THE Scottish Government has announced that it will introduce a scheme to support pensioners who have lost their Winter Fuel Payment thanks to the decision by Chancellor Rachel Reeves to axe the universal benefit. Reeves’s move resulted in the loss of around £160 million in Barnett Consequentials for the Scottish Government, reportedly with just 90 minutes notice. There's that resetting the relationship between Westmister and the devolved governments for you.
The immediate loss of the funding to pay for the equivalent benefit in Scotland left the SNP Government, which unlike Westminster has limited borrowing and revenue raising powers, with no choice but to copy Labour’s decision.
The issue has highlighted how poorly Scotland is served by Westminster governments. Scotland produces the bulk of the UK's energy, most of which is exported to the rest of the UK or further afield, and is rewarded with some of the highest energy costs in Europe. Scotland is, of course, the coldest part of the UK.
READ MORE: Douglas Ross scolded after accusing SNP minister of lying in Holyrood statement
Reeves's cut felt to many that Scottish pensioners were being left to freeze while Scotland's energy was being exported to allow households elsewhere to benefit from lower energy costs than households in Scotland, whose natural resources are being exploited. Better Together, aye, right.
Figures released on Thursday show that claims for pension credit have increased by 145% since the UK Government announced it would means-test the Winter Fuel Payment. Receipt of the payment is now restricted to pensioners who claim the means-tested benefit, which has a notoriously low take-up rate.
Earlier this week, in an exercise which was cynical even by the standards of the Labour party in Scotland, Anas Sarwar announced that his party intended to force a vote on reinstating a means-tested tapering form of the Winter Fuel Payment. The apparent change of heart came after Labour – and not the SNP – were rightly blamed by a furious Scottish public for the decision, and Anas Sarwar saw his hopes of becoming the next first minister freezing like a pensioner with hypothermia.
Holyrood election, and not in order to save freezing pensioners, Labour did a U-turn – even though just last month Labour MSPs had voted against urging their bosses in London not to axe the payment.
In order to save their fading chances of winning the nextThe move is a transparent attempt by Labour to take the credit for the Scottish Government stepping in to rescue pensioners from Labour's heartlessness. Oh look, Sarwar will cry when he pops up on BBC Scotlandshire, Labour forced the SNP to rethink.
He will omit, of course, that this situation has only arisen because his Labour party has sold its soul to the City of London and won't raise taxes on the rich or impose a wealth tax. If this is what a Labour Government looks like, it proves that the only way to protect Scotland from the Tories is independence.
The issue came up in First Minister's Questions today when Sarwar chose to blame the SNP for the state of public services, conveniently overlooking the past 14 years of Conservative austerity which is being continued by Keir Starmer.
READ MORE: Anas Sarwar says he isn't 'playing politics' with Winter Fuel Payment U-turn
Sarwar said: “The IFS make the point, we had disproportionately higher spending here in Scotland and we have more staff – but we have poorer performance. That points to not staff being wrong, not resources being wrong but a failure of leadership and a failure of government.”
It was nice of him to acknowledge that Scotland has better funded and staffed public services.
The First Minister hit back, claiming that pensioners had been “betrayed” by Labour’s promise of change at the General Election.
John Swinney said: “If Mr Sarwar believes that the solution to all of our problems in Scotland is the election of a Labour Government, I would ask him to go and have a conversation with pensioners in Scotland today.”
There's no way he'd ever do that. Sarwar hides from mildly critical media interviews, there's no way he's going to come within ten miles of an angry Scottish granny. She'd give his political opportunism very short shrift.
Labour aren’t listening
Rutherglen Labour MP Michael Shanks (you know, the guy who promised to speak up for the town in Westminster only to very quickly show his true careerist colours), is yet again not listening to public opinion.
Shanks has announced that he will vote against the Assisted Dying Bill, when it comes before MPs tomorrow, citing concerns over safeguards and risks to vulnerable people. Opinion polls have consistently shown majority support amongst the public for assisted dying for terminally ill people, but politicians are behind the curve.
A poll by campaigning group Dignity in Dying, described as the largest ever poll on the issue, found that there is a majority in favour of assisted dying in every constituency in the UK.
Three-quarters of respondents (75%) said that they would support making it lawful for someone to seek assisted dying in the UK, with just 14% against. 73% of respondents in Shanks' own constituency support changing the law.
If passed, this bill will only apply to England and Wales. SNP MP Stephen Gethins has said that he will abstain on the bill, given that it does not apply to Scotland and because he does not want to prejudice a similar bill which has been presented to the Scottish Parliament. However, there are concerns that this bill may be outwith Holyrood's legislative competence as it relates to lethal drugs, a subject reserved to Westminster. The fate of the Scottish bill is likely to depend on tomorrow's vote.
This piece is an extract from today’s REAL Scottish Politics newsletter, which is emailed out at 7pm every weekday with a round-up of the day's top stories and exclusive analysis from the Wee Ginger Dug.
To receive our full newsletter including this analysis straight to your email inbox, click HERE and click the "+" sign-up symbol for the REAL Scottish Politics
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 here