Newsletter
Enter your email address here to receive updates from the team.
Poll
Jobs
Policy | Charity & Fundraising | Research | Education | Executive | Media | Social Care | Communications
User login
RSSScottish Labour’s identity crisis
New leader Johann Lamont has to develop a coherent political and constitutional alternative to the SNP - but what it is?
By James Maxwell Published 18 December 2011 11:05
New leader Johann Lamont has to develop a coherent political and constitutional alternative to the SNP - but what it is?
Johann Lamont woke up this morning leader of a party which has lost all sense of itself. Over the last six or seven years, Scottish Labour has watched as the SNP has gradually appropriated much of its traditional left-of-centre agenda. Now, with a nationalist majority at Holyrood, Labour finds its ideological identity absorbed into a new Scottish consensus, with little or no space to build a distinctive progressive alternative.
Lamont's over-arching task is clear. She has to demonstrate that Labour amounts to more than just the anti-independence party; that it has a coherent political and economic vision for Scotland.
This will be more difficult than it sounds. If she shifts the party to the centre, she will run it straight into an electoral brick-wall. A large part of the SNP's success can be attributed to the sense of frustration many Scots came to feel with New Labour's neo-liberal project. Alex Salmond understood this and, despite his own baffling fixation with Ireland's low-tax, light-touch economy, developed a package of policies - including free university education and an integrated health service - which adhered more closely to the broad social-democratic instincts of the Scottish electorate.
On the other hand, if Lamont tries to outflank the nationalists on the left Labour's support will be reduced to a shrinking core vote in its central belt and west coast heartlands. Lamont has already tested this approach - at the elections in May - and it produced disastrous results. That's not to say there isn't room for Labour to attack Salmond from the left - the First Minister's plans to lower corporation tax and his close relationship to some members Scotland's disgraced financial elite leave him open to charges of fiscal conservatism. In order to be effective, though, such attacks would have form part of a wider strategy which draws in sections of society beyond the party's trade union and public sector base.
Lamont faces a similar dilemma when it comes to the constitution. The break-up of Britain terrifies Labour, so much so, in fact, that its response to the SNP's May victory was to retreat into a kind of extreme, reactionary Unionism. In recent months, senior Labour figures have described the nationalists as "neo-fascist", accused them of trying to "rig" the referendum ballot and made repeated - and usually unsubstantiated - claims about online smear campaigns run by pro-independence activists. Yet the angrier Labour has become and the more aggressively it has rejected real constitutional reform, the lower its poll ratings have sunk.
What should be absolutely clear is that the status-quo - which here refers to both the current devolutionary settlement and Calman's loaded exchange of fiscal powers - is a non-starter. Scottish public opinion demands more and, by now, Lamont must have realised that. But she must also be aware that were she to embrace either devo-max or full-fiscal autonomy, she would be conceding 90 per cent of the case for independence. A federal Britain would see the Scottish Parliament gain responsibility for all aspects of government in Scotland except defence and foreign affairs. That means the case for the UK would rest on Trident, a seat on the UN Security Council and not much else. Is that the role Labour really wants to play in Scotland, as the principal defender of Britain's dangerous, redundant and hugely expensive nuclear missile system?
Whatever road Lamont decides to take her party down, she should be in no doubt that its future hangs in the balance. As her defeated opponent Tom Harris warned during the leadership contest, Scottish Labour has reached a pivotal moment in its history and failure to live up to the challenges ahead will result in "well-deserved obscurity and irrelevance". Serious shock therapy is needed to resolve this crisis of identity - who knows if Lamont is capable of administering it.
Related articles
Latest Posts by our Bloggers
From the magazine
-
Samira Shackle -
Ryan Gilbey -
Rebecca Stott -
Will Self -
Jason Cowley -
Sophie Elmhirst -
Martha Gill -
Rafael Behr -
George Eaton -
Rafael Behr
Elsewhere on the Blogosphere
- ConservativeHome
Could George Osborne's leadership ambitions deliver a referendum on the EU? - Political Scrapbook
Latest data shows recession worsen after Tory HQ attempt to spin figures - Coffee House
The coalition: two years in - Left Foot Forward
Spending watchdog slams Regional Growth Fund waste - James Kirkup
LOL: David Cameron's love-texts to Rebekah Brooks could mean voters laugh out loud – at his expense
Blogroll
- Alastair Campbell
- Benedict Brogan
- Coffee House
- Comment Central
- Conservative Home
- Dave's Part
- Gary Gibbon
- Guardian Politics
- Hopi Sen
- Iain Dale
- Labour List
- Labour Uncut
- Left Foot Forward
- Liberal Conspiracy
- Liberal Democrat Voice
- Luke Akehurst
- Neil Clark
- Next Left
- Our Kingdom
- Paul Waugh
- Penny Red
- Pickled Politics
- Political Betting
- Political Scrapbook
- Simon Fletcher
- The Bleeding Heart Show
- Think Politics
- UK Polling Report
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Jobs
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists
37 comments
Lox, can you point out the factual errors in the article?
Leadership is not the only issue that Labour have. The deeper problem is their self-mythologising belief that constitutional issues are a distraction from social issues and that these are somehow not connected. To bring about social change you need the powers to do so. If Labour really believe that the current powers are adequate (or those contained in the forth-coming Scotland Bill) then they have to say how they will transform Scotland without extra powers. During the campaign, both Ken MacKintosh and Johann Lamont argued for no further change to devolution, putting them at odds with other party members such as Malcolm Chisholm, former First Minister Henry McLeish, and even Lord Foulkes, who tabled amendments to the Scotland Bill seeking greater "financial responsibility". In a recent poll, 68% indicated their support for Devo-Max. Many grassroots activists support greater powers. If Labour continue to be the party of no change on the powers for the Scottish Parliament, they will not be believed as truly caring about ridding Scotland of poverty. After all, we had these powers for the eight years or so when Labour were in power at Holyrood and when there was a Labour government at Westminster. So why did Labour not bring about radical social change then? In short, why should we believe them?
Interesting article and wouldn't disagree with a lot of it. Labour has a huge problem on it's hands in Scotland. Namely if it makes itself electable in England then it probably won't be electable in Scotland.
You can argue the Scottish and UK parties are different entities but it won't cut alot of ice if the Scottish Labpur party has policies undermined by a neo liberal UK party.
This, among other things is why the SNP are better placed to prosper under the current arrangements.
Labour also has a fight on it's hands to convince scots that it still represents the ordinary person. Not sure it can win this
A shrewd article by James Maxwell although he makes the mistake of referring to Johann Lamont as a leader of a party.There is no such thing in reality as The Scottish Labour Party.Just the Labour Party in Scotland.Lamont,Ruth Davidson and Willie Rennie do not lead their parties.People at Westminster do.Alex Salmond leads his party.And that is what it all comes down to.A choice between continuation of Scottish economic needs being automatically subordinated to the very different needs of the south-east of England and all governmental economic decision making being made in Scotland's interests.The choice between Scotland's exclusion from international forums along with the imposition of Trident submarines stationed on our West coast and a nuclear free and progressive Scotland playing a positive part in international decision making.
Labour members in Scotland would be better starting to consider a real Scottish Labour Party in an independent Scotland.A different party in a different sovereign state but retaining friendly links to Labour in the south.
No matter who 'won' the leadership election was bound to be ineffectual, given the spectacular lack of talent to choose from. Labour's 'brightest and best' gravitate towards Westminster, since the party is still arrogant enough to rely upon its core vote . Even when this spectacularly collapsed in May they didn't get it.
Parachuting in someone such as Jim Murphy or Douglas Alexander can only smack of desperation, and they aren't exactly real political big beasts. They are both New Labourites who will forever be tainted with the stain of Blair and Brown.
