Letter: 'MP must redeem himself over two child benefit cap'

I, as a lifelong trade union activist, was touched by his mention of the influence that his grandfather, also a trade union activist, had on his life.

Both he and Martin’s grandmother both worked hard to lift their family out of poverty. His family continued to work hard to allow Martin to attend St Aloysius’ College and Oxford University.

After my father died when I was 13, my mother also worked hard to make sure her four sons were able to go through further and higher education.

During his election campaign he spoke about, if elected, working to give all children the same life chances he had been given.

After his election he posted on social media that “It’s been a busy week but I’m putting people first”. He also spoke about the influence that David Cairns had on his life.

All of these things would make it seem to us all that he would be fighting for everyone in Inverclyde.

However, after what happened in the UK parliament on Tuesday, July 23, I am not so sure about which people he is putting first.

By voting against the SNP’s amendment to the king’s speech which would have repealed the two child benefit cap, he not only spoiled my birthday, but he also condemned children in Inverclyde and across Britain to further poverty and suffering.

This from a man who said all the nice things about his family being lifted out of poverty, a man who still lives in Inverclyde, one of the most deprived areas of Scotland and a man who said that he was heavily influenced by David Cairns.

I knew David well both as a priest and a MP and David would have been one of the first people to go through the lobby of the British parliament to vote to support the amendment to abolish the two child benefit cap because he was more concerned about putting people before party.

David never forgot where he came from and always served ALL of the people of Inverclyde especially those who were struggling financially through no fault of their own.

Martin McCluskey had the chance to do the same but chose not to. He also went against the wishes of many trade unions who wanted the two child cap removed and the children’s charities who have said that removing the cap would be the most cost effective way of lifting hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty.

During the election campaign, the Labour party in Scotland told us that they were opposed to the two child cap and that their elected MPs would vote to remove it and Angela Rayner said that the two child cap was abhorrent and should be removed.

Given that all of the Scottish Labour MPs - except for one who didn’t have the guts to vote and abstained - voted to keep the two child cap, were they, and Angela Rayner, not telling us the whole truth then then or now? Whichever it is, the people of Inverclyde, and the rest of Scotland, need to be aware of this.

When challenged about the way they voted, Scottish Labour MPs said that fiscal rules could not be broken and there wasn’t enough money in the kitty to end the two child cap.

They also said that the Scottish Government should be finding money to mitigate the effect of what is now the Labour Party’s policy to keep the two child cap.

So while the British Government has to be fiscally prudent, Labour expect the Scottish Government to break their own fiscal rules.

When Martin won his seat, people said to me that, as an SNP activist, I must be hugely disappointed. I told them that of course I was but, just as I did with David Cairns and Iain McKenzie, I was prepared to see if he would live up to his promises to the people of Inverclyde.

I have to say that given what has happened so far I am not filled with confidence that Martin is going to put people before his parliamentary career.

Perhaps he can redeem himself by fully supporting the compensation claims for the WASPI women and not simply toe the party line if they try to water things down. Only time will tell.

Yours sincerely,

Tom Tracey

Address supplied