SCOTTISH Labour are being urged to apologise for misleading voters after Anas Sarwar claimed he did not “accept” there would be spending cuts under a Labour government during the General Election campaign.
On Monday, the Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced that there would be a range of spending cuts and reviews in response to a £22 billion black hole in the public finances.
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) had consistently warned the Labour Party that they would be forced to make £18 billion of cuts over the course of the next parliament if they chose to maintain the Tories’ spending plans.
However, the party now claims that it has inherited a worse financial situation than spelled out by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) before the election.
Indeed, Reeves said that the OBR itself had been unaware of a £6.4 billion overspend on the asylum budget this year alone.
John Swinney asks Anas Sarwar where £18bn of spending cuts will come from if Labour win the General Election.
— STV News (@STVNews) June 3, 2024
The Scottish Labour leader says 'he doesn't accept' there will be spending cuts
Follow live: https://t.co/h7KbFjtgP1 pic.twitter.com/JPp9qUOHAH
On June 3, during the STV Leaders’ Debate, First Minister John Swinney pressed the Scottish Labour leader on how a Labour government would afford the £18 billion of cuts predicted by the IFS, which now pale in comparison to the reality spelled out by Reeves.
“I don’t accept that there will be spending cuts,” replied Sarwar.
The Scottish Greens have now called on the Scottish Labour leader to apologise for misleading voters after Reeves announced swingeing cuts less than a month after coming to power.
“Scottish Labour promised change and an end to Tory cuts and austerity, but that has fallen apart within weeks of them taking office,” said Scottish Greens co-leader Lorna Slater.
“Anas Sarwar couldn’t have been clearer, I was standing on the stage with him during the BBC debate when he said ‘read my lips: no austerity under Labour.’
READ MORE: Ian Murray: 'Wrong to say Labour knew cuts needed before election'
“He told us that his MPs would oppose the cruel two-child benefit cap, but not a single one of them voted to scrap it when they had the chance last week.
"Would his party have won so many seats if they had been honest about what they were actually going to do?
“How can we trust Scottish Labour to stand up for our communities when they have been so quick to drop their own policies?
“Anas Sarwar needs to apologise to Scotland and take a stand against Keir Starmer, Rachel Reeves and the cuts that they are imposing.”
She called on Labour to introduce a wealth tax to fill the hole in the public finances after analysis from the University of Greenwich found that a tax on the richest 1% of households could raise more than £70 billion a year for public services.
“These cuts are a political choice,” she said.
“By introducing a wealth tax and asking the super rich to pay a bit more they could easily remove the two-child cap and undo a lot of the 14 years of pain we endured under the Tories.
“That is how we can move on from the mess created by the Tories and fund our just transition to a fairer, greener economy that works for people and planet.”
Scottish Labour have been contacted for comment.
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