Inside Westminster there's a problem for Scottish Labour

I joined them on Wednesday and heard MPs discuss the scourge of poverty.
But while I am immersed in politics every day, I could not have anticipated the mood of this lobby day.
Built for kings, Westminster Hall is the oldest part of the UK parliamentary estate. It is a far cry from the realities facing millions of people every day.
In 2024, almost three million emergency food parcels were delivered - the equivalent to one every 11 seconds. In Scotland, more than 239,000 were distributed.
Every week, hundreds of MPs pass through this corridor on the way to the Commons chamber. They hold the power to make a difference - but will they?
I met up with the Scottish volunteers just before we entered Westminster Hall. They were excited to take their campaign to politicians; hopeful that the urgency of their message would be listened to.
Campaigners, from all across Scotland, including Glasgow, Edinburgh and Dundee, told their representatives how their food banks were pleading for donations for new born babies, asking supermarkets for milk formula and nappies.
After an hour though, their enthusiasm had waned.
The MPs and their staffers were willing to listen but there was a growing worry among campaigners that the "warm words" would be left behind in the ancient halls of Westminster.
To be fair to the Scottish MPs, there is no doubt they meant well and it would not be fair to suggest they were not moved by the accounts of poverty they heard. It was clear many were aware of the hardship in their constituency.
Read more:
Speaking of the Scottish Labour MPs she had met, one campaigner told me: "Every MP we've spoken to here are sympathetic to the problems - although it is evident some are more than others.
"But they are new backbenchers. The chances of them standing up and leading a rebellion in the Commons is pretty slim."
At the same time as MPs gathered to meet with campaigners, a major event was looming in the House of Commons.
MPs were due to debate the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) proposed welfare cuts.
This was the day that Liz Kendall unveiled her green paper on the changes to Personal Independence Payments (PIP), where changes to the eligibility threshold would cut disability payments for millions.
Since then, we have witnessed the resignation of one Labour MP, frontbencher Vicky Foxcroft, a Lewisham North representative.
She resigned the whip, stating that she could not in good conscience advocate for these reforms.
When campaigners raised their concerns that these changes would push more people towards food banks, the MPs told them reform on the broken system was crucial - but other MPs were quick to share that they too had concerns.
But here is how that went down.
Another campaigner said: "The MPs who met with us today are saying all of the right things and that is really encouraging and welcome to hear.
"But the thing is: when it comes to standing up in parliament, or standing up against decisions being made by the government or the Prime Minister, will they do it?
"I'm worried that what we're hearing is just warm words. We want the MPs to mean what they say and I'm just not sure that they do."
When I put these concerns to some of the Scottish Labour politicians in attendance at the lobby event in Westminster Hall, they hit back.
"Whether during my time as a councillor or as an MP, I always try to take on board the concerns of my constituents and where possible, I raise them in the chamber. That is exactly what I am doing here."
Coatbridge and Bellshill MP Frank McNally was also adamant his track record of supporting children in poverty while a councillor in North Lanarkshire would reflect in the Commons.
"Before I became an MP, I created the first food programme in the UK that feeds kids 365 days a year," he said.
"It's an area that is really important to me. We've got a child poverty strategy that is going to be published very soon, and I think that we want to see real, tangible actions within that because there is no one magic bullet.
'We need that comprehensive approach that goes across all aspects of government, from decisions that are taken here at Westminster and decisions that are taken in the Scottish Parliament.
'There needs to be a holistic approach to addressing some of these issues and that is what I'm focused on.'
Mr McNally was one of the MP's who expressed "concern" at the welfare proposals but was not ready to say how he would vote on it either way, while stressing the government should abolish the two-child benefit cap when "economic circumstances" allow it.
After speaking with campaigners, Glasgow South MP Gordon McKee said: "Nobody wants any food bank to exist. Unfortunately this is a legacy of 14 years of Conservative government, where more and more people were struggling to afford the basic necessities."
But the MP, described within his party as a "rising star", also said his party had delivered "nearly" the biggest increase in the national minimum wage 'in history'.
READ MORE:
Dr Zubir Ahmed, the Glasgow South West MP, told The Herald he understood what it was like to be disadvantaged.
"I grew up in a family and in a close where my dad was the only person that had decent work coming in.
'I know what it's like when government essentially puts you on the scrapheap, limits your potential and tells you this is as good as it is going to get.
'I don't want to be part of any government that does that. I want to be part of a government that enables work and solves those kind of issues, where people in work don't need to use a food bank because they've got a decent income coming in and job security.'
The next few weeks facing Scottish Labour MPs could be career defining.
Having the courage to oppose decisions being made by senior party figures can be harmful for their place amongst colleagues.
It was fair to say that this was the main concern from campaigners in Westminster last week: stand up for you constituents or stand up for your party - sometimes there cannot be both.
There was clearly a nervous energy in the Scottish Labour camps in London and I sensed that the campaigners there almost felt sorry for them.
Big decisions are coming - and perhaps there is no easy path for a Labour MP.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

