LABOUR have been accused of “not being honest” about public spending cuts – after Anas Sarwar was accused of re-writing the party’s economic policy during a TV debate.
The SNP have claimed Labour plans would result in £18 billion worth of austerity measures because of strict fiscal rules imposed by shadow chancellor Rachel Reeves.
Addressing a clash between John Swinney and Sarwar (below) on Monday night’s debate, which saw the Labour leader charged with “blowing apart” Labour’s fiscal plan, Reeves denied she would preside over austerity.
Speaking to journalists in Edinburgh after an event at the Royal Bank of Scotland, Reeves said: “Our fiscal rules are clear and Anas [Sarwar] set them out last night.
“Labour would bring down debt as a share of our economy. We would balance day-to-day spending through tax receipts and, subject to that, we’d be able to borrow to invest in things that improve our country’s growth and productivity.
“What John Swinney needs to explain is why he’s opposed to an extension of the windfall tax that will enable that investment in infrastructure here in Scotland.”
The shadow chancellor insisted there would be “no return to austerity under a Labour government” while taxes would not be increased for working people during the next parliament.
READ MORE: John Swinney and Anas Sarwar clash in TV debate over Labour's economy plans
Asked if she would ever be open to further borrowing powers for the Scottish Government, she said her focus was on “growing the economy” and lowering taxes for working people, rather than “looking for new ways to borrow or new ways to tax, which is the approach of the SNP”.
Earlier, the SNP challenged Reeves to “come clean and admit where the austerity axe will fall under the Labour Party’s damaging plan to impose billions of pounds of cuts to public services”.
SNP economy spokesman Drew Hendry (above) said: “People in Scotland want an end to 14 years of Tory cuts – but the Labour Party is doubling down and will impose at least £18bn of cuts under its plans, which will mean less money for Scotland’s NHS and schools
“With Anas Sarwar contradicting Reeves, it’s clear the Labour Party is not being honest about the devastating cuts they will make.”
Labour have said they would “balance” day-to-day spending with tax receipts.
Research from the House of Commons library suggests this would mean covering a current budget deficit, which does not include capital investment, of £51bn.
READ MORE: Keir Starmer and Rishi Sunak to go head-to-head in TV debate – how to watch
Reeves has previously set out plans to raise £5bn per year by tackling tax avoidance and £2.6bn by ending non-dom status, which allows UK residents to avoid paying tax.
The Tories have claimed this still leaves a £38.5bn black hole in the nation’s finances.
The respected Institute for Fiscal Studies in March this year accused both main parties of a “conspiracy of silence” over the necessity of either tax rises or spending cuts in the years to come.
In his Budget earlier this year, Chancellor Jeremy Hunt pencilled in public spending cuts worth £20bn in areas outside of health, defence and education.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel