Beware: Labour will be coming for all our universal benefits

In the opinion of many, Labour's cruellest decision was to abolish universal payment of the winter fuel payment to pensioners. Although this measure will have little or no affect on better-off pensioners it is very likely to impact severely on very many who do not fall into that category and who will not meet the means testing levels that will be imposed by the Labour Government. The Labour Party's intense dislike of universal benefits - not least those which currently operate in Scotland such as free prescriptions, free tuition for Scottish students in our universities and free bus travel for our younger people - has been well documented at Holyrood over the years, both in statements from its various leaders and its MSPs' voting records during that time. After what took place in the Commons on Monday regarding the winter fuel payment, it does not take a great deal of logic to conclude that if the Labour Party - after only three weeks in power - is prepared to make a decision to abandon many UK pensioners, it would have absolutely no compunction in ending universal benefits in Scotland, if ever given the opportunity to do so.

Decisions taken by Labour to retain the two-child benefit cap and also to abolish the winter fuel payment for pensioners have in my opinion already set the scene for the debate that is going to take place between the two main political parties in Scotland from now until the onset of the 2026 Holyrood elections. The Labour Party and Anas Sarwar in particular will no doubt make statements about having no intention to cut universal benefits. The words of my old colleague to judge by actions rather than words will need to be a consideration by many people during those 2026 elections, particularly in view of the actions of the Labour Party over the past week.

Jim Finlayson, Banchory.

READ MORE: So much for Labour being the party of the working class

READ MORE: You want to visit Scotland? Are you sure about that?

This could throw SNP a lifeline

THE outcry over the new Chancellor’s announcement of cuts to pensioners’ winter fuel payments was doubtless predictable, and will have been factored into Keir Starmer’s new government’s plans. I am surprised that the bar has been set so low that even poorer pensioners will lose this benefit, although it has always seemed ludicrous that the better-off should have received it at all. When I receive my annual payment, I send an equivalent amount to Shelter, to assuage the guilt I feel at being a recipient. I hope that Ms Reeves will revise the limit for eligibility upwards so that those genuinely in need do not suffer. Yet no doubt she has calculated that that would bring in less revenue for her other purposes.

This measure, and her warning about impending tax increases, is probably part of a strategy that demands that unpopular measures be enacted early in the new government’s lifetime, leaving four years for remedial attention to the country’s finances followed by some restorative payments to ease the pain. The aim will be to smooth the path to the next General Election by getting the painful parts over at the start, in the hope that short memories will prevail and the anger at this measure will abate.

This does, of course, potentially provide the SNP with a lifeline that its waterlogged party badly needs before the 2026 election. I hope that voters do not fall into that trap.

Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh.

Get the Letter of the Day straight to your inbox.

Going off the rails already

AFTER only a few weeks in office the Labour Party is going off the rails already. The penny-pinching raid on winter fuel allowances and VAT on school fees shows a remarkable lack of common sense. The penalising of Israel shows a remarkable degree of misunderstanding of the real situation.

If Keir Starmer wants to fix the economy it must be done by growth and if he wants to fix the Middle East it must be done by recognising the real cause of all the problems, which is Iran.

Dr Gerald Edwards, Glasgow.

Devolution hobbles us all

SCOTLAND’S compromised and malfunctioning democracy is being graphically exposed by the Scottish Conservatives' dilemma over how to present themselves (“Scottish Tories face dilemma over links with UK party”, The Herald, July 30).

The devolution settlement was designed to give any devolved administration only partial power and partial agency. That’s not just a problem for the SNP. It hobbles all Scotland’s political parties. To those paying attention it’s abundantly clear that our problems and potential require to be addressed by all the powers available to any other normal functioning state. Policy choices need to be discussed and debated openly, without someone over the fence having the power to interfere, constrain options, apply different values, and generally mess with us, even in a well-intentioned sort of way.

A house with such acute structural problems is not suddenly made secure by changing its name and painting the door a different colour. Ruth Davidson understood this when rejecting Murdo Fraser’s 2011 proposal to distance their party from the Westminster mothership, because that would be to concede that Westminster constraints meant the unionist model was not working for the unionist parties in Scotland. There would still be no room for manoeuvre whatever they called themselves, so why draw attention to the fact?

Anas Sarwar faces the same issue, distancing himself by various verbal contortions and denials from pre-election promises and post-election policies which haven’t matched up, and we’re only a couple of weeks in.

We independence supporters will get there in the end, because Union supporters with the country’s best interests truly at heart will discover that they require full powers to achieve them. Then they’ll be able to give Scotland their full attention. To the benefit of all of us.

Frances Roberts, Ardrishaig.

Progressive? Really?

I AGREE with Kevin McKenna when he says in his column ("Cherry has been let down by politics of the playground", The Herald, July 30) that, in Scottish political discourse, the word “progressive” has been distorted beyond recognition.

I am old enough to remember the 1960s, when the Tory candidates for election to Edinburgh Corporation (the predecessor of Edinburgh City Council) stood as "Progressive" candidates rather than describe themselves as true-blue Tories or Conservatives or Unionists.

The "Progressives" were the ruling group on the Corporation but they were progressive in name only. They vehemently opposed equality of educational opportunity, they presided over intolerable slum housing in Scotland's prosperous capital city and their main “virtue” was to keep the rates as low as possible to the detriment of public services for the poor and dispossessed. In short, they were right-wing regressive Neanderthals.

So beware of politicians who claim to be "progressive". They may turn out to be wolves in sheep’s clothing.

Dennis Canavan, Bannockburn.

David Lammy (Image: PA)

The bias towards Israel

AS the anniversary of the genocide taking place in Gaza looms on the horizon I found your article on Foreign Secretary David Lammy and the situation in Palestine interesting ("No-one has ‘veto’ on a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine, says Lammy", The Herald, July 31). Why? Simply because at a time when almost every country in the world opposes what is happening there with the exception of the UK and the USA, nobody mentions the power wielded by externally-funded organisations within Westminster, namely the Labour and Conservative Friends of Israel. Nobody mentions that the Foreign Secretary, the Prime Minister and many other MPs are members of Labour Friends of Israel.

To suggest that their assessment of and response to what has happened and continues to happen in Palestine will be unbiased is an insult to one’s intelligence.

David J Crawford, Glasgow.