KEIR Starmer must be fair pleased with himself.

Seven troublesome Corbynites are out of his hair for six glorious months – papped oot for backing an SNP effort to scrap the cap that limits benefits to two children, unless a mother can prove she has been raped.

It is now the Labour Two Child Cap. What a result.

The Labour leader has further cemented his reputation as a tough, single-minded authoritarian – a latter-day Abraham ready to sacrifice his most important political priority to “prudence”. You remember – Gordon Brown’s favourite deity.

READ MORE: Michael Shanks ignores pledge to oppose Keir Starmer on two-child cap

We’re led to believe Starmer must feel terrible because “it’s in Labour’s DNA” to protect children. No matter that 1.6 million kids across the UK will pay the price of his monetary obedience – all their families must somehow stumble on minus £4k per child until growth returns to the economy.

Jings, that is tough. Starmer is the Charles Bronson of British politics.

Indeed, I’d guess his stand-off was carefully chosen.

Only a totemic issue like child poverty could demonstrate to doubting voters that he Starmer is serious, sensible and heartless to the core – not Liz Truss and definitely not Jeremy Corbyn but quite like the PM he actually admires, Margaret Thatcher.

The Knight is not for turning. Even to save children.

It’s more important for Starmer to dismiss all suggestions that his party will be spendthrift. More important to prove he controls the hefty Labour majority and is not controlled by it.

Yes, you can have the child cap scrapped. But when I say. And not a minute earlier. If you disagree, you’re out.

Starmer (below) and Labour high command are in hock to conservative-minded voters. He is actively seeking sacrificial lambs to prove his bona fides to them – not the progressives who put him into power.

(Image: PA)

And then, icing on the cake, Starmer has been able to demonstrate that Labour MPs in Scotland are his guys – nowt to do with the Scottish Labour Party or Anas Sarwar.

He made them sacrifice their credibility completely, leaving the Labour-supporting Daily Record with egg on its face (again) after urging MPs to “Vote for ending child poverty” – a front page headline quoting Gordon Brown which was brandished by Stephen Flynn at Prime Minister’s Questions yesterday.

Whaurs yer left credentials noo lads and lasses?

And whaur’s yer relationship with Scotland’s leading tabloid?

Starmer doesn’t care.

He was out biffing the SNP at PMQs, taking advantage of the fact Flynn has no capacity to respond, and teaching his new Scottish Labour MPs a very important life lesson– attack is the best form of defence.

So instead of hanging their collective heids in shame, Scottish Labour MPs have had the temerity to suggest the Scottish Government should mitigate the two-child cap instead.

Labour backbencher Gordon McKee, the new MP for Glasgow South, told this paper: “Some elements of welfare policy are devolved to the Scottish Parliament.” And he recommended constituents write to their MSPs calling for the cap to be scrapped.

Now Alba’s Ash Regan is proposing a bill in the Scottish Parliament to do just that – and taking some pelters.

READ MORE: Children's charity boss turned Scottish Labour MP panned for backing two-child cap

So, Starmer’s not just imposed the iron fist on his Scottish MPs, he’s also got independence supporters arguing amongst ourselves as well.

Total result. But not so fast – on a load of fronts. Holyrood will have to mitigate the two-child cap – and it’s not me, a Labour MP or Ash Regan saying that. It’s the Scottish poverty charities who successfully campaigned for the game-changing Scottish Child Payment (SCP) in the first place.

Introduced in 2021 the payment (currently £26.70 a week) was described by Professor Danny Dorling as having the biggest single impact on child poverty anywhere in Europe for the last 40 years. It’s lifted between 50,000 and 90,000 kids out of poverty.

Now obviously, with action, figures and accolades like that, Scots might think we are doing pretty well.

But that isn’t good enough.

Because there are statutory targets to eliminate child poverty by 2030 and unless, we’re just to shrug and toss them aside, a gear change has to happen.

Ruth Boyle, policy and campaigns manager at The Poverty Alliance says: “The unjust two-child cap was a Westminster policy, and we repeatedly called on the UK Government to end it at the earliest opportunity.

“But until that happens, the Scottish Government can act to protect children by filling the gap in household incomes.

“During the General Election campaign, the First Minister said he would like to do that, and we know the cost would be less than the [recent] council tax freeze. He can now make it a priority in his next budget.

“It’s the kind of urgent action we need to meet our child poverty commitments, passed with the support of every party in the Scottish Parliament.”

Jamie Livingstone of Oxfam Scotland agrees. “Given our legal child poverty targets [the two-child cap] should be mitigated in Scotland – most likely through a targeted measure via the Scottish Child Payment, [which] needs to be increased for all recipients to at least £40 per week by 2026.”

But doesn’t the SCP mitigate the effects of the cap?

Not really.

The Child Payment is a passported benefit, triggered by the receipt of Universal Credit ... Of course, the bairn’s household is better off and at least SCP is paid for all children, not just the first two, unlike the Universal Credit.

But £26.70 a week SCP does not make up for the Universal Credit they are denied, and that’s how experts think the Scottish situation can be tackled while Keir Starmer waits for a burst of economic growth before he does the right thing.

Yip, it’s a bit clumsy, devising higher payments for the eligible first two kids so that the third and fourth have proper support.

But then ministers already do the same with the bedroom tax – it cost £69.7m to mitigate in 2022-23 and it too will remain in Starmer’s Britain.

It is crazy that the Scottish Government should have to consider spending cash to mitigate a Labour imposed policy. Flynn’s (below) right to say doing that would cut spending on other services. But that’s also what Starmer is saying.

(Image: PA)

Helping kids is a tough political choice.

Of course, Westminster has a bigger budget, can print money and borrow easily, while Holyrood must balance a budget with the lowest ever devolved settlement in real terms.

Understood. But still.

Even Suella Braverman (who abstained) has conceded that the punitive refusal to finance “extra” children simply doesn’t work. If eradicating child poverty is John Swinney’s personal and government goal, this might be a good way of pursuing it.

And if he won’t, the kids might.

Two weeks ago, Scotland became the first UK nation to incorporate the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) into domestic law enforcing a statutory duty on all public authorities, including the Scottish government, to protect children’s rights.

It allows children and advocates court access to enforce their right to fair treatment, education, health, and protection from exploitation. I’m no lawyer, but that sounds beefy.

READ MORE: Sky News hosts slam Labour ministers for ducking media scrutiny

More than that, it sounds like a Scottish Parliament that’s collectively decided to go further than Westminster of any political stripe when it comes to eradicating child poverty.

So, what’s it to be?

Poor kids will be cold kids this winter. Poor kids are stressed kids all the time.

Yet the news reports that stressed people are adversely affecting their dogs but not their kids. We’re back to the deserving v underserving poor – an argument that’s haunted and hobbled Britain since Victorian times.

So, what does the Scottish public believe? And does anyone care about the evidence?

I think we do. I think the Scottish Government should mitigate the two-child cap.