SPEAKING in Brighton at the TUC Congress on Tuesday, Keir Starmer faced a question from Alan Crosbie, the national president of The Educational Institute of Scotland, the country's largest teaching union.

Noting that Labour has not scrapped the two-child benefit cap, which is pushing children into poverty, he asked what the government is doing to tackle child poverty.

The answer appeared to be "setting up a task force" – and not actually giving families in poverty any more money. Presumably they can feed their kids and keep them warm on the cosy glow that comes from knowing that there is a task force.

Starmer implied that getting rid of the two-child benefit cap will not by itself solve the problem of child poverty, insisting that the underlying causes had to be addressed.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has repeatedly defended the two-child cap on benefits

He said: "We've already obviously set up a task force, but that has to get to the underlying causes as well. This isn't an issue that can be solved just by one adjustment in welfare, frankly.

“It's about housing, it's about education, it's about wages, it's about conditions in which people live, health, mental health. All of that has to be addressed, and we are determined to address it, and are already addressing it."

This is the classic straw-man argument. Absolutely no one is suggesting that the abolition of the cruel two-child cap on benefits will magically cure child poverty by itself – but that is not a reason why it should not be abolished. Rather, people are arguing that abolishing the cap will make a significant difference to children living in poverty, a position supported by the great majority of anti-poverty organisations and campaigners.

It's a bit like repeatedly hitting a man with a broken leg on the shin with a hammer, while insisting that you're not going to stop because that won't cure his broken leg and get him to walk again. Maybe not, but it will certainly make his life a whole lot less miserable.

READ MORE: Scottish council rakes in millions after doubling council tax on second homes

Starmer is not a stupid man, he fully understands this. But the real reason that he's not prepared to abolish this hideous legacy of Conservative rule is because he is unwilling to take real "tough decisions" and increase taxes on the rich. As a result of decades of Tory and New Labour policies, the UK is the 9th most unequal out of 38 OECD economies. According to the anti-poverty Equality Trust think tank, the richest fifth take 36% of the UK's income and its wealth, while the bottom fifth have only 8% of the income and a mere 0.5% of the wealth.

Yet the redistribution of wealth, once a cornerstone of Labour belief, does not figure in Starmer's plans. The poor will continue to pay for the greed of the rich. So, no change there then.

Better Together chief turned Labour MP deploys tired Tory arguments

The SNP's Westminster leader Stephen Flynn has said that the £150 million fund being given to the Scotland Office by the Treasury should instead be given to the Scottish Government to offset the loss of £160m to Holyrood caused by the decision of Chancellor Rachel Reeves to abolish the universal Winter Fuel Payment.

The extra money for Ian Murray's department is ostensibly for anti-poverty initiatives but will be disbursed directly by the Scotland Office, bypassing the Scottish Government in what many see as a continuation of the Westminster power grab initiated under the Conservatives.

Anas Sarwar and Blair McDougall together on the campaign trail

Speaking on BBC Radio Scotland, Blair McDougall, the former Better Together director – Mr Project Fear himself, said his jaw hit the ground when he heard Stephen Flynn's suggestion, saying: “What he is suggesting there is to take £150m out of anti-poverty measures to restore the Winter Fuel Payment to the wealthiest pensioners."

That is the classic right-wing argument against universal benefits. They always focus on how universal benefits benefit the wealthiest, conveniently ignoring the fact that they benefit many many more who are just over the threshold set for means-tested benefits.

But it's not really surprising that McDougall trots out tired old conservative arguments. Starmer's Labour party is founded on them.

READ MORE: How Scottish Labour MPs voted on the Winter Fuel Payment cut

The real advantages of universal benefits include the fact that they are much cheaper to administer as assessments do not have to be carried out and claims examined. Universal benefits also ensure that everyone who needs the benefit gets it.

A large number of eligible pensioners do not claim the means-tested benefits which would entitle them to the newly restricted Winter Fuel Payment. An even larger number of pensioners are on low incomes but are just over the cut off level for claiming.

Disingenuously, McDougall chooses to imply that the Scottish Government want to reward the rich at the expense of the poor. His misleading pearl-clutching might have been slightly more convincing if his own Government was not refusing to abolish the two child cap on benefits – the single step which anti-poverty charities agree would do more than any other to tackle child poverty.

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