Scottish Labour's support for cuts plays into the SNP's hands
Johann Lamont's echo of Conservative rhetoric - "something for nothing" - was a disastrous way to begin the debate.
By George Eaton Published 26 September 2012 8:57
At the last Scottish Parliament election in 2011, Labour pledged not to reverse popular SNP policies such as free university education, free NHS prescriptions and the council tax freeze. But in a speech in Edinburgh yesterday, Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont signalled a change of direction, declaring that Scotland could not be "the only something for nothing country in the world" and calling into question the future of those benefits. She said:
I know that there are families, working hard, on above average incomes who feel they pay enough and are attracted by policies likefree prescriptions, free tuition fees and the council tax freeze.
I know where they are coming from.
But I ask them to look at how they are paying for those free things. What price your free prescription when an elderly relative spends five hours on a trolley in A&E, or the life-saving drug they need isn’t available at all?
What price free tuition fees when your neighbour can’t get a place at college, or when university standards are now lower than when they went to uni?
What price the council tax freeze, when your parents care is cut, and your child’s teachers cannot give them the materials they need because there is a ban on something as simple as photocopying.
With growth likely to remain anaemic or non-existent, few will dispute that there is a reasonable debate to be had about the services the state should provide and how they should be paid for. But with her provocative support for cuts, Lamont has fallen into a giant SNP elephant trap.
The speech itself was considerably more nuanced than most of the headlines suggest, but her echo of Conservative rhetoric - "something for nothing" - has allowed Alex Salmond's party to present itself as the defender of the poor against a Labour Party dedicated to savage cuts. Rather than implying that cuts were inevitable, Lamont should have presented voters with a choice: higher taxes or lower spending? In fact, she did just that, stating "if we wish to continue some policies as they are then they come with a cost which has to be paid for either through increased taxation, direct charges or cuts elsewhere. If we do not confront these hard decisions soon, then the choice will be taken from us when we will be left with little options." But the provocative language elsewhere in the speech meant any nuance was lost.
In challenging the concept of universal benefits, Lamont has underestimated the strong body of popular support that exists for them. "What is progressive about a banker on more than 100,000 a year benefitting more than a customer on average incomes from the council tax freeze?," she declared. But universal public services, to which all contribute and from which all benefit, are the essence of social democracy. Once this principle is abandoned, greater cuts will inevitably follow as the rich, no longer receiving, have less incentive to give (you could call it "nothing for something"). For this reason, as Richard Titmuss sagely observed, "services for the poor will always be poor services". If Lamont is not to alienate many of her party's natural supporters, she should reassure them that she still recognises as much.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















19 comments
Bad day for labour then? This does n't juts give the gnats a news-cycle, it gives them ammunition for years to come. She does ntt just sound like an ill-educated tory, she actually IS an ill-educated tory.
OTH Cameron must be happy - not only has she vouched for his policies, she has put a big nail through Labour's prospects for the next General Election. If they are lucky, Labour will only lose 15 seats to the SNP, if not they will lose 25...how easy will thqat make it for Ed to gain a majority? Just to add to the fun, the Glib-Dumbs are pretty much finished in Scotland - they are going to lose most of their seats to the SNP as well. What's the chances of the SNP becoming the 3rd party at Westminster? Pretty good unless Clegg can keep 30 seats in England...does that seem likely? Given that they have betrayed their voter-base on everything from Fees to the NHS to cannabis to Trident it seems unlkilely.
Universal benefits are not free. They're paid for by taxpayers. Once you go down the road of means testing there's no way back-the poor will eventually be hammered.
If an Independent Scotland spend the same per GPD as e.g. Norway, for defence, it would save circa £1.6bn a year! The total cost of free personal care for the elderly, free prescrition charges, free university tuition fees and free bus passes is currently circa £800m per annum.
In addition we could e.g. restrict tax relief on pension contributions to basic rate income tax. According to HMRC calculations that would save £500m a year.
With those two savings alone we could continue to finance the above and have an extra £1.3bn per year. That could be used to finance 20,000 affoardable houses per year (£1bn) and finance an end to fuel poverty.
To achieve this we will require Independence. The alternative would be to remain in the Union and increase income tax, council tax and business taxes. What a choice!
After Johann Lamont's disaster at First Minsters question time last year about the cost of steel and its contract within the building of the new bridge across the forth. It would have been very hard to imagine she could do any worse, but surprise surprise, she and the labour party have done just that, welcome to the new RED TORY party, dedicated to taking every service from you unless you can pay.
So Labour echoes the Coalition - no surprise there then.
It's the same in England and Wales.
This all has nothing to do with 'independence', which is splitting the working class, splitting Britain, which would make rebuilding Britain even more difficult.
It would be far, far better for Scottish Labour to follow the lead of Welsh Labour. Down in Wales it was Labour that introduced free prescriptions, free school breakfasts, free bus passes for the elderly, and other universal benefits. Welsh Labour has also outflanked the nationalists on patorism and "standing up for Wales", taking a lot of traditional Plaid Cymru ground.
Gold dust for 2014. Thanks Johann!
Apart from that, I cannot for the life of me understand what on earth SLAB are thinking. I don't think they know themselves now. They are completely rudderless.
I give her 6 months max.
Now we know what labour would do. In the worst recession in generations, people having their wages frozen and cut year on year along with mass job losses, she would make it even worse by putting up council tax ( and we all know labour love to do that with astronomical rises in Glasgow massively outstripping inflation since the council tax was introduced) and abolishing free prescriptions. I agree to a point that there is a something for nothing culture in Scotland and should we gain independence we could not carry on regardless. There would either be huge cuts or large tax rises. Personally i agree that higher education should not be free but free prescriptions are crucial and the council tax freeze a Godsend for many people in tough times. She has shown that she is out of touch with ordinary people and how they feel. Thats the next election lost for labour.
So she tells a few home truths and you all slaugher her, tell me how do you propose to get not just Scotland but the whole UK working again, redressing the awlful black hole into which we fell first under Brown and the Cameron? sensible answers only!
Some problems are unsolvable unless reduced to bite size. Self governing Scotland at 5m pop. is manageable, whilst the UK system is distinguished by the stupidity of trying to govern 60m plus from one central legislature. A stupidity unmatched any where else in the world.
For Scotland the steps are:
Restore a more immediate and accessible and accountable democracy.
Focus on 'drying up' welfare dependency by re-industrialisation founded on renewable energy generation and offshore engineering.
Then re-socialise the whole urban poor by lifting living standards, services and amenities. At the moment there is a vicious circle of unemployment, poverty, social problems, ill-health. Reverse that into employment, jobs and growth, rising incomes, rising expectations and standards, improving lifestyles and better health.
Well these are not "something for nothing or freebies",I have paid my dues and I am entitled to my bus pass (used twice a month) to go to the shops,I cant work any more and did pay into the system since starting work in 1967.You took the insurance and now that I have had an accident at work you want to step on me as well.No the insurance was compulsory and supposed to look after me if something happened,and it did.Now the benefit was like any insurance policy,had conditions and when I started work I was told that I would be paid "related earnings" and that was taken away.
There's not enough of us in Scotland to make an impression on the UK and it's monumental problems, that up to you lot.
Hopefully we'll be well out of it by 2014. We can't influence the UK, but we can influence Scotland. Might sound selfish, but its the only sensible option.
And if you think the UK's problem, economic or otherwise, started with Brown. Then you've got no hope of fixing them whatsoever.
Why the interest? Strange how the trials of Johann Lamont interests you so given some of the anti Scottish bile you've written on here.
DMYERS - Johann Lamont is barely an intellectual LIGHTWEIGHT
The West has fragged the Balkans and the former Soviet Union. OK, and let's not forget Chechoslovakia. The Euro kerfuffle is about to dismember Spain, Italy and probably Greece. The Mid-East is also about to fragment into geopolitical smithereens - if not radio-active dust - and Great Britain has in history drawn many a line which has resulted in mayhem.
We do not agree with the creation of all these 'micro' nations but since globalisation's come upon the scene everything seems to be shrinking.
Just look at the good old USA. Split right down the middle. Rainbow Nation my foot.
Cartographers
Scottish Labour has a major problem its plate: the very policies which Johann Lamont has not put up for debate (a debate, conducted via a commission, incidentally, which will not report until after the vote on Independence - how cack=handed is that?) are the policies which the electorate democratically CHOSE in an emphatic election win in 2011. These policies, which aim to improve the lives of ordinary folks, are exactly the policies which a self-respecting Labour Party would have proposed. They didn't, and yesterday Johann confirmed that she had signalled in Blairite language that the centre-left ground was being abandoned. There is now no option for Scots, but Independence.
As if this wasn't bad enough, it was confirmed to Scottish TV viewers, in two mind-numbingly embarrassing interviews on Scotland Tonight and Newsnicht, just why Johann had been kept quiet for months since assuming leadership. Simply not up to it.
So in the world of Johann Lamont, we can't afford universal healthcare, free tuition, prescriptions, elderly healthcare...
but we can afford disastrous PFI schemes that have bankrupted the NHS, illegal wars costing £10's of billions, the renewal of trident at £100bn over it's lifetime, the olympics (but it was worth it for the feelgood factor for just a few weeks in..err..when was it again ?), paying off sacked councillors on full pension plus a £500k golden handshake (South Lanarkshire Council Director of Finance this year) and has happened throughout many labour run councils especially Glasgow., £4m a week to pay for the unelected House of Lords and so on..
Hope Labour voters are happy with that..
Lamont asks: "What is progressive about a banker on more than 100,000 a year benefitting more than a customer on average incomes from the council tax freeze?"
She also applies this logic to higher education, free prescriptions and bus passes for retired citizens.
What Lamont fails to take into account is that these bankers, and others on similar or higher wages, pay tax at the top rate, which over a lifetime equates to hundreds of thousands of pounds for the treasury. For Labour to therefore claim that the poor are subsiding the wealthy is laughable. These people pay more in annual income tax than I earn in a year.
Lamont, it appears, wants to return to the shameful and discredited means testing system which was found to be more expensive to operate than it is to give free prescriptions to all. Labour claim they want an equal society; where is the equality in Lamont resurrecting the class system between the haves and have nots?
There is something missing from the "debate" Johann Lamont wants to start (although she demonstrated on both Scotland Tonight and Newsnight Scotland that she has no intention of actually taking part in such debate - merely starting it). Lamont mentions higher taxes, but which taxes does she refer to? Income tax? Capital gains tax? Corporation tax? Inheritance tax? Air Duty? Alcohol duty? None of these taxes are available to the Scottish Parliament.
The scope for Scotland to take a different path in terms of taxes under the current set-up is very limited. We could allow councils to raise council tax, but people voted for a five-year freeze in 2011 so stopping that would mean breaking a manifesto promise, and luckily the SNP are not the Lib Dems. Besides, her own party joined together with the Conservatives to deliver a council tax CUT in Stirling last year - quite incredible, really. Of course, when asked if she was calling for the freeze to council tax to be stopped on Newsnicht, Lamont characteristically refused to do so - she wants to talk of tough decisions, but has no intention of being the one to make them.
The Scottish Government wanted to introduce a Large Retailer Levy last year. Lamont - along with the rest of her party (except perhaps Malcolm Chisholm, the only Labour MSP that refuses to play petty partisan politics) - voted against this last year.
So the taxes that Lamont wants to raise would appear to be ones Scotland has no control over. Well, if this is the case, then any debate on "radical" changes to public service provision needs to be conducted without the usual proviso of independence being off the table.
Lamont wants people to have a debate on how Scotland can afford public services within the constraints of devolution. Well, the rest of us want to have a debate of how Scotland can afford public services without this rather big string attached.
This is hardly a surprise from someone who is barely an intellectual heavyweight. Reading through the transcript of the speech betrays her dreadful command of English, and, if you want a laugh, go and have a read on the Scottish Labour website.
If Labour think this character can bring them any sort of electoral benefit, they are even more deluded than I thought. Her 'performance' (she reads all of her questions from a script and never bothers to listen to the answer which has already nullified her next question) at FMQs is laughable. Poor Labour.