AS a means of kickstarting a debate, it was genius. Kirsty is the “Holyrood baby”. You may remember her from political adverts – the picture of a pregnancy scan or as a youthful child running towards a sunlit horizon. Holyrood Magazine has birthed her as the baby of unequal Scotland. We are to ask what can be done to enhance the life chances of Kirsty, and wee babies like her.

Naturally, as a magazine reporting on the national parliament, Holyrood asked questions of our MSPs and social policy. What health provision is available? How will her family care for her? What school provision will be available? Will her community’s interests be listened to? As “inequality is a choice”, we are tasked to scrutinise our politicians for how they tackle poverty.

This is a common management-style approach to inequality. Those who direct national priorities plan to mould Kirsty’s upbringing to make sure she gets all the services she needs. Like a strict formula of baby milk, we assume that the route to equality comes through the nurses knowing what policy ingredients to add in the mixture.

That fits closely to how groups involved in policy-making view themselves. Well intentioned business, charity, and public-sector quangos all say they have the ideas and tools to help Kirsty out of poverty. Many are convinced – within the tens of billions ascribed to current service provision – that great strides are already being made. Sometimes, of course, they are correct.

In parliament we have various strains of that similar mentality. MSPs from Green to Tory believe they can provide leadership on social problems like poverty through their job as legislators. It may sometimes reflect cognitive dissonance (see Tory policies), but they believe it to be true.

Kirsty, the baby of Scotland’s hopes and dreams, provides a perfect reflection of that role in public life. Mark McDonald MSP said it is “an important encapsulation of issues that face too many children”. Monica Lennon MSP held Kirsty’s image aloft in her first speech to parliament. Ex-minister Mike Russell pinned Kirsty’s picture, alongside worrying inequality statistics, to his wall as a “strong reminder…about the need for a better Scotland”. Some liberal ideas about reducing inequality in Scotland are fascinating and persuasive. Dr Harry Burns, former chief medical officer for Scotland, captured policy attention by explaining the impact of the stress hormone cortisol on young children. Unstable environments, Burns explains, can be a major cause of social problems throughout life. Early years intervention, for love, care, and stability, are therefore crucial to make sure Kirsty grows up happy and healthy.

Scottish Government plans to double free childcare provision are the result of such professional research. This is, in my view, more likely to reduce child inequality than any of the management and money shuffling that so far has been lauded as “education reform” to close the “attainment gap”.

There are, however, problems with Kirsty being a political prop. Like hugging and kissing babies at election time, she becomes an image our political class can embrace without confronting the roots of inequality that are created outside parliament.

If “inequality is a choice”, it is the choice of poverty-pay employers, rogue landlords, an out-of-control system of banks and financial speculators. It is the choice of corporate firms leading sectors from food to clothing to transport to media. Inequality is deeply engrained into our society at all levels.

The idea that the one per cent of the population involved in day-to-day policymaking can manage it out of existence may sound appealing (it requires no confrontation) – but I’d suggest it is a limited strategy. If you seriously want to tackle inequality, the political class needs to confront Scotland’s super-rich who benefit the most from “economic growth”, while poor children like Kirsty grow up then stay poor.

We can’t expect stretched public-sector workers to solve inequality via a policy declaration from on high. Nor is inequality something for public service to alleviate. It has roots in the market place. So we need to challenge inequality at its source: the exploitation of labour and assets for the benefit of the few. Where is the needed action on tax?

Otherwise Kirsty’s path could be one of radicalism, rebellion, and cynicism. Writing trinity Roch Winds suggested that Holyrood Baby “needs powerful, militant trade unions that plunge disobedient governments into chaos”.

Writer Amy Westwell warned that when Kirsty become “fed up with the Scottish Government’s pandering industrial strategy” she will organise a lock-in at the low-paid Amazon warehouses.

Holyrood baby should open our eyes. A modern economic class war has been fought and won by rich vested interests against children like Kirsty for 40 years. Too often politicians and public campaign organisations have been feeble in response.

My fear is that Kirsty, this year’s political prop, is destined to be reborn again and again, haunting us all as a spectre of our society’s hypocrisies.

Michael Gray @GrayInGlasgow is a journalist with CommonSpace.scot