YOU have to give the Labour Party some credit. Just when you think they can’t possibly shoot themselves in the foot any more than they already have this year, they somehow manage to achieve the near impossible and blast off just another piece.
Do you remember in the 90s when Labour were the masters of PR and spin?
Now the party seem to be unable to go a day without tearing themselves apart and coming across like some distant remote species entirely unconnected to the human race.
Yesterday’s move by Labour was perhaps the most bizarre yet. The party seemingly rejected thousands of people who had signed up as supporters and affiliates. These people, the party felt, did not support the aims of Labour.
By opening up the leadership election to supporters, the party had, almost by accident, created a grassroots democratic movement. There was a buzz. Two hundred thousand people paid three pounds and joined up and said they would like to be involved in the next stage of the Labour Party. It was probably the most exciting and dynamic thing to have happened to Labour in years.
Unfortunately these were the wrong kind of supporters for the party.
It is an incredible scenario. One that had Armando Iannucci put in The Thick Of It, it would have been rejected as too far-fetched.
Perhaps the most spurious reason for rejecting a supporter was that they may have not voted or campaigned for Labour in a previous election.
If someone who campaigned for the greens or the Lib Dems says to Labour that they’d like to be involved in shaping the future of the party you would expect them to be welcomed with open arms.
The SNP, often accused of control freakery, would never dare demand such historic loyalty. You could have voted no at the referendum last year and still join up. The secret to the SNP’s success is likely as simple as that. A broad church of people who ultimately believe in independence.
Maybe the Labour party should try being a broad church of people who believe in socialism.
Frankly, Labour do not deserve the supporters and party members they have.
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