This story is a ridiculous example of egg-head bureaucrats with misplaced priorities. Children aren't economic resources. They're people. And parents don't choose to have children because of the financial benefit. In fact, they welcome children in spite of their significant costs.
It is also ridiculous to value only work outside the home. Mothers (or fathers) who choose to stay at home to care for their own children are providing significant value to those children and to society - whether or not that value shows up on a tax return.
Did the commission consider the economic effect of all the goods and services purchased for children? What about the money spent to keep them entertained? Fed? Clothed? Diapered? What about people buying new houses or moving to bigger apartments to have room for more kids? I doubt that any of that was considered. It doesn't fit the template.
The template seems these days that human beings are bad. We're destructive of nature and destroying the planet. The fewer of us - the better.
I have a suggestion for how people who think that there are too many people on the planet can have a direct impact on solving that "problem" themselves. But I think I'll keep that to myself.