The only answer for Labour can be for them to figure out what it wants to stand for in Scotland, and under Lamont that would appear to be a continuation of the unsatisfactory status quo. She clearly does not understand (perhaps willfully) that there is an appetite for further change in Scotland - whether for devo-max or for independence - so this can only serve to further undermine the party's position.
Strange name for a woman, "Johann".
Drawing on my rudimentary German knowledge, Johann is German for John.
A woman with a German male first name as a Scottish Labour party leader is
a bit extravagant and over the top.
I guess the Germans will have a giggle should they find out.
I suppose if one looks at the first names of US political leaders then Johann is not so wayward.
Religious people will recognise it as as the name of a Christian saint.
Lets hope the lady is not an atheist as this would truly stuff things up.
At least the Scots are not boring.
My grandson has a Scottish name. Since I am not British when I first heard the name I almost fell of the chair, not knowing whether to laugh or cry.
Suffice to say I got used to it and since the kid is a lovely boy I have grown fond of the boy and the name.
What does "Hamish" mean in Scottish terms?? Perhaps I could google it.
Good luck!
All 3 Party Leaders now could be women. We've already got the 4th, Salmond no more than Thatcher in a kilt. Things looking up for Sctland.
Independence would mean England would become a nation that is ruled most of the time by the Conservatives (Labour only won the popular vote in England in 1997 and 2001 at the last 8 general elections) and a Scotland in which the SNP would emerge the natural party of government. No wonder Labour has become so manically unionist of late and they tried so desperately to block the people having their democratic say on independence.
@swatantra nandanwar ,Salmond is Thatcher in a kilt? What planet are you on? He wants to join the EU, eventually join the euro, and increas immigration. Add that to free prescriptions and uni places how the hell is that remotely like Maggie? As for lamont, labour have just lost the next election with her winning. She is a charisma free zone.Salmond will make mince meat out of her.
To "South Pacific", Hamish is an anglicised version of Seumas which is Gaelic for James.
The SNP is terrible for Labour.
The seats in Scotland are fundamental to Labour gaining power in the UK. Labour's future is therefore in an SNP/ Labour coalition.
But we all know the Labour elite will do anything, say anything, sign anything and give away anything to propel themselves to power. The dynamic means people in England will be put off voting Labour to avoid giving away disproportionate power to the SNP.
The Murdochs have made mincement of Salmond.
I bet Alex regrets jumping into bed with James " I didn't read the email " Murdoch.
I’m always bemused by the metropolitan left’s inability to understand the political make up of the SNP. Left wing, but pro business, social democratic yet alleged to be the thrall of big finance, single issue but overwhelmingly popular (running at 51% in the polls amazingly). That’s because its not a UK party, fighting on a UK ticket. Transport it to Denmark, Sweden or Finland, and it would become instantly recognisable as a fairly normal, just left of centre, Scandinavian style political party. And that’s why it is winning hands down, as it has redefined the political landscape of Scotland, has chosen its own ground, has chosen the time and place of its battles, whilst all three opposition parties have no idea how to deal with them. Politics in Scotland has now moved beyond the UK, indeed have moved beyond the ability of the UK parties to understand or respond coherently.
Oh and Hamish is a “Scottified” version of Seamus, whilst Johann is a common girls name in the Hebrides, where Ms Lamont’s family comes from. It’s a Gaelic version of Joanna. Oh and its LAmont, not LaMONT.
Salmond Thatcher in a kilt ?Try a bit harder ffs.
Indu pendant
Wouldn't worry about it. It's almost a stick on that Scotland is heading for independance. Then, from what I can gather you'll be pleased that things are a fair bit rosier for the Tories in elections.
So the Tories and the Lib Dems in government and Labour before them have let City of London based multi-nationals off with paying billions in tax according to the Public Accounts Committee.While North Sea Oil operators have been slapped with prohibitive tax bills,especially by George Osborne.I should think the oil companies will be looking quite favourably on the idea of an independent Scotland.
The Labour Party in Scotland has failed to make the case for the Union. Salmond will call his referendum and win it as Scots decline to be governed by another Tory government they didn't vote for. Then the Scottish Labour party starts campaigning on real issues and becomes the natural party of government in an Independent Scotland within 10 years as the SNP, having won their case for independence have nothing left to campaign for. The English Labour Party then really has to get its finger out, and might have a useful role model.
I'd ignore Swatandra's crap about Salmond being Thatcher in a kilt, Benjamin. I've never read a word of informed or intelligent comment from him-on any subject-but he keeps on quack-quack-quacking away.
In what sense have the Murdochs made mincemeat of Salmond, matthew? Can you justify that, or are you just bitter at the fact that Labour's declining relevance in Scotland makes Ed M even less likely to be PM?
The article is spot on, though. Labour stands for nothing in Scotland but nostalgia and reactionary unionism: the latter position, of course, being recently endorsed by Peter Robinson of the DUP. Strange bedfellows, eh?
Lamont? The union's candidate. A safe pair of hands, if by that you mean she's going to oversee the continued decline in Labour fortunes in Scotland with the consistency that Ian Gray's ineffectual and negative leadership displayed.
No, Matthew, given that the article points out that Scottish labour is intellectually bankrupt and heading for further political irrelevance, I can't disagree with any of it. Can you?
Lox calm dowm, the only decline I see is Alex Salmond chasing the Murdoch shilling.
http://www.scotsman.com/news/alex_salmond_s_tv_offer_to_tycoon_rupert_mu...
You sound very bitter Lox, Miliband took on the Murdoch Press, and it was him who called for a judicial enquiry in to Press Hacking.
Interesting. The prospects of an independent Scotland somewhere before
2020 seems to be growing. With access to and control over a major portion of the hitherto UK oil and gas fields in the North Sea, Scotland would stand more than a fair chance of long-term economical wealth - provided the Scots create an oil-fund
as the one Norway has.
Being linked to an austerity-ridden UK is not a viable option in the eyes of Scottish public opinion, which is
demonstrated by election results as well as in recent polls.
The SNP is indeed a slightly left-leaning party of the Scandinavian type - that is, they want to build an alliance between a healthy private sector and a decent welfare state. Pretty Norwegian, I'd say. A comparison between the party programmes of SNP and the Norwegian soc-dems ("Arbejderpartiet") provides some interesting similarities.
A Scottish referendum regarding independence is not many years away. Ms LAmont would be well advised to adjust to that, turning Labour into a true Scottish political entity.
A neutral, non-aligned foreign policy, with the same EES-agreement Norway has struck with the EU, is probably the best way to start off.
And the Tritons will have to go, of course.
The Labour Party in Scotland, like it's English counterpart, was killed off mainly by the Nu£abour cult. Why would Scots be afraid of possible failure as a nation when they experienced actual failure, across the board, for 13 years under Nu£abour? A failure which is continuing.....
I don't give it any credence but it I just find it some going that this guy has been a Labour candidate for parliament.
Is she any relation to Johann Hari? Are we sure she's a she? Whichever gender, she's sure been at the deep fried Mars bars.
Is that a no then Lox?
Don't shoot the messenger old bean.
I see Scotland as far better advised to follow a similar path as the likes of Norway in the immediate future. I despise the current right wing tone in UK politics and if there is any way for Scotland break off from the current trajectory and follow a more civilised form of politics then the Scottish people should jump all over it.
Fine reading - perfect analysis.
Be assured all the pro-independence minded people are very very contented that Labour chose Ms LAmont.
She was our dream and Labour answered it with a marvellous Xmas gift.
Bless Labour for it - well done and greatly appreciated.
Lamont elected by the union block vote is a godsend for the SNP as Scottish Republic rightly points out. She was jointly responsible with Gray for her party's May debacle and is the candidate of no change. An ex teacher who is unable to understand the difference between "Independence" and "Separation"
Indu Pendent: Why would the SNP ever enter a coalition with Labour? You clearly have no understanding of the bitter relationship between those parties.
