Labour's love lost

YESTERDAY'S extraordinary resignation by Wendy Alexander will spark a flurry of questions among a surprised public. "If she is innocent over 'dodgy' donations, why has she quit?" will be one.

Or: "What's wrong with Scottish Labour that it can go through four leaders in less than eight years?" And another: "Where does this leave the political process, with no credible opposition to the SNP?" But the most commonly heard question may well be: "Who cares?"

When Alexander stood to replace Jack McConnell much was made of the claim that only she had the political experience and intellectual weight to challenge Scotland's biggest political beast, Alex Salmond. In truth, she has made little or no impact on the electorate outside the hothouse that is Holyrood and those who commentate on it.

That is not to say that Alexander did not have a vision for her party and Scotland. She was quietly modernising the former while trying to outline the latter. Most notably, this included the brave decision to take on her colleagues at Westminster in an attempt to effectively federalise the party and get it to look seriously at devolving further powers to Holyrood. This newspaper backed that approach, which took form in the cross-party Calman Commission.

But Alexander failed in her main job as chief opponent to the Scottish Government. That Salmond regularly swatted her aside at First Minister's Questions was by the by, certainly to most people. Much more damaging was the inability to get Labour's voice heard where it matters, in the streets, the pubs and in homes. To many, it was almost as if the Labour Party had ceased to exist in Scotland. Certainly, it did not seem to speak for them when it came to their concerns about underperforming schools, dirty hospitals and anti-social behaviour in the streets. Even when statements were made on these matters, and more, voters weren't listening.

To be fair to Alexander, this malaise predated her leadership and indeed helped bring the SNP to power last year. But in her short time as leader the gap between the so-called People's Party and the people widened, as did that in the opinion polls between Labour and the rampant SNP. Alexander complained yesterday of the SNP's "vexatious" complaints against her, and she had a point. Last week's standards committee suspension was politically motivated and she has paid a price that is way out of proportion with her 'offence', of not registering donations to her leadership campaign.

But Alexander had not built up enough goodwill and popularity – in her party and at large – to survive. It will now fall to someone else to try to revive her ailing party. If it seems incredible that anyone would want to grasp this poisoned chalice, it is the nature of politics that there will be no shortage of candidates who are convinced they can do better than Alexander.

For the next few months Labour will be preoccupied with that succession rather than its role as the main opposition party. It must emerge from this period with a clearer direction and a more effective leader. It is difficult to see who that could be, but two things are clear.

First, there must be a genuine contest and a debate hot enough to forge a new identity and direction. At this early stage, it appears this may well come down to a straight fight between Andy Kerr, the party's public services spokesman, and Iain Gray, the enterprise spokesman. Kerr may be better suited to the guerrilla tactics of opposition politics, but Gray would be the safer pair of hands and more likely to continue the necessary modernisation of the party.

Second, this time Gordon Brown must stay out of it. He must allow his Scottish colleagues and party members to come to their own conclusion. His patronage of Alexander denied the Scottish party that sorely needed debate last year. Given his track record – he also backed Henry McLeish – candidates would be wise to run a mile to avoid his support.

And in the end will it make any difference? Will the public start to care about Scottish Labour once more? Only if it starts doing its job again, because right now Labour isn't working. If the splits and rivalries which have emerged in the last year, especially between London and Edinburgh, continue then the party will be dead. And few will mourn its passing.

Wha's like us... Bruce Malone

IT IS easy to be cynical about the teaching profession – their long summer holidays, starting this weekend, are a source of jealousy among the rest of us. But teachers, at their best, are one of this country's greatest assets, devoting themselves to the intellectual and personal development of the next generation of Scots.

Bruce Malone is the perfect example of why they deserve our respect. When he took on the role of head teacher at St Andrew's RC Academy in Carntyne in 1991 the school was struggling to cope with some of Glasgow's poorest and most socially disadvantaged children. Imposing discipline, school uniform and a safe environment, he turned the school around. Links were developed and nourished with parents and the local community, and emphasis was put on developing a new culture of self-respect and achievement. Two years ago it received one of the best possible reports from inspectors.

Last week Malone received an honorary degree from the University of Strathclyde in recognition of his work. If only our schools had more like him.

Left in the dark by a daft plan

POLITICIANS control our lives from cradle to grave (and decide the amount we are taxed in between). So perhaps it should not come as a surprise that they want to control our exposure to daylight. If the Tories win the next UK general election, as seems likelier by the week, they are intent on putting the clocks forward by an hour, ensuring more daylight in the evening in the south of England.

The trouble is, this would condemn Scots to ever-darker mornings, especially in the depths of winter. Never fear, says Tim Yeo, the Conservatives will devolve power over time from Westminster to Holyrood. This will allow an SNP Government to stick with the current arrangement while England takes an hour's leap into the future. The Tories seem quite pleased with this, saying it respects Scots' right to control their own affairs within a secure Union.

Common sense would suggest that, in fact, it will just lead to confusion. Scottish office workers would have to come in an hour early if they wanted to keep pace with English colleagues, and Scots businessmen phoning south at the end of the working day would find phones ringing out in empty offices. You could get a train from Lockerbie to Carlisle and arrive before you had set off. At a mundane level, TV's News At Ten would be on at 9pm in Scotland. The Tories haven't thought this through. Nor has the SNP Government in Edinburgh, which thinks we could stick with the old system even if England changes. It is a bonkers idea all round, and should be quietly ditched.