Alexander isn't the solution, she's part of the problem

IF WENDY Alexander is the solution to Scottish Labour's problem, then all the party is going to end up with is two problems. Her leadership could well mean division and further defeat.

The mood inside Scottish Labour is pretty ugly. The majority of Scottish Labour MPs wish they had never backed a Scottish Parliament and, far less increase its powers, would be happy to see the back of it. Inside the MSPs' group there is confusion and little consensus on a forward strategy.

In the minds of many Labour politicians, the strategy to defeat the SNP adopted from the Seventies onwards has failed in the most dramatic fashion. They fear that instead of doing down the SNP they have emboldened it to the point that for the first time in a generation Scottish Labour is looking at losing Westminster seats in numbers, and could be out of power in Holyrood for more than just one term.

And now, after Salmond's publication last week of a white paper on constitutional change, they are also facing up to their personal nightmare scenario of the SNP holding and winning an independence referendum.

To rescue them in their darkest hour they have turned to a person many inside the Labour Party believe is one the architects of their predicament, as a devolution enthusiast and someone who wants more powers for Holyrood. They have turned to her not because they believe her strategy will work but because it's the price they have to pay to have Alexander as their leader.

As a solution for Scottish Labour, Alexander has her attractions. She is bright, she has vision and she offers the party a chance to distance itself from the managerialism personified by its last leader.

According to Alexander's supporters that managerial approach is now personified by her principal rival for the job, Andy Kerr. Kerr is being passed over despite the fact that he holds views much more in the mainstream of the Labour Party and despite the fact he is by far the best performing minister of the last regime (and author of the only piece of legislation anyone can remember - the smoking ban). Unfortunately for Andy he is seen as being too like Jack McConnell, and a change is required.

But that change comes with a downside. Labour's new Scottish leader is famously bad at making connections with people, adopts a rather patrician air and has a tendency towards huffiness if things don't go her way. The question of whether Alexander has the skills required to lead and manage the