers that having children is somehow equitable with lowering energy demands, limiting consumption and polluting less to ensure that its readers continue proving financial support to fund their delusions, but when are they going to stop and simply point out some harsh truths to them. All concerned might find it liberating.

Has the cost of living crisis been sorted and I wasn’t paying attention? Thought not.

One of the main drivers of the cost of living crisis, is that there are too many people living both nationally and globally to be in any way sustainable. Just because some might find this sentiment unpalatable doesn’t make it any the less true. People are living longer which puts ever increasing pressure on the NHS, public services and infrastructure, and the dwindling proportion of taxpayers relative to the amount of people claiming benefits. So any extension on the limit of this particular benefit to feckless spongers should be celebrated.

Or is ir just me?