Lip reading is not Labour’s speciality on austerity politics- Angus Robertson

Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar and some of the new Scottish Labour MPs. Image: Getty Images.

Don’t take my word for it, ask any of the 50 Labour MPs who are set to rebel in a parliamentary vote on Keir Starmer’s decision to cut winter fuel payments as part of the austerity agenda. Make no mistake, this cut is a life-and-death issue for some pensioners.

In 2017, when the Conservatives had planned to introduce a similar policy, a Labour report warned that axing the allowance would increase excess deaths by 3850 that winter. With energy prices having increased since 2017, we know even more pensioners are struggling with energy bills. So, what has changed?

This is a question that should be asked of the new cohort of Scottish Labour MPs. Despite being elected on the basis of Anas Sarwar’s words, none have signed the parliamentary motion—lodged by one of their Labour colleagues—criticising this austerity measure to cut fuel payments.

These and other Labour government cuts have a real impact, not just on pensioners in Scotland, but on the Scottish Government’s overall budget. Funding decisions like these by the UK Government mean the Scottish Government’s budget is millions of pounds shorter than it would have been, putting Scotland in an enormously difficult situation and forcing cuts to public services.

Indeed, the Institute for Fiscal Studies says “the Scottish Government has far fewer options to address pressures than the UK government.”

Consequential funding is a key component of the devolution settlement. The intention of this was to ensure devolved nations received their fair share of their contributions to the UK back in order to run their governments. The UK government determines this funding through a process—known as the Barnett formula—that involves several factors.

First, the funding is based on a ‘needs assessment’, which considers factors such as population size, demographics and economic conditions. This is supposed to reflect and respond to the plain fact that regions with greater needs should receive a proportional share of funding. The UK government then takes into account the responsibilities devolved to each nation. For example, if a nation has responsibility for additional services like education or healthcare—as Scotland does—it, in theory, will receive more funding to account for this.

Then, a ‘convergence mechanism' is put in place to help narrow the gap in public spending per head between the devolved nations and England. This means that consequential funding will be adjusted to reflect the English average.

Reading the above, you will notice two things: first that the process is controlled entirely by the UK Government and second, proportional spending is determined by the English average.

This means that if Westminster spends less, the Scottish government gets less. As the winter fuel payment cut shows, this is happening now.

For decades, the Scottish Government, with support from the people, has taken the opposite approach to consecutive UK Governments in our support for the less well-off and vulnerable. We believe providing the means by which everyone has the best chance at life is the right thing to do.

However, the austerity policies of UK Governments block our ability to do this. Shame on Labour for allowing it to continue.

Angus Robertson is Constitution, External Affairs and Culture Secretary