Kenny Farquharson: Accent on tough with Labour’s new leader

FIRST things first. Can we all agree on how to pronounce the surname of the new leader of the Scottish Labour party? To my mind there is only one correct way, and that’s LAmont, with the emphasis on the first syllable, not LaMONT, with the emphasis on the second.

The latter is preferred by former Tory chancellor Norman Lamont, and is the equivalent of TV’s Hyacinth Bucket insisting her surname is pronounced “Bouquet”. It’s LAmont, just as a former Scottish secretary’s name was Helen LIDDell, not Helen LiDELL. Got that? Good.

Next, can we agree the electoral college that handed power to Lamont yesterday is a flawed, antediluvian antique that needs to be unceremoniously ditched? When John Smith was elected Labour leader in 1992 he courageously confronted the unions, demanding that the party move to a system of one-member-one-vote. And yet here we are, almost 20 years later, with an electoral college that allows multiple voting and the almost feudal influence of powerful union barons. Last year, ordinary members of the Labour party chose David Miliband to lead them. Union votes handed the crown to his brother Ed. (One year on, Ed still looks like the geeky captain of the school chess team, rather than a prime minister in waiting, and is trailing in the polls.) And now, ordinary members of Scottish Labour have picked Ken Macintosh, only for union votes to gift the leadership to Lamont. Not only is this palpably unjust, it is also poor politics. It undermines the leader’s authority from day one. The system must change.

Third, can we all agree a zero tolerance policy towards anyone finding amusement in the fact that Lamont has a working-class Scottish accent? In the early days of the Scottish Parliament I was appalled by some of the things I heard in the black-and-white corridor and the press gallery about the way some MSPs talked, and much of it was directed at Labour women. In recent weeks I’ve heard this reprised, with reference to Lamont. For goodness sake, it’s almost 25 years since The Proclaimers released Throw The ‘R’ Away. Have we learned nothing? We’re Scottish, with glo’al stops, round vowels and rolled Rs. This is how we speak. Get used to it.

There were a number of positives in Lamont’s acceptance speech yesterday, particularly the underscoring of the point that this is now a Scottish party that has Scotland as its number one priority. Yesterday’s election was significant in that, for the first time, there is now a leader of the whole party in Scotland and not just the Labour group at Holyrood. And there were signs in Lamont’s speech that for her this is more than just a technicality. “Scotland is our country and our cause,” she said, in a phrase that could easily have come from a Salmond conference platform.

For me, her best moment came from an ad lib, in a section where she was supposed to say that “people have labelled me many things in this campaign, some flattering, some less so”. She demurred at “some flattering”, saying she couldn’t remember anybody saying anything nice. It demonstrated a truth about Lamont that will be a strength in an incredibly daunting job. Lamont is not glossy or glamorous. She does not have that almost cartoonish larger-than-life persona of an Annabel Goldie or an Alex Salmond. What she is, however, is the kind of no-nonsense tough-minded woman who is instantly recognisable to every Scot with a maw, an auntie or – apologies, Johann – a granny. She’s the teacher at school you didn’t want to cross, the pal’s mum you didn’t dare upset, the kind of Scotswoman who demands and commands respect. But crucially, she brings to this flintiness a sprinkle of very dry, very Scottish humour. Salmond’s couthy charm has a curiously pastoral and People’s Friend quality.

It has its roots in a Glebe Street of the mind. Lamont’s counter will be a harder-edged urban humour that is more akin to the kind of affectionately cruel joshing you hear every day in canteen queues and at bus stops. Her clashes with Salmond could be more interesting than most people expect. My advice? She should model herself on Scotland’s current exemplar of the impressive, nae-nonsense Scotswoman – the marvellous Margo MacDonald.

Let’s not mince words, though. There are few people even in her own party who believe Johann Lamont can drag Scottish Labour back to a winning position, or that she can become a more credible national leader than Salmond. And there were indications in her speech yesterday that she has yet to grasp the enormity of the biggest challenge Labour faces – the independence referendum. This is the tartan elephant in Scottish Labour’s room, and I am by no means convinced Lamont’s response to it is going to be sufficient.

In her speech she said: “I want to have the referendum now to confirm once again, that devolution is the settled will of the Scottish people and nothing else. Once that is done we can focus on how we refresh and renew the current settlement so that it can better reform and renew Scotland.” I’m sorry, but this “jam tomorrow” approach won’t do. We have been here before. In 1979, as Scotland prepared to vote in the first devolution referendum, former Tory leader Alec Douglas-Home urged Scots to vote No, promising that the Tories would come up with a better form of home rule afterwards. Of course, when Number 10 became Maggie’s Den, that prize proved illusory. Scots are unlikely to fall for a Labour version of the same pitch.

Understandably, they will treat the referendum on its own terms – as a choice between the options actually on the ballot paper. Lamont’s key task is to ensure the form of devolution on that ballot paper is fit for purpose, and fit for Scotland’s future.