Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

Mandy Rhodes: Accidents happen and benefits are a safety net… the clue’s in the name

Michelle Ballantyne sparked outrage (Photo: Allan Milligan)
Michelle Ballantyne sparked outrage (Photo: Allan Milligan)

RUTH DAVIDSON’S welfare spokesperson at Holyrood, Michelle Ballantyne – the would-be social security minister if the Tories ever get into Bute House – has sparked outrage by saying it is “fair” that people on benefits should not have more than two children.

When the Tories first mooted the idea of imposing a two-child benefit cap five years ago, it felt like one of those crazy pre-election campaign plans that would wither on the vine as less hysterical approaches to the rising welfare bill were found.

Well, it turned out that even some of the outriders were only slightly more outrageous than the ideas the UK Government was actually working on as it attempted to simplify the benefit system and cut costs with the roll-out of Universal Credit.

Paying benefits fairly is undoubtedly complicated because people’s lives are complex and so, too, are the politics, not to mention Byzantine ways of processing claims and time delays on pay-outs. But Universal Credit has, so far, been an unmitigated disaster.

The idea of a two-child benefit cap may have been a simple one which fed neatly into a particular Conservative sense of pitting the “strivers” against the “skivers”, but when you have to put in place a caveat so inhumane as the “rape-clause” to mitigate it, then surely that should have been the tombstone moment for a government policy which has caused such hardship?

But instead it has enthusiastic cheerleaders such as Michelle Ballantyne and the Scottish Tories at Holyrood waving it on.

None of us plans to be poor but sometimes it happens: divorce, redundancy, insecure tenancy, illness, death – things we all face at some point. Too many workers are just one paycheck away from falling below the poverty line and one bill away, one unforeseen emergency, from being seriously sunk.

The benefit cap takes no account of the unpredictability of life, doesn’t recognise the twists and turns that mean you can’t plan for every eventuality, and Ballantyne has just thrown red meat at the issue.

Most of the families in receipt of tax credits are in work – they just don’t get paid very much. They don’t have the luxury of planning their family based on permanency because their living arrangements are built on financial quicksand.

And if they had to wait until they knew beyond any reasonable doubt that they could afford to provide for a third child for the rest of its life without any state help at all, then our already diminishing population would just shrink further.

Michelle Ballantyne has six children. Did she carefully plan the conception of each? Did she count on never being out of work, being of good health and always having a well-stuffed financial cushion to land on?

The problem for the Tories is, however they try to dress up the two-child cap, however much they describe its accompanying rape clause as a humane response to an unavoidable benefit claim, their approach to welfare still smacks of privilege, eugenics and an inherent right to decide who is deserving and who is not.

And in this case, unforgivably, it is children who are being targeted and who will suffer.