"The deeper problem is their self-mythologising belief that constitutional issues are a distraction from social issues and that these are somehow not connected".
Very true. At the last Holyrood election they would brush off constitutional issues with embarrassingly condescending statements about 'fighting for the things that really matter'.
And opinion polls might back this up at face value, when everyone ranks health and jobs etc as the top issues.
But the need for more powers to improve the Scottish economy and bring in the funds to make a difference on these matters is still obvious to most voters, and simply ignoring that is killing labour's prospects here.
From what it seems so far, Johann Lamont is content for Scotland to remain at a standstill, and so their stagnation will continue.
With Scottish Independence we can look forward to a generation of unbroken Tory rule. RIH Labour!
I've always said that Scottish Labour needs a big gun to take on Salmond. He's in a completely different league to the provincials up there. He has Westminster experience.
The only solution to Scots Labours predicament is to draft in a big hitter (no I don't mean Haris) someone with a breadth of experience like Murphy or Darling or Alexander. Otherwise Scots Labour is going no where, And the 3 names I've meantioned would better serve Labour up North than down at Westminster.
There's another dimension to this story, one which rarely gets examined outside of Scotland - but one which Gallach touches upon - and that is the details of the actual policies, and the guiding political philosophy, of the SNP in government.
The overriding issue in Scotland is the relation between poverty and the failure of the public sector to impact on the effects of poverty, despite major investment.
What the SNP is currently doing is seeking to implement a genuine re-organisation of public sector provision which is not driven by ideology (by contrast with Blair & the current Tory administration), but rather by the evidence basis which explains both the causes of poverty and its consequences.
To this end, it would be instructive to compare Nicola Sturgeon with Andnrew Lansley, the work they are doing, and the esteem (or lack of esteem) in which they are held by professionals. Similarly, try comparing the increasingly ideological puppet David Nicholson with the inspiring and respected Harry Burns - and then make the link to the political support each one is getting.
Matthew, as the article you've cited makes clear Salmond had less contact with NI in four years than the other party leaders had in four: and the Scotsman slates the SNP at every turn. Next time try quoting the Daily Mail-it hates the SNP too, and carries as little credibility.
I'm sure you do see Labour declining in Scotland. You'd have to be blind not too, wouldn't you?
Anyway, I'm not bitter at all. Just glad to see a reactionary, corrupted party on the decline in my country.
I see it's the Scotsman's fault, very original Lox, blaming the media.
Why don't you blame the BBC while your at it.
The Daily Mail, has credibility, when did that happen Lox?
The only thing declining is UK economic output Lox, please remember that.
Matthew, sorry: I didn't think I needed to spell everything out for you, but here goes...
The Daily Mail is a dishonest rag. I'm sure we both agree on that, don't we? So now we've accepted the principle that newspapers have their own ideologically driven editorial agendas, and by extension, if you read the Scotsman regularly you'll know that it has an anti-SNP agenda. So the point I was making-and I'm sure you're not so stupid that you didn't understand, only stupid enough to pretend that you didn't-was that the Scotsman carries the same credibility as a disinterested source of comment on the SNP as the Daily Mail. There. Do you understand that now?
Is UK economic output declining? Does that mean we're back in a recession? Are we really?
You seem to be bereft at the thought of us ungrateful Jocks losing interest in Labour here-perhaps if the Labour party in Scotland wasn't composed largely of self-serving hacks, with the brightest of them (everything's relative, remember) having one eye on a sinecure Westminster seat and perhaps a seat in the House of Lords at the end of a career characterised by the ability do do what they're told, people might take them seriously. (I notice that you didn't take issue with my description of Labour in Scotland as reactionary and corrupted, did you?)
Why don't you look forward to a resurgence in labour fortunes in Scotland under Lamont, if that keeps you happy? Don't hold your breath, though.
Post new comment