North Wales Chronicle

26 minutes ago

• North Wales Chronicle

UK must push for diplomatic solution following US strikes on Iran, says Swinney

The Scottish First Minister's response to the developments in the Middle East came after Sir Keir Starmer urged Iran to return to negotiations. UK minister Douglas Alexander said the Government 'has been putting contingencies in place' as the region braces for any potential retaliation from Iran. US President Donald Trump said three key nuclear sites in Iran were 'completely and fully obliterated' in the military strikes. The US is thought to have used B-2 stealth bombers to drop bunker-busting munitions on the sites – including the deeply-buried Fordo facility – as well as 30 Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from submarines. The US-UK base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean is not thought to have been used in the operation. Posting on X, Mr Swinney said: 'The Middle East conflict has reached an alarmingly greater level of danger after the US attacks on Iran. 'The conflict must be stopped by a diplomatic solution delivered through the international community. And the UK Government must insist on that now.' The Prime Minister had earlier said Iran should 'return to the negotiating table', noting the region remains 'volatile'. The Middle East conflict has reached an alarmingly greater level of danger after the US attacks on Iran. The conflict must be stopped by a diplomatic solution delivered through the international community. And the U.K. Government must insist on that now. — John Swinney (@JohnSwinney) June 22, 2025 He said: 'Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. 'Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat.' Former Scottish first minister Humza Yousaf was critical of the Prime Minister's response. He posted on social media: 'An awful statement from the PM, which ignores our collective responsibility to uphold international law. 'Supporting illegal military action in Iran, and gas-lighting us about an imminent nuclear threat, is hauntingly reminiscent of the lies told in the run up to the Iraq war.' During a protest march in London, Mr Yousaf had earlier accused the UK Government of 'abusing' anti-terror laws against the Palestine Action group, which vandalised two aircraft at RAF Brize Norton. Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat. The situation in the Middle East remains volatile and stability in the region is a priority. We call… — Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 22, 2025 Trade policy minister Mr Alexander, who is the MP for Lothian East and a former international development minister, spoke to the BBC's Sunday Show. He said: 'I understand that people have woken up this morning to the news that was breaking overnight with a real sense of concern. 'I want to assure your viewers that the British Government has been putting contingencies in place. 'There have been a whole series of meetings, I and other have been attending Cobra meetings in the course of the week.' He said plans are being put in place to move UK nationals in affected countries to safety, stressing the UK 'took no part in this military action'.

Telegraph

30 minutes ago

• Telegraph

This is why Reform is on the cusp of victory

New polling by Ipsos-Mori has Reform on 34 points, currently heading for a working majority in Parliament at the next election. If this came to pass, it would mark the most extraordinary result in British politics in at least a century. Can we really trust polls like these? Let us consider reasons to be sceptical. The first is that all polls like this – standard, nationally representative surveys of a few thousand voters – only capture national vote share. They do not project the corresponding outcome of seats. While we can make rudimentary assumptions of a party's likely representation in Parliament, they are still assumptions. A 34 per cent vote share would return a huge number of seats, but we cannot know whether the spread of votes would be broad enough to secure the number of seats implied by this poll. A party might receive 34 per cent of the vote share, but their support might be concentrated in small geographical areas. In such circumstances, Britain's 'first-past-the-post' electoral system would limit them to a small number of seats. We know Reform will get little support in the big cities; this will artificially inflate Labour's seats next time and limit Reform's. The second reason to be sceptical of these polls is that, this far out from an election, they cannot be treated seriously as predictions. Polls are merely snapshots of public opinion at an exact moment in time. Things were different three months ago; they will be different in three months from now. Sometimes, with polls like this, there is a third reason to be sceptical: you get 'rogue' polls which put one party in an unusually high or low position. Sometimes polls randomly tap into a sample which is out-of-line with public opinion for some reason. This is why you must consider the average of all polls of a given period, and also consider whether polls reflect trends. In considering this specific point, let us now flip the analysis back over. Let us consider why this poll should be taken seriously: there are several reasons to do so. You cannot credibly write this poll off as 'rogue'. This result of 34 per cent broadly reflects other polls coming out at the moment. While it is a little higher, it is not much higher, and it confirms a clear trend that Reform is on the march. It obviously also reflects recent election results. At the mix of national and local elections in May, Reform secured a new MP, a new Mayor and a raft of new councillors across the country. They received 31 per cent of the vote share in the local elections. Ipsos-Mori's poll merely puts Reform on a slightly higher vote share than they secured several weeks ago in real elections. You must always take polls seriously if they reflect what is coming out in focus groups at the same time. Ed Shackle, Public First's head of qualitative research, confirms this to be the case. All the current momentum is with Reform. He notes that, while you used to get some hesitation from voters about admitting they were considering a Reform vote, this is gone now. People increasingly sense that Reform is surging, and it is exciting to get on the bandwagon. While Reform is surging in less-affluent areas on the coast and in towns and small cities across provincial England, their support is up across the board in the focus groups. They are currently hoovering-up most of the votes of disaffected people across the country. This recent polling result has also come after a wave of stories on issues where Reform is strong: immigration and crime, most notably. For the last few weeks, the media has been awash with stories of grooming gangs, serious crimes alleged to have been committed by asylum-seekers, the continued arrival of small boats, and all the rest. This cannot but help Reform's standing in the polls. While I am personally sceptical of anyone's ability to make a judgement on the national mood based on their own personal, random conversations, when these conversations are entirely in line with the polls, you have to wonder. And the conversations I have with ordinary people in my own personal life confirms that huge numbers of people are seriously thinking about voting for Reform. Overall, then, we should take this poll seriously; Reform is very obviously the most popular party in the country at this moment. But we still have four more years before the next election and an awful lot will change. Above all, given their recent record, it is reasonable to assume Reform will blow themselves up with internal rows and blatant incompetence. If they can make it through to the end of this year in a similar polling position but without a terrible internal trauma, it will be worth taking them very seriously.

