Stephen Paton: Jacob Rees-Mogg seems to have missed the Good Samaritan verse in his Bible

Rather than thank the organisation for its efforts to keep British children fed during this particularly dark winter, the Tory leader of the House of Commons attacked it for political point-scoring – though who those points were aimed at is unclear.

Rees-Mogg seemed to be about two minutes away from declaring that poverty itself was a Labour plot, enacted on millions, solely to make the Conservative government look bad. The Tory Party have become so enamoured by themselves that inconvenient facts such as the rising number of families facing abject poverty this Christmas are merely a flourish of the opposition, rather than flesh and blood reality.

Rees-Mogg didn’t use the phrase “virtue signalling”, but he was clearly inspired by this piece of right-wing oratory that seeks to cast doubt on the intentions of anyone who dares to show a little kindness.

READ MORE: Peter Krykant: Nicola Sturgeon must treat drug addiction as a health issue

Accusations of virtue signalling are broadly used as a tool to cynically brush off criticism regardless of its validity; a get-out-of-jail-free card for floundering right-wing politicians without an answer.

For all his bluster about political point-scoring, the fact remains that while Rees-Mogg was coldly mocking humanitarian efforts to feed hungry children in the UK, others were in tears over finally being able to eat for the first time in days as a result of that aid.

One recipient said: “I obviously would never see my children go without so there have been two or three days where I just haven’t eaten at all. They are my priority and I want to make sure they have enough.”

I know Jacob Rees-Mogg enjoys a Bible verse or two, so let me point to the parable of the Good Samaritan in the Gospel of Luke.

Stripped of his clothes and beaten, a traveller lies half-dead by the side of the road ignored by others walking the path. That is, until a Samaritan happens by who shows the man kindness and mercy in his hour of need.

I wonder, would Rees-Mogg have muttered about virtue signalling witnessing this simple act of kindness now?

I think so.

There’s something so coldly inhumane about the phrase “virtue signalling” and the conspiratorial behaviour it inspires. At its heart is the premise that any act of solidarity, support or charity is motivated solely with the intention to look virtuous in contrast to a political opponent.

​READ MORE: Mike Small: Far too many live precarious lives in this broken Britain

This worldview leaves no space for the idea that simple acts of humanity can exist without ulterior motive.

Perhaps it betrays more about the politicians and right-wing activists who use the phrase than those it is typically used against.

Like all phrases co-opted by the right, however, “virtue signalling” actually did mean something once, before it was twisted out of shape. Functionally, it meant talking the progressive talk, while failing to walk the walk.

As a recent example, Glasgow’s West Brewery capitalised on anger around the treatment of workers during lockdown to garner positive stories in the press – only to have its own behaviour thrust into the spotlight shortly after.

In April, the east-end brewery announced it would no longer sell West beer to Wetherspoons, after the pub chain’s owner Tim Martin left 40,000 employees without wages during lockdown despite being worth £400 million himself.

However, the brewery itself later came in for criticism over its treatment of some of its workers during the pandemic, including asking employees to use their remaining holiday days to cover the time the pub was shut due to lockdown, rather than put staff on furlough.

Eventually they caved in and U-turned after pressure from a trade union. This is what virtue signalling looks like.

​READ MORE: Ethically challenged, self-serving UK Government has no sense of morality

As always, it’s important to ensure that what the powerful say and what they do is in alignment – particularly in a time when regressive forces have learned they can reach new audiences by dressing up their old arguments in the garbs of the left.

Unicef saw the material need of families in Britain and stepped up to do its bit. It walked the walk, which is more can be said for politicians who would rather see children starve than acknowledge their own failure.

Jacob Rees-Mogg does not come across to me as a man who has ever gone for want of anything, never mind his next meal. He is a looming caricature of an 18th-century miser, more likely kept alive by the fluttering of moth wings in his chest than a beating heart.

While he equivocates and deflects with the confident ignorance that comes with the British aristocracy, children continue to starve. Homes fall apart.

And good people with good intentions get busy.