THE last article I wrote for The National was a reaction to Rachel Reeves’ angry, finger-wagging, tirade aimed at Jeremy Hunt for having – supposedly – hidden the state of both the UK economy and the public finances from her. It was a very odd outburst given that absolutely everyone else in the UK knew just how bad things were.

Its bizarreness, coupled with the financial attacks on pensioners and those in care in England that she announced on the same day, set the scene for what might happen over the next five years.

In truth, Labour have during their first month in office made clear to all those who voted for them thinking that they might see change that the party has no intention of doing any such thing.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has adopted a strongly pro-City position (Image: Lucy North/PA Wire)

Labour’s new mantra, adopted since arriving in office, is: “We can do whatever we can afford.” This consciously reverses the suggestion by economist John Maynard Keynes, who inspired Labour for decades, who said: “We can afford whatever we can do.”

That reversal is deliberate. It says that Labour will not do whatever is possible. Instead, it says Labour will do whatever those who hold the purse strings in the City of London will permit. As a result, Labour has effectively decided that it will not do whatever it is that will make life better for most people over the next five years.

That is because of the so-called fiscal rule that they have adopted. This basically requires that any additional government spending be funded by growth in the UK-wide economy.

READ MORE: I'm an economist – Keir Starmer's economic 'rules' are a joke

In the last month the Bank of England has said that UK growth over the next five years will be weak, and certainly worse than that in the EU, as if that might come as a surprise to anyone. And now, the respected National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR) has said growth might not exceed 1.2 per cent a year over the next five years. That is historically very weak.

It means Labour will, in effect, have no funds to change anything if it sticks to its fiscal rules. It will instead deliver what the Tories did, at best. Well done to all who voted for this.

And then we come to the recent rioting. This was not on my political bingo card, or that of many other people, two weeks ago, but the far-right grab opportunities wherever they can manufacture them with disinformation. Rioting became almost a daily occurrence in England, but not Wales or Scotland.

What has this to do with Labour’s fiscal rules and its likely claim that austerity is necessary because we cannot afford anything else? Pretty much everything, I would suggest.

Rishi Sunak's 'stop the boats' slogan has been adopted by far-right rioters (Image: PA)

The Tories created what I consider to be a narrative of racial hatred. Suella Braverman said migrants were invading the country. They weren’t .

Rishi Sunak wanted to “stop the boats”. He hasn’t, and Labour will not either until they provide safe routes of passage for those seeking asylum, as is their legal right.

Tory leadership candidates Robert Jenrick and Kemi Badenoch both peddle unpalatable anti-migrant lines, unconcerned that the vast majority of migrants have a completely legal right to live in the UK.

Meanwhile, Labour seemingly ignores the fact that all these lines were created to distract attention from the fact that the Tories imposed a callous form of austerity on the UK as a whole, which the SNP government in Holyrood was unable to wholly ameliorate.

The anti-migrant lines were meant to distract attention from the fact that people had real concerns about inequality, jobs, pay, housing and public services, all of which were failing them. Those failures were government-created. Migrants were blamed.

READ MORE: Warning as Labour advised 'by same finance giants who will benefit from PFIs'

Now, Labour is making it clear it thinks there is no money to address these rightful concerns that highlight the reality of politically-created inequality in Scotland and elsewhere. But, unless Labour tackle them, the anger in society will only grow.

That anger is being exploited by the far-right now. In response, Labour cannot just get tough on racist rioters and those who incite them, although that will be necessary. They will also have to alleviate the stress afflicting all those people that decades of neoliberal government deliberately left behind.

My concern is that there is no sign that this is understood by Labour. It’s as if they are only intent on treating the symptoms of the current crisis, and not its causes, including the actions of politicians who have encouraged it. If they do not deliver real change in the well-being of people, we are in deep trouble.

That puts a special responsibility on the SNP. First, it has to call for these changes in every way it can. Second, it has to deliver them to the greatest degree possible in Scotland to show that an alternative is possible. Third, alongside independence parties in Wales and Northern Ireland, it has to make the case for breaking up the Union – if that cannot deliver what the people of Scotland and those places need.