SCOTTISH Labour MP Michael Shanks has been labelled “disgraceful” for failing to honour his commitment to vote to scrap the two-child benefits cap.
During the lead-up to the Rutherglen and Hamilton West by-election last year, Shanks described the two-child benefit limit as “heinous” in an apparent bid to distance himself from UK Labour leader Keir Starmer.
Questioned about his position on the policy in August last year, Shanks said he would represent Scottish Labour and vote against Starmer on issues such as the two-child benefit cap.
He said: “It’s a heinous policy, dreamt up by a Conservative Party out of touch with people’s priorities.
READ MORE: Labour suspend seven rebel MPs after two-child cap vote – see the full list
“Scottish Labour is opposed to the two-child cap, we’ll continue to oppose it and I’ll campaign against it.”
On Tuesday night however, Shanks was one of the Scottish Labour MPs to vote against the SNP’s amendment calling for the cap to be scrapped.
Speaking to The National, SNP MP Graham Leadbitter said: “The fact we have a Government minister reneging on a pledge of his is disgraceful.
“Not only that, the whole of Scottish Labour should be ashamed of the way they acted on this critical issue.”
The MP further added that it was particularly shocking given Shanks was only elected in the Rutherglen by-election last October before being re-elected in July.
“Months after first being elected on a promise to abolish that cap, Michael Shanks has given his pound of flesh for a ministerial salary," Leadbitter said.
His SNP colleague Pete Wishart was also critical of the whole of Scottish Labour for backing the cap.
“I’m disappointed with all Labour Party members acted on this. There was so many commitments to end child poverty,” he said.
(Image: Colin Mearns)
“I know what Michael (above) said in his election campaign and I think he should have honoured that yesterday, but so should the rest of the Labour MPs who compliantly went through the Labour lobby without raising a peep in any of the contributions being made yesterday.
“It’s on all of them and they really are going to have to do better than this and the expectation of the people of Scotland when it comes to issues around poverty is to work in the best interests of Scotland.”
The National has approached Shanks for further comment.
Labour leader Keir Starmer faced questions on the issue during his first PMQs on Wednesday afternoon.
SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn challenged Starmer and was told off by the Speaker for holding up a front page of the Daily Record, which showed Gordon Brown calling for people to vote Labour to tackle child poverty.
Flynn said: "Just five days before the General Election in Scotland, on the front page of the Daily Record, Gordon Brown instructed voters to vote Labour to end child poverty.
READ MORE: Frankie Boyle condemns Labour MP 'celebrating' two-child benefit cap
"Yet last night Labour MPs from Scotland were instructed to retain the two-child cap which forces children into poverty. So Prime Minister, what changed?"
Shanks isn’t the first Scottish Labour MP to come under fire for previous comments with Kirsty McNeill, a former children’s charity boss, also voting to keep the cap.
The Labour Party also faced criticism from Sky News after appearing to cancel a scheduled Yvette Cooper interview with Kay Burley on Wednesday morning.
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