The Independent

an hour ago

• The Independent

Giraffe genitalia among hundreds of body parts imported by trophy hunters

Wildlife hunters took home nearly 1,800 giraffe body parts 'trophies' in a year – including from more than 100 animals specially bred in captivity to be shot, it's been revealed. Whole skins, bones, skulls, feet and tails were all popular with wealthy hunters who paid to shoot giraffes – but one even tried to smuggle back home genitalia from an animal they had shot. Customs officers in the United States discovered the genitalia in the luggage of a traveller returning from Africa. Figures from the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites) show that 1,791 giraffe trophies were exported worldwide in 2023, the most recent available data. Some 120 of the animals were recorded in the database as captive-bred, to be killed by foreign hunters. British hunters imported 21 giraffe trophies into the UK that year, but other European nations also accounted for some imports, including Austria, Germany and France. US hunters imported 1,072 (60 per cent) of the global total. Plans for a ban on trophy imports into the UK remain stalled. The Tories under Boris Johnson dropped proposals for a ban, and Labour accused the government of being 'complicit' in trophy hunting when Conservative peers blocked such a plan. Campaigners are calling on the UK government to finally deliver on Labour's long-standing promise to ban the import of hunting trophies – a pledge made in election manifestos. Giraffes are classified as vulnerable by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) Red List, the global system of monitoring species' statuses. It estimates there are about 68,000 giraffes left in the world. The species is outnumbered three-to-one by elephants in Africa – whose own populations are dropping – yet they have less protection, conservationists point out, calling for action to close legal loopholes. 'Giraffes have suffered about a 40 per cent decline in numbers in three generations,' said Prof Fred Bercovitch, adjunct Professor at the University of the Free State, South Africa and a leading giraffe expert. 'If the decline continues at the current rate, they will be extinct before long.' British-owned trophy-hunting companies are offering giraffe-shooting 'holidays' online. One is marketing more than 200 giraffe shoots, with 'special offers' starting at under £1,500. One worldwide site offering wildlife shooting trips in Botswana and Zimbabwe charges a fee of $1,800 (£1,336) to hunt giraffes on its estates. Prof Bercovitch, who has written giraffe conservation reviews for the IUCN, rejected industry claims that trophy-hunting boosts local economies. 'If trophy-hunting benefits the local economy and increases the socioeconomic status of people in hunting areas, then those people would have a higher standard of living than people in areas where hunting is forbidden. However, there is no evidence to suggest this is the case,' he said. He called on the UK to act. 'The trophy-hunting of giraffes produces yet further declines in endangered populations. If the UK truly wants to support conservation, it must shut its borders to these trophies once and for all.' A private member's bill banning trophy-hunting imports is due to have a second reading in the Commons on 11 July, and it's understood the government will set out its position then, but private members' bills rarely become law without government support. A spokesperson for the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: 'The government was elected on a mandate to ban the import of hunting trophies – that is exactly what we will do.'