REASONS for the abject failure of the Labour Party in Scotland at the General Election were laid bare in a BBC Scotland documentary last night.
Deep divisions within the party over strategy, tactics and policies were revealed, with the party’s stance in the referendum being seen as the chief cause of Labour’s problems.
According to former Scottish leaders of the Labour Party, the joining of Labour with the Tories and Liberal Democrats in Better Together was a big factor in the party’s descent towards its General Election devastation.
Johann Lamont was Scottish Labour leader during the referendum campaign but resigned afterwards, claiming that the party in Scotland was being treated as a “branch office”.
She admitted on the programme the decision to join Better Together had been divisive.
Lamont said: “I took a view that we should be part of Better Together but I recognise there were people in our party who are less comfortable with that.
“And, of course, we were having this kind of argument put back to us by the SNP, while they themselves were making that common cause, that somehow that we were doing the wrong thing by working with people in Better Together.”
Henry McLeish, former Labour leader and First Minister, said: “I believe the Better Together campaign was created in London, and was delivered to Scotland to be implemented by the Labour Party. Speaking to many, many Labour Party people, they were totally dismayed by the fact that we could have a platform with the Conservatives because we have no platform with the Conservatives on anything else.
“It gave the SNP a field day and in the referendum, what we found was it was the SNP and their voice of Scotland against the rest.”
Another former leader and First Minister, Jack McConnell, said: “The whole campaign design was wrong. There should have been an independent, non-party campaign for a No vote that the three political parties then each supported in their own way with their own supporters.
“This idea that you bring the grandees of the three Westminster parties together to come and tell Scotland what to do – it’s a daft idea. It’s always going to be problematic but nobody would listen, and organise the campaign in a different way.
“It is an example of what was wrong with the thinking – the idea you can dictate to Scotland how it thinks instead of listening and engaging with people who are active in Scotland and have some experience of the situation.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here