For the first Labour budget in 14 years, this was pretty good and I don’t even feel it necessary to add the caveat “in the circumstances”. It was a rare case of a politician under-promising and delivering more positivity than was advertised.

Importantly, it was easily recognisable as a Labour budget which contained a lot of items that would not have happened without change. That really is the test, large and small. It was also a Scottish budget which will deliver a stack of new money, both capital and revenue, which must now be spent well, and that cannot be taken for granted.

This time, please let’s see every penny of Barnett consequentials being used for their intended purpose, particularly in relation to the NHS. And while the Chancellor cannot impose reforms in Scotland as a condition for extra money, the truth is that they are every bit as necessary here as elsewhere in the UK.

Read more

“Responsibility” was the Budget watchword and Rachel Reeves cut a more than credible figure. As a former Bank of England economist, she conveys economic authority which always helps with a Chancellor of the Exchequer. After she had set out the fiscal realities in politically brutal terms, her opponents fared poorly in rebuttal.

Responsibility and realism are all very well, but what about another important “r” to a Labour audience – redistributionism? As Ms Reeves said, “change must be felt” as well as evidenced through speeches and numbers. Here too, there was plenty to take encouragement from what she announced.

A big rise in the National Minimum Wage will make a significant difference for low paid workers, 200,000 in Scotland alone, while a reduction in the rate of Universal Credit repayments will benefit 1.4 million lowest income households to the tune of £420 a year, according to the Rowntree Foundation.

That is the kind of measure which does not catch a lot of headlines for the simple reason it is unlikely to impact on a single member of the commentariat. However, it’s the type of action which denotes a Labour government – just as the introduction of the National Minimum Wage was in 1997 – and makes a real difference to the pressures on people’s lives.

Then, the slogan was “education, education, education” and, in England at least, that became a driving mission of the Labour government. This time, Ms Reeves’ catch-phrase was “investment, investment, investment” which does not have the same relatable qualities but is at least as important. With a lever-pull on borrowing rules, she will back this up with loads of new money for investment, much of it in Scotland – particularly related to energy transition.

At the same time, her priority was to “fix the foundations” and nobody should doubt the need for that. Yet it is one of life’s little curiosities that people who, a few short months ago, could not find anything bad enough to say about the Tory government are now desperate to believe their denials, when it comes to the fiscal legacy they left behind.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer departs 10 Downing Street, London, to attend Prime Minister's Questions and the BudgetPrime Minister Sir Keir Starmer departs 10 Downing Street, London, to attend Prime Minister's Questions and the Budget (Image: Stefan Rousseau) Rationally, there was no reason for Labour to invent a £22 billion black hole, thereby inflicting additional handicaps upon its own ambitions and forcing tax rises. I have no difficulty believing that what they found under the bonnet was a great deal worse than even the outward appearance of a Tory car crash, driven by Johnson and Truss, had suggested.

I am sure Ms Reeves would have much preferred to pronounce gravely that though Labour had inherited a fiscal mess (as all incoming governments claim), somehow they had worked their way through it inside three months and all was now relatively well. In this case, such political alchemy was not an option.

Even the fact that the Office for Budget Responsibility pretty much endorsed what Ms Reeves has been saying about her inheritance obviously does not satisfy her critics. The OBR chucked in the grenade that the information they were given by the Tories in March was “materially different” from the evidence that has since emerged, so all forecasts which flowed from it were distorted.

It was, as Ms Reeves said, “the height of irresponsibility and they knew it”. This left a black hole of unfunded spending commitments which was far too big to be wished away. Announce now and pay later is a form of government with which Scotland is particularly familiar. But it was also a game at which the Tories became adept in their demob-happy stages.

Read more

Against that background, Ms Reeves has done pretty well. You can’t raise £40 billion in taxes without some squeals from those who will pay. By and large, businesses will absorb the costs but they will also benefit from the investment and spending power injected into the economy. Budgets are about hard choices and everyone knows public services and infrastructure have declined to an alarming extent. It is idle to complain about that while also resisting the means of funding them.

An awful lot about Budgets is not contained in the House of Commons statement. It is in the small print of accompanying documents. The Tories have had 14 years to give all sorts of obscure tax breaks and advantages to the special interests they represent. Unravelling and reversing these does not happen in three months either but step by step, change will come.

Having regarded the hasty announcement about ending universal Winter Fuel Payments as bad politics, though the principle is correct, I hope this Budget will more than counter the negative impressions it engendered. It shows the direction the Labour government is heading in – and that will add up to good news for triple-locked pensioners as well as for Scotland.

I liked the fact that in her preface, Ms Reeves quoted a bit of history to the Tories. “This is not the first time it has fallen to the Labour Party to re-build Britain”, she said. 1945 and post-war recovery, 1964 and the white heat of technology, 1997 and the end of the Thatcher era. It’s never easy but it can always be done.

Brian Wilson is a former Labour Party politician. He was MP for Cunninghame North from 1987 until 2005 and served as a Minister of State from 1997 to 2003