Was Swinney sincere in response to child poverty campaign?
The sincerity of politicians is always called into question when real life issues like child poverty are focused on.
For John Swinney, there was extra pressure. In taking up the office of First Minister almost a year ago, he made his central mission the eradication of child poverty.
At the outset of The Herald's series, we could not have foreseen how the Scottish Government would respond, particularly after the campaign element – calling for the Scottish Child Payment to be increased to £40 per week – was unveiled.
An open letter setting out this ask was sent to the First Minister on Tuesday evening, backed by 23 of the country's biggest anti-poverty charities or organisations.
Under 24 hours later, the First Minister had responded, committing to 'going further' in the effort to combat the devastating levels of child poverty in the country.
It cannot be understated how swift a response this was – and evidenced the First Minister wanted to engage on the issue.
Of course, the call to increase the Scottish Child Payment was not specifically addressed in Mr Swinney's letter but it is clear the door is open for a discussion.
I sat down with the First Minister in Bute House on Friday, hours before he made the trip to Rome for the funeral of Pope Francis - a pontiff known for his work in helping the poor.
There, I saw the First Minister in a way I had never seen him before.
When we spoke of the hardship facing families in Scotland, he was visibly moved. I distinctly remember thinking that this was the reaction families wanted to see.
Politicians often offer buzzwords and soundbites to the media as a way to get around the difficult questions. The First Minister is no different. He is a skilled politician with decades of experience.
Read more from Unspun:
Has John Swinney's special summit in Glasgow backfired?
Time for NHS Fife to admit defeat in Sandie Peggie row?
Waiting on EHRC guidance creates dangerous limbo for trans people
Scottish Government's new policy programme faces big challenges
And yet here he was, probably the sincerest I have ever seen him. The First Minister reflected on how his perception of poverty had changed over the years, from witnessing how it impacted his classmates, to meeting school children in his capacity as education secretary.
It can only be a positive to have a political leader willing to engage on the big issues.
But if his sincerity is to matter to the 23 charities that worked with The Herald to call for change, there must be action to follow it.
He has angered charities claiming any further increases from £27.15 per week, for each child, could remove the incentive for parents to work.
The Herald has also written to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, calling for the two-child benefit cap to be abolished.
Sir Keir has not yet responded to the calls and Scotland minister Kirsty McNeill was unable to find the time to speak to us this week on the issue.
In his letter to The Herald, Mr Swinney said eradicating child poverty should be an effort across the political spectrum – and with a Holyrood election just a year away, it's time to see how sincere politicians are willing to be on this.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scottish Sun
an hour ago
- Scottish Sun
SNP warned not to ‘squander' £9.1bn boost after Chancellor Rachel Reeves unleashed £300bn UK-wide splurge
LABOUR challenged the SNP not to 'squander' a £9.1billion boost to Holyrood's coffers after the Chancellor turned on the taps at her spending review. Rachel Reeves unveiled a £300billion UK-wide splurge in a bid to appease voters after her party's rocky first year in power. 2 Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar labelled the extra money as 'game-changing' 2 Finance Secretary Shona Robison claimed that if Ms Reeves was being fair, she'd have sent an extra £1bn a year to Holyrood Announcing her long-term spending plans for the years from 2026, she confirmed major investment in defence and nuclear power plus a three per cent above-inflation increase to NHS spending down south. Ms Reeves admitted 'too many people in too many parts of our country' were yet to feel the benefits of the 'change' they voted for when Labour swept back into power last July. The knock-on effect of the Chancellor's funding pledges means a massive cash boost for the Scottish Government to spend as it sees fit. Nats ministers will get an average annual boost of £2.4billion on day-to-day spending and £400million for major projects in the years to 2029. That's on top of the £4billion-plus yearly bonus delivered last October from the first Budget of Sir Keir Starmer's government. Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar labelled the extra money as 'game-changing'. He said: 'These plans will bring billions of pounds of investment to Scotland — on top of the record Budget settlement. 'But the massive increase in funds must not be squandered by the SNP government, which has a track record of waste and failure.' Scottish Secretary Ian Murray said voters would face a clear choice at next May's Holyrood election. He said: 'It's either a third decade of the SNP, who've squandered their opportunity over the last 18 years and squandered the £4.9billion extra the UK Government gave earlier. Top 5 takeaways from Spending review 'Or a government that's committed to investing in public services and infrastructure, renewing Scotland and working with a UK Labour government to deliver jobs right across the country.' But experts warned the extra cash could be swallowed by Scottish Government pledges such as pay hikes for public sector workers and higher devolved benefits. FUEL AID HOPE NATS' Finance Secretary indicated the SNP might dish out more cash to pensioners after Labour's winter fuel payment U-turn. But Shona Robison refused to commit to passing on all of an estimated extra £120million from Westminster to struggling Scots OAPs. Labour has now said older people down south with an income below £35,000 will receive the handouts, following an outcry when they were axed. Experts reckon the extra funds now due to Holyrood will be enough to cover £100 payments Nats have already pledged to pensioners. Asked if the payments could be increased, Ms Robison said: 'There's other things we need to fund as well which is why we're looking at the options. We'll deliver the best deal for pensioners.' Nats ministers are already set to spend £2billion more on welfare by the end of the decade than they receive from Westminster. But SNP Finance Secretary Shona Robison claimed that if Ms Reeves was being fair, she'd have sent an extra £1billion a year to Holyrood. She said: 'This review is business as usual from the UK Government, which is yet again treating Scotland as an afterthought and failing to provide the funding we need. 'Had our resource funding for day-to-day priorities grown in line with the UK Government's overall spending, we'd have £1.1billion more to spend on our priorities over the next three years. In effect, Scotland has been short-changed by more than a billion pounds.' But despite the extra cash, an expert warned SNP policy decisions mean tax rises or spending cuts may be needed to balance Scotland's books by 2027/28. David Phillips, associate director at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said the winner of next year's election 'will face tough choices' due to increased NHS, benefits, and public sector pay costs. Earlier, Ms Reeves told the Commons her plans were the start of Labour's project to 'renew Britain'. She vowed to back the Acorn carbon capture project in Aberdeenshire. But official documents raised questions about how the scheme, to store gas emissions under the North Sea, would be funded. NUCLEAR SWIPE AT FM & CO RACHEL Reeves slammed the SNP's opposition to arms factories and nuclear power as she confirmed defence spending hikes. The Chancellor announced an £11billion boost for the armed forces plus a £600million increase for security and intelligence agencies. She also confirmed a £250million redevelopment of the Faslane base on the Clyde, where new nuclear submarines will be stationed. It means defence spending will be upped to 2.6 per cent of GDP by April 2027. Ms Reeves blasted Nats' opposition to nuclear weapons and munitions. She said: 'Investment in Scotland, jobs in Scotland, defence for the United Kingdom, opposed by the Scottish National Party, delivered by this Labour Government.' Sir Keir Starmer previously set out the UK Government's Strategic Defence Review in a speech in Glasgow last week. Nats and Labour clashed as the No10 chief claimed Nats' goal of scrapping Trident nuclear missiles would make Scotland less safe. Sir Keir said: 'Imagine the effect that would have on the safety and security of the UK and of Scotland.' They concluded: 'A final investment decision will be taken later.' Scottish Tory finance spokesman Craig Hoy warned UK taxes will probably have to rise at the Budget this autumn. He said: 'This spend-now-tax-later statement will offer no comfort to those betrayed by the first year of a disastrous Labour Government. 'Taxes remain sky-high and the Chancellor will almost certainly have to hike them further to pay for her spending plans, breaking yet another of her promises.' Mr Hoy added: 'Scots are saddled with two failing, high-tax, left-wing governments — one at Westminster and the other at Holyrood.'
Belfast Telegraph
an hour ago
- Belfast Telegraph
Fact check: 2025 spending review claims
On Wednesday Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves delivered the Labour Government's first spending review, outlining its spending plans for the next few years. We've taken a look at some of the key claims. How much is spending increasing by? At the start of her speech Ms Reeves announced that 'total departmental budgets will grow by 2.3% a year in real terms'. That headline figure doesn't tell the full story, however. Firstly, 2.3% is the average annual real-terms growth in total departmental budgets between 2023/24 and 2028/29. That means it includes spending changes that have already been implemented, for both the current (2025/26) and previous (2024/25) financial years. The average annual increase between this year and 2028/29 is 1.5%. Therefore, as the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) has said, 'most departments will have larger real-terms budgets at the end of the Parliament than the beginning, but in many cases much of that extra cash will have arrived by April'. Secondly, it's worth noting that the 2.3% figure includes both day-to-day (Resource DEL) and investment (Capital DEL) spending. Capital spending (which funds things like infrastructure projects) is increasing by 3.6% a year on average in real terms between 2023/24 and 2029/30, and by 1.8% between 2025/26 and 2029/30. Day-to-day departmental budgets meanwhile are seeing a smaller average annual real-terms increase – of 1.7% between 2023/24 and 2028/29 and 1.2% between 2025/26 and 2028/29. Which departments are the winners and losers? Ms Reeves touted substantial spending increases in some areas (for example, the 3% rise in day-to-day NHS spending in England), but unsurprisingly her statement did not focus on areas where spending will decrease. Changes to Government spending are not uniform across all departments, and alongside increases in spending on things like the NHS, defence and the justice system, a number of Government departments will see their budgets decrease in real terms. Departments facing real-terms reductions in overall and day-to-day spending include the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (this factors in reductions in aid spending announced earlier this year to offset increased defence spending), the Home Office (although the Government says the Home Office's budget grows in real terms if a planned reduction in asylum spending is excluded) and the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Did the Conservatives leave a '£22 billion black hole'? Ms Reeves made a claim we've heard a number of times since it first surfaced in July 2024 – that the previous Conservative government left a '£22 billion black hole in the public finances'. That figure comes from a Treasury audit that forecast a £22 billion overspend in departmental day-to-day spending in 2024/25, but the extent to which it was unexpected or inherited is disputed. The IFS said last year that some of the pressures the Government claimed contributed to this so-called 'black hole' could have been anticipated, but others did 'indeed seem to be greater than could be discerned from the outside'. An Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) review of its March 2024 forecast found an estimated £9.5 billion of additional spending