Is Swinney serious about tackling child poverty?
Eradicating child poverty has been the 'moral compass' of John Swinney's government this past year.
And in his Programme for Government (PfG) last week, he maintained that it remained the number one focus.
It would be fair to assume, then, that the legislative agenda for the year ahead would be filled with fresh ideas to achieve those ambitions. But there were none.
Read more from Unspun:
The First Minister was right to say that child poverty is estimated to rise in every part of the UK except for Scotland, with the 'game-changing' Scottish Child Payment praised by anti-poverty organisation the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
Scotland's child poverty rates are projected to be 10 percentage points lower than England's by 2029.
The benefits of the Scottish Child Payment should not be ignored for the contribution it will make towards this.
But under the vision Swinney has for Scotland, do we simply strive to be better than other parts of the UK, or do we go further and lift as many children out of poverty as possible?
Looking through the PfG, one policy stands out as new – and the impact it will make on children's lives in Scotland is limited.
From September this year, peak rail fares on ScotRail trains will be scrapped for 'good' to drive people out of their cars, while putting money back into the pockets of commuters.
Swinney was asked by journalists why he opted to announce discounted rail fares over child poverty action.
'In any policy programme, you have got to strike a balance in the commitments that you bring forward,' he said.
He said higher earners in Scotland were already being asked to contribute more through higher taxes to allow families on lower incomes to receive the Scottish Child Payment.
Children's charities had hoped the Programme for Government would bring bold action that would help the Scottish Government meet its ambitious targets on child poverty.
By 2030, the Scottish Government must reduce relative child poverty to under 10% and absolute child poverty to under 5%.
Current projections suggest that, while the SNP can be commended for being the only country in the UK not making child poverty worse, it is not on track to meet these targets.
Some 22% of children are in relative poverty, with the 18% interim target missed. Absolute poverty is at 17%, just short of the 14% goal.
Addressing child poverty, Swinney told MSPs in his speech: 'If we want to truly eradicate child poverty in Scotland, we must go further, and I recognise that.'
The PfG included commitments to expand free school meals to pupils in S1 to S3 who are in receipt of the Scottish Child Payment. It was announced in January already as a sweetener for the Scottish Greens to ensure the budget was passed.
That means that within the PfG, there were no new initiatives to tackle child poverty.
While eradicating child poverty may not be a huge driver in encouraging people to vote, the charities who took Swinney at his word to go further will not forget it – and they will be disappointed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
22 minutes ago
- The Guardian
What does the change to the winter fuel payment mean?
After months of speculation the government has announced that it will reinstate the winter fuel payment to most pensioners in England and Wales. Under the new rules, any pensioner with an income of up to £35,000 a year will be eligible for the full allowance, while anyone on more will have to pay back their share. The payment is worth £200 a year to households where both pensioners are aged under 80 years old, and £300 if there is a person aged 80 or over. A pensioner aged 85 who lives alone will get £300, as will a couple of the same age. The new system will mean these payments are made automatically to those receiving a state pension. There will be no need to claim the money. No. The threshold applies to individuals, not households. A couple who qualify for a £200-a-year payment will get £100 each. If one has an income of more than £35,000 a year and the other does not, the higher earner will have £100 clawed back while the other one is allowed to keep the money. In a couple where one person is aged 80, they will receive £200 and the other will receive £100. The person over 80 will repay £200 if their income is more than £35,000. This will create some quirks. A single pensioner, living alone, will repay the full £200 or £300 if their income is more than £35,000, while a couple with an income of £69,000 would keep all the money. Two households with the same incomes and one person aged over 80 could have to repay different sums depending on whether it is the older or younger person who receives more than £35,000. For most pensioners, money will be taken through the pensioner's tax code and applied to their income the next year. Those who already file a tax return for other reasons may find it is added to it, but it is not yet clear if that will be the case. The same is true when someone dies. The government says it will not make families do a return or pursue them for the winter fuel payment. However, if they have to do a return for someone who has died for other reasons, it is not clear if they will have to declare the payment. There is a potential for problems if someone retires part-way through a tax year and earns more than £35,000 because they are still getting their salary, then drops well below that the next year – they will be faced with repaying the payment when they are on a lower income. No. The new means-testing will take into account income only, not savings or the value of any property. A person with £1m in the bank would still qualify for the payment with an income less than £35,000. The Scottish government gives out a pension-age winter heating payment. Last winter this was restricted to only those people who qualified for one of a handful of benefits including pension credit. This will change next winter, and the payment will be given more widely. Northern Ireland has a winter fuel payment and seems likely to move in line with England and Wales.
