I had planned to begin this article with the words, ‘We have a new leader’, but as I typed I realised that it would be more accurate to write, ‘We have a leader’.
Johann Lamont has been elected, with 51 per cent of the vote in a three-way contest, as the first leader of the Scottish Labour party, so hooray for that.
In her acceptance speech, Lamont was the first to acknowledge the scale of the challenge which we face. We are all aware of the scale of our defeat in May, so I will avoid labouring the point, but with local government elections approaching in just over four months’ time, we have no time to waste in getting back on track.
But getting back on track can’t mean hoping that the electorate will see the light and return to Labour, as Lamont is well aware. Change within the party will have to run much deeper than that.
As a party, our priority must not be to fight the SNP, it must be to offer imaginative, realistic policies which, as our new leader said, pass the only test that matters: the best interests of the Scottish people.
To engage with the people, we need to be candid and we need to communicate consistent values. Kneejerk negativity is out; a considered gutsy approach is in.
Our new leader has emphasised her willingness to change and a no-holds barred approach to policy development. This is the time to dump the policies which hampered us at the last election and which jarred with our values – knife crime, the council tax freeze – we have a prime opportunity to reconsider.
It can’t be about just what we’re against though. Lamont has spoken of her desire for a better future for the people of Scotland, but what will that future look like? What would a ‘better’ Scotland look like?
To communicate a vision, we must first develop it.
Scottish Labour has a track record of investing in media relations and organising, but neglecting core policy development. If we are to be a party of substance, of gravitas, a transformational party, then we need to invest in the thinking as well as the doing.
It’s hard, when you’re short on money, to invest in the long term rather than firefighting, but it’s as necessary for a party as for a country.
I believe that Johann will be an excellent leader of the Scottish Labour party, and, in time, first minister. She’s hard-working, strong and, unusually in a politician, she has the ability to listen. I think she ‘gets it’, a quality that can be neither learned nor taught.
As a party, though, we can’t sit back and wait for our leader to transform our fortunes or, alternatively, wait for her to fail. We need to take more ownership than that.
In accepting the leadership, Lamont referred to the importance of our unity of purpose, our common endeavour. So ask yourself, what can you do? What are your ideas?
It’s our party, not just Johann’s. She knows that, but it’s up to us to act like it.
—————————————————————————————
Judith Fisher coordinates Research and Knowledge Exchange for Strathclyde Business School and stood in 2011 on Scottish Labour’s Glasgow regional list for the Scottish parliament. She writes here in a personal capacity.
—————————————————————————————
Agree with discussion on policies. Judith is right about the Council tax freeze – it is regressive and we need the courage to argue against what is a popular policy – whilst accepting SNP have mandate to maintain it. On Knife Crime I disagree with Judith – right aim to target knife crime – too many peoples lives blighted by people carrying knives. Policy was maybe unsound legally but motives behind it spot on.
I think we also need to consider chipping away at Free Perscriptions – a benefit to the middle class, and have a long cold look at Free care for the elderly as well at Tuition Fees.
I recognise the need to build an electoral co-alition and that everyone in society should benefit from public policy but the Labour party should not be in the business of giving disproportionate resource to the middle class through a universal approach.
We should never, ever have been on strike from the scottish parliament either – political symbolism that demonstrates a lack of respect for democratic instutions in my opinion.