pressures were known to the Treasury at that point in time, but were not known to the OBR as it prepared its forecast. It's true that this review didn't confirm the £22 billion figure, but it also did not necessarily prove that it was incorrect, because Labour's figure included pressures which were identified after the OBR prepared its forecast and so were beyond the scope of the OBR's review. We've written more about how the Government reached the figure of £22 billion in our explainer on this topic. How big is the increase in NHS appointments? Ms Reeves took the opportunity to congratulate Health Secretary Wes Streeting for delivering 'three-and-a-half million extra' hospital appointments in England. The Government has previously celebrated this as a 'massive increase', particularly in light of its manifesto pledge to deliver an extra two million appointments a year. Ms Reeves' claim was broadly accurate – data published last month shows there were 3.6 million additional appointments between July 2024 and February 2025 compared to the previous year. But importantly that increase is actually smaller than the 4.2 million rise that happened in the equivalent period the year before, under the Conservative government – as data obtained by Full Fact under the Freedom of Information Act and published last month revealed. What do announcements on asylum hotels, policing, nurseries and more mean for the Government's pledges? Ms Reeves made a number of announcements that appear to directly impact the delivery of several pre-existing Labour pledges, many of which we're already monitoring in our Government Tracker. (We'll be updating the tracker to reflect these announcements in due course, and reviewing how we rate progress on pledges as necessary). The Chancellor announced an average increase in 'police spending power' of 2.3% a year in real terms over the course of the review period, which she said was the equivalent of an additional £2 billion. However, as police budgets comprise a mix of central Government funding and local council tax receipts, some of this extra spending is expected to be funded by increases in council tax precepts. Ms Reeves said this funding would help the Government achieve its commitment of 'putting 13,000 additional police officers, PCSOs and special constables into neighbourhood policing roles in England and Wales', a pledge we're monitoring here. The spending review also includes funding of 'almost £370 million across the next four years to support the Government's commitment to deliver school-based nurseries across England', which Ms Reeves said would help the Government deliver its pledge to have 'a record number of children being school-ready'. The Chancellor also committed to ending the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by the end of this Parliament, with an additional £200 million announced to 'accelerate the transformation of the asylum system'. When we looked last month at progress on the Government's pledge to 'end asylum hotels' we said it appeared off track, as figures showed the number of asylum seekers housed in hotels was higher at the end of March 2025 than it was when Labour came into Government.
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Reeves ‘failed' to back English councils in spending review, MPs warn
The Treasury will pump an additional £3.4 billion per year into councils by 2028/29, compared with 2024/25, which combined with yearly council tax rises is set to boost their spending power by 3.1% in real terms. But Mr Forster warned that 'in the detail of the statement', the Government 'is only investing an extra 1.1% in local government next year and the year after'. The Liberal Democrat MP told the Commons he was 'very disappointed' with the Chancellor's statement and asked: 'What does the Chancellor say to councils across the country and to my constituents of Woking to justify that lack of investment?' Ms Reeves replied: 'Well, that's real-terms increases in spending every year, that this Labour Government are giving to local authorities. 'And that compares to the Conservative-Liberal Democrat administration from 2010 to 2015 that cut real spending by 2.9% every year, so I'm much happier to stand on my record as Chancellor than what the Liberal Democrats did when they had a chance of being in government.' Woking issued a section 114 notice two years ago, in June 2023, when it faced having to plug a £1.2 billion deficit. Billpayers in the Surrey borough faced a 9.99% council tax rise the following year. Mr Forster, who is a member of the Commons Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee, told the PA news agency: 'In today's spending review, the Chancellor has failed to invest in local government – and she is refusing to acknowledge the harm this will cause. 'In my constituency of Woking, our local authority has already gone bankrupt, I fear more will soon follow. Following the former Conservative administration bankrupting Woking, we have seen public toilets close.' He called on the Government to 'support councils more'. The spending review which Ms Reeves fronted on Wednesday pledged 'wider reforms' which 'will ensure funding is effectively targeted, based on an updated assessment of need, and will consolidate funding to give local authorities greater flexibility to innovate'. Local government reorganisation will 'improve the join-up between local services, enabling councils to deliver services more efficiently', according to The Treasury. Conservative MP for Broxbourne Mr Cocking, who is also a member of the Commons committee, described the spending review as 'devastating'. He said: 'Councils that are going through local government reorganisation, where councils that have been run really well, are going to be potentially lumbered into new super-unitary councils, with councils that haven't managed their finances well'. Mr Cocking said that where authorities merge, 'you'll find that residents that have got sound council finances, have had good services, are now going to be subsidising areas that have made bad decisions', and added that the spending review failed to compensate for this. Surrey's district and county councils are set to merge, with new single-tier authorities taking on town hall functions, as part of the Government's push towards 'unitary' councils throughout England set out in last year's English Devolution White Paper.