Western Telegraph
24 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Government facing ‘walk of shame' over Chinese embassy decision
Sir Iain Duncan Smith said response by the Government to the proposed embassy near the the capital's financial district had become 'Project Kowtow', as he criticised the Government for 'one denial after another (and) one betrayal after another'. Sir Iain referred to the warnings reportedly issued by the White House and Dutch government to Downing Street over the plans, which is set to be scrutinised by ministers. The worries stem from the close proximity of the proposed embassy's Royal Mint Court site to data centres and communication cables. The Sunday Times said the US was 'deeply concerned' about the plans, quoting a senior US official. In response, planning minister Matthew Pennycook said he could not give a full response as the matter was still to come before the department for a decision, and any verdict could be challenged by the courts. Sir Iain said: 'Beijing has a recent history of cutting cables and confirmed infrastructure hacks, including embedding malware capable of disabling all that infrastructure. 'Minister Peter Kyle yesterday on television said surprisingly that this was in the planning process and could be managed. Will the minister correct this record? The planning inquiry has concluded, no changes can be made to the Chinese planning application at all. 'I'll remind him the application contains nothing about cabling. Indeed to the inquiry, the Chinese have rejected only two requests, which he referred to actually, made by the Government in the letter from the foreign and home secretaries, despite ministers regularly saying that this letter, and I quote, should give those concerned, 'comfort'.' Sir Iain Duncan Smith took part in a protest over the plans for the embassy in February (PA/Jordan Pettitt) The Conservative MP said rerouting the cables would cost millions of pounds, and asked Mr Pennycook why the Government had denied the existence of cables until the White House confirmed it. He asked Mr Pennycook to deny reports by Chinese state media, saying the UK had given the Chinese assurances that it would allow a development 'no matter what'. He added: 'I see this as Project Kowtow, one denial after another, one betrayal after another. No wonder our allies believe that this Chinese mega embassy is now becoming a walk of shame for the Government.' Mr Pennycook replied because of the 'quasi-judicial nature' of his role, he could not comment on details of the application. He also said it would not be 'appropriate' for him to comment on the cabling or national security issues. He said he did not 'recognise the characterisation' by the Sunday Times of the embassy being raised in talks between the UK and China on trade. 'It is important to also emphasise that only material planning considerations can be taken into account in determining this case,' he said. 'But, as I say, I cannot comment in any detail on a case and it is not yet before the department.' Tory shadow communities secretary Kevin Hollinrake said Parliament had been treated with disdain by the Government. Mr Hollinrake said: 'Question after question, letter after letter, the Government has consistently treated Parliament with complete disregard on this matter. Stonewalling legitimate inquiries about national security, about ministerial discussions, and warnings about security bodies.' He added: 'Why won't the Government follow the examples of the US, Australian, and Irish governments which veto similar embassies that threaten their national security? 'The Government is on the verge of making a decision that will lead to huge risk, that will persist for decades. Will they change course before it is too late?' Mr Pennycook replied: 'No decision has been made on this case. No application is yet before the department.' Marie Rimmer, Labour MP for St Helens South and Whiston, said: 'China has a track record of aggressive state-backed espionage, and surely this country cannot afford to make a massive underestimation of what risk if this would go ahead?' She added: 'We cannot not say anything in this House. We must comment on what we see, and please understand that we must do so.' Meanwhile, former security minister, Conservative MP Tom Tugendhat, asked whether the Government believed the Chinese would treat a similar application in the same way. He said: 'Do you honestly believe that thr minister thinks that the Chinese would look at this proposal in the same way? 'Do we actually in this House believe that our economic security being threatened, as highlighted by the Americans and the Dutch, would go through a bureaucratic planning process with no ability to vary it because, frankly, them's the orders? 'I don't think that's the way China would do it, and it's certainly not the way we should.' Mr Pennycook replied: 'I'm very glad that we have a different and more robust planning system than the People's Republic of China.'
The National
25 minutes ago
- The National
What does the Winter Fuel Payment U-turn mean for Scottish pensioner?
The Chancellor announced on Monday the payment, worth up to £300, will be restored to anyone of pension age with an income of under £35,000 a year. But what does this mean for Scotland? The Scottish Government was due to take over responsibility for winter fuel payments in September but the introduction of a new universal benefit was delayed after the UK Government decided to start means-testing the payment. In November, it was announced a devolved benefit would be created, giving £100 for all pensioner households, with those on pension credit due to receive £200 or £300 depending on their age. It is set to be introduced ahead of this winter. While Scotland can still boast that the £100 payment is universal whereas the English and Welsh payment is not, it means a cohort of Scottish pensioners – those with income less than £35,000 – will now receive less than their English counterparts. READ MORE: Former SNP MP hits out at 'foolish' Hamilton by-election campaign Social Justice Secretary Shirley-Anne Somerville said ministers were not consulted on the major U-turn and has urged the UK Government to ensure the Scottish Government is 'fully appraised' of the proposed changes 'as soon as possible'. She said: 'I welcome any extension of eligibility by the UK Government, but this is a U-turn the Chancellor should have made a long time ago. 'But there is still no detail about how the Chancellor intends to go about that. Unfortunately, it still sounds as if many pensioners will miss out.' The Scottish Government now has a decision to make as to whether it makes any changes to the Pension Age Winter Heating Payment on the back of the announcement. Scottish Labour is calling for the extra money the Scottish Government will receive as a result of Barnett consequentials to increase the current offer. Labour MSP Paul O'Kane said: 'The SNP must re-examine their own proposals in light of this game-changing announcement, ensure payments reach those most in need, and give a cast-iron guarantee that no struggling Scottish pensioners will be left out of pocket under their plans.'
