RULING out support for indyref2 has left Scottish Labour “looking intransigent, undemocratic, and tone-deaf,” a close ally of Richard Leonard and Jeremy Corbyn has claimed.
The comments, made in an article for the Tribune by Glasgow councillor Matt Kerr, are the latest salvo in the party’s increasingly bitter civil war over the constitution.
The left-winger - who recently lost out to Jackie Baillie to be Labour’s deputy leader - says the party will not even be able to reclaim second place at the next election unless it can win back Yes voters.
Kerr said the victory for the No campaign in 2014 “was the very definition of pyrrhic.”
He added: “The independence movement had grown massively during the campaign, and built an enthusiastic base. ‘Better Together,’ meanwhile, had looked like a defence of the status quo – and even as it mounted a successful rearguard action on the union it damned the Labour Party as a force for change or progress in the eyes of working-class Scotland.
“The Labour Party’s involvement in it was seen by huge swathes of our support as being in bed with the Tories, who were busily destroying lives in our communities. People were angry, but not just anyone – people who had been lifelong Labour voters, supporters, and even members were angry.
“And yet, the machine rolled on. What came next was a catastrophic defeat in 2015 after a campaign that will be remembered for canvassers being literally chased out of streets where the Labour vote a few years earlier would have been weighed, not counted. “
Earlier this month, Scottish Labour’s ruling executive committee voted to oppose indyref2 in its Holyrood election campaign next year.
Speaking at the time, Leonard, the Scottish Labour leader, said: "We agreed to campaign for a programme of home rule, devolution and democratic advance within the UK.”
Ian Murray, the shadow Scottish secretary, and Baillie, the party's deputy leader in Scotland, have both been vocal opponents of a second vote.
Others, including Health spokeswoman, Monica Lennon, and veteran MSP Neil Findlay have both previously said the party should not stand in the way of a new referendum.
In the article, councillor Kerr, who makes clear he would vote and campaign for a No in any future indyref2, said Labour’s decision ensures next year’s Holyrood election will be dominated by the constitution.
He added: “There are many ex-Labour voters out there who voted Yes, the majority of whom have not returned to the party. Some may be diehard supporters of independence now, but many aren’t.
"They departed from the Labour Party because they saw us as representing a status quo that wasn’t working and they still see us that way. We have failed – not to convince them about our view on independence, but to convince them that our policies would improve their lives more than the SNP.”
He added: “The Labour Party in Scotland has no route back to second place, never mind power, unless it is willing to reach out to those people. No-one aspiring for real change can be satisfied with the SNP. But the reality is, they couldn’t be convinced by the Labour Party either.
"Ruling out another referendum in all circumstances leaves us looking intransigent, undemocratic, and tone-deaf – the very reasons people were willing to shift support from us in the first place.”
Kerr was the party’s candidate in Glasgow South West at last December’s General Election. On the final day of campaigning, Jeremy Corbyn was in the constituency to kick off his tour of the UK.
It had been a key Labour target. However, the SNP romped home, with Chris Stephen increasing his majority from just 60 to 4900.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel