CHANGE? What change? It’s been a funny fortnight for me as a new MP and I don’t mean in a comedic sense. The imperialist trappings and antiquated traditions of the environment I now move in take a lot of adjustment.
But I do chuckle inwardly to myself when I watch young wannabe Labour MPs gazing ambitiously at the front benches, dreaming of their future careers. And that includes the occasional Scottish Labour MP I’ve noticed slipping quietly into that space when the house is relatively empty.
Sometimes I find myself humming old tunes in my head as I move from one portrait-lined corridor to the next. One of the anthems of my youth was a song by The Who entitled Won’t Get Fooled Again.
The song’s lyrics suggest that while political fortunes may ebb and flow, even to the extent of revolution, the power base remains the same.
READ MORE: Labour vote to KEEP two-child benefit cap as SNP calls batted away
The General Election campaign reminded me of that.
The Labour Party in general and Scottish Labour in particular rode to victory in so many constituencies on the back of their promise of change.
Yet, paradoxically, since then we have witnessed the Labour Party promising to adhere to the fiscal rules of the outgoing government, with a clear signal that we can expect more of the same approach with regard to tax and borrowing, and no change to the austerity policies that have caused untold hardship to those on the lowest incomes.
Plus ça change, plus c’est la meme chose. (The more things change, the more they stay the same.)
The SNP Westminster group, by contrast, has put the issue of child poverty at the forefront of debate. We know that 4.3 million children in the UK are living in poverty and we know that this has devastating long-term impacts on their future life chances.
Growing up in poverty has detrimental impacts on health, educational attainment, earning potential and life expectancy itself.
There are many facets to the plight of children growing up in material deprivation and many policy levers which might be used to help.
The Scottish Government has already shown leadership by introducing the Scottish Child Payment – a weekly sum of £26.70 per child per week for those families most in need – that is already lifting more than 300,000 children out of poverty.
Our Westminster leader Stephen Flynn (below) has called for the establishment of a four-nation poverty summit to bring together expertise to tackle the challenges faced by low-income households, problems exacerbated by the cost of living crisis.
The new Labour government, meanwhile, has announced a taskforce on child poverty led by Cabinet ministers Bridget Phillipson and Liz Kendall.
So far, however, it has refused to deliver what would be an easy win for low-income families across the UK by scrapping the Tories’ two-child benefits cap.
Reversing this wicked policy would be a powerful statement of intent and would send a strong signal that every child matters.
READ MORE: Scottish Labour MP says 'contact your MSP' in two-child cap email
Nothing speaks to the alleviation of immediate poverty like hard cash in the pockets of those who most need it. But those on the Government benches remain silent on this and on Stephen’s proposal.
The Child Poverty Action Group estimates the cost of abolishing the two-child cap would be £1.7 billion. To put that in perspective, it represents around 0.14% of total government spending.
Stephen tabled an amendment to the King’s Speech in the House of Commons that would scrap the two-child limit, which has gathered cross-party support. We will continue to keep pressure on the Labour Party to do the right thing.
By the time you read this, we will know for sure how much appetite Scottish Labour MPs have for real change as they vote on the amendments.
It remains to be seen whether the new government will pass or fail this first real test.
If they fall at this early hurdle, we will know to expect very little in the way of meaningful departure from the Tory austerity that has pushed so many people, especially low-income families, disabled people and the elderly, to the brink.
So much for the change promised by this mythical party called Scottish Labour.
What we actually need is a real change in policy direction, something which the removal of the two-child benefit cap would represent. But I fear it’s a case of “meet the new boss, same as the old boss”.
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