THEY are, says George Galloway, Labour's "dwarves". Front-runner Andy Kerr, spits one Labour MP, encapsulates "the triumph of ambition over talent".
Iain Gray is the embodiment of "mediocrity", says a Kerr-ite MSP. As for Cathy Jamieson? "Can you imagine her as leader?" asks one senior Westminster figure (rhetorically). "Not since Bobby Charlton fought Arthur Scargill over a comb has there been
a more futile contest," declares Gorgeous. And yet, in six weeks time, one of these three figures will emerge as the person whom this beleaguered party believes can become the next First Minister of Scotland.
In Bute House in Edinburgh, Alex Salmond is sitting back in his sofa, now content in the knowledge that the official residence appears to be his – barring unpredictable events – until at least 2015. Such is the lowly standing of the three Labour candidates, the meticulous SNP operation hasn't even got round to polling on them yet. With Gordon Brown on the edge, and the entire Labour movement in freefall, this is not the most auspicious time for anyone to take over a party whose former lock grip on Scotland is weakening by the hour. And yet the task of turning that around now falls to Jamieson, Kerr or Gray. Can any of these three candidates buck the odds and throw the First Minister off his perch? Or is this summer election, in Galloway's view, simply a "waste of printer's ink"?
When the threesome met up on a wet Friday afternoon last week at the party's Glasgow headquarters to lay out the ground rules for the election campaign to come, the atmosphere was cordial. Kerr, Jamieson and Gray were all part of the 1999 devolution intake and have known each other for years. But the background sniping and bitching by friends and allies of the group was already underway. Jamieson is the "left-wing hypocrite", the alleged Socialist who, upon gaining a position of responsibility as Justice Minister, promptly backed the privatisation of the prison transport system like a latter-day Thatcherite.
Gray, meanwhile, is the "boring" candidate, Gordon Brown's man in Scotland who will bow down to the wishes of "London". Meanwhile Kerr, the two-to-one-on front-runner, according to Ladbrokes, is hardly free from abuse himself. "Jack McConnell without the brains," declares one Labour source. And don't even ask Labour MSPs near Monklands hospital what they think of him. Two of that number – Cathy Peattie and Karen Whitefield – have not forgiven Kerr for his time as health minister when he OK-ed the closure of Monklands Accident and Emergency Unit. They've signed Jamieson's nomination papers.
To be fair, nobody in politics can ever run for long without enemies. Of the three, Jamieson has the most experience in frontline Labour politics, having been a significant figure in the party for over 25 years. She came to prominence in the early Blair era when, as a leading figure of the left-wing Campaign group, she displayed her formidable campaigning abilities by gaining a seat on the party's UK national ruling body. Jamieson then came to prominence as a key member of McConnell's Cabinet team, most notably as Justice Minister when she was infamously assailed by a group of neds on a visit to discuss anti-social behaviour. Politically, she then became something of an enigma. Lib Dem coalition partners spoke warmly of her lack of ideology, and, indeed, even Blairite ministers in London declared approvingly that the former hardliner had become something of a pragmatist.
Jamieson worked closely in that Cabinet with Kerr, the man widely seen as McConnell's closest ally, especially after he was appointed to the troublesome health portfolio. Up until now, Kerr was likely to go down as the minister who piloted through the historic ban on smoking in public places – a policy he backed with considerable personal zeal. The enemies he picked up at health will be a running sore in his campaign. Last week, a local party activist in Lanarkshire, Jim Dempsey, sent a letter to Labour MPs and MSPs demanding to know whether they would be supporting "the person who would close an eye to centuries of Labour struggle to improve the quality of life for all".
For Gray, the political waters have been calmer. A former teacher and Oxfam worker, he entered the Scottish Cabinet before both Jamieson and Kerr as a member of Henry McLeish's team, but his political career was abruptly interrupted when he lost his seat in 2003 to the then Tory leader David McLetchie. He seamlessly moved into another public role, as adviser to the then Scottish Secretary Alistair Darling – a job which has earned him his tag of being "London's man". Gray has hit back, pointing out how, in the job, he ensured the devolution of rail powers to the Scottish Parliament, to where he returned last year as MSP for East Lothian. But for the purposes of an election campaign – where the patterns are painted with a broad brush – it is likely that the tag will stick.
Gray had been first out of the blocks in late June when Wendy Alexander suddenly quit the job, making it clear that he wanted to take on the job. Jamieson followed soon after, but Kerr only made his mind up after coming back from holiday two weeks ago, having wobbled – according to friends – because of the stress the post would place on his family life. But what has emerged from the first week of campaigning is that no-one in the party, not even the candidates, appear to be able to agree on what the job they are applying for actually is.
The dispute centres on the fact that, in the Labour Party rule book, the leader of the Scottish Labour Party remains Gordon Brown, or whoever happens to run the party at a UK level. The advent of devolution did nothing to change this. The actual job title is leader of the Scottish Parliamentary group. None of the candidates are yet suggesting that the rule book should be revised, but, as the first week of campaigning showed, the confusion over the remit of the job is sure to become central to the month ahead.
Kerr began the dispute on Monday last week when he used an interview on BBC Scotland to declare that he wanted to see the role of the Holyrood Labour leader "beefed up". He went on: "I have to say I think the leader in Scotland needs to have a much wider voice, a much more influential voice and a much stronger voice. That's what I intend to say during the campaign."
The status of the Holyrood leader has long rankled Kerr – as it did McConnell before him. One MSP close to Kerr recalled the practical problems throw up by the confusion: "There was a Cabinet meeting when Jack had to make a phone call to Brown to check that everything was OK. You can't carry on having that kind of thing happening." Furthermore, according to Lanarkshire Labour sources, Kerr is said to have had a row with local members over his role in a local party committee, over which he, as the MSP, is not in charge.
The Kerr camp is now talking up their challenge to the way the party is run. "You always get the impression from MPs that in terms of policy they are the top dogs, so if Gordon Brown appoints Des Browne then he is the top dog in Scotland. The job cannot be seen as secondary in importance. The leader in the Scottish Parliament has to be primary," said one close ally.
As we report today, former Finance Minister Tom McCabe – no great ally of Kerr's – is among those calling for such changes to happen. Meanwhile, Gray – while opting for a less confrontational style than Kerr – is also of the view that once the new leader is elected, the very nature of that election will give the new Holyrood leader a clear mandate. Scottish Labour must have, he says, "a distinctive Scottish voice".
But predictably, the reaction among MPs has not been overly enthusiastic. "It is madness for Andy to have to have a dividing line with London Labour. This kind of thing drove Henry (McLeish] and it drove Jack and it has got us precisely nowhere. We need someone to change the record," said one. Another MP went on: "We would just be moving towards an SNP mark 2. If that is Andy's position, then a lot of people will be thinking twice about giving him their support." A third Westminster figure added: "It's an odd strategy to say that I will take on Salmond by launching an attack on my own party."
Others are questioning Kerr's political acumen in raising the issue in a campaign where MPs make up a significant chunk of the electorate. In a clear sign, not even Kerr's MP, Adam Ingram, is backing him. "I don't think it's for me or other MPs to offer backing," he told his local paper last week before adding: "Let's not forget this vote is for the leader of MSPs at Holyrood, not for the leader in Scotland."
Over in the Jamieson camp, change of a different form is being considered. While she has not sought to open up the turf war with Westminster, her campaign suggests that a Scottish Labour Party under her would be just a distinctive a body under her as it would be under Kerr. Jamieson the pragmatic minister has disappeared, and the left-wing Socialist has returned. She kicked off with a tub-thumping demand for energy companies to be charged a windfall tax, demanding that unless they show "some decency", the government should take a huge lump out of their profits. The leftward march was then added to by a further call for Network Rail to be mutualised and turned into a not-for-profit company.
Even her opponents in the party acknowledge that the move may be canny politics. "The thing about Cathy is that she knows how to tickle the party's erogenous zone," said one MSP who is backing Gray. But the direction of Jamieson's campaign has left her open to accusations of hypocrisy. "This is the minister who backed privatisation at every step. Now she is left-wing after all," said one Labour MSP. Jamieson also performed perhaps the first gaffe of the campaign – at a press conference in Glasgow Central Station to announce her rail plans, she failed to show up.
But coming through the middle, say some observers, will come Gray. In keeping with his less-than-charismatic image, he sparked fewer fireworks last week, positioning himself as a "serious" politician who could take on the "playground politics" of Salmond. The approach has won his support from a wide-range of MSPs, including the defeated Glasgow East candidate Margaret Curran. Running as a unifier, say his allies, might just work at a time when the party needs some seriously healing.
Who will win? Who can say? Labour insiders are utterly split over who might have the best chance. Such an election, involving well over 100,000 people in Scotland, has never been tried before. Labour headquarters, meanwhile, is having to ask its affiliated unions to get the names and addresses of members able to take part – at present they don't even know. But on the wider question – can any of them beat the SNP? – then firmer opinions are held. Galloway may be a maverick, but his opinion on this occasion is widely shared. One Labour source commented miserably: "If any of these three went into their local Tesco, you'd have to wonder whether anyone would know who they were." Kerr, Jamieson and Gray have a six-week opportunity to get themselves in the shop window. But they know only too well that the real struggle lies in the months and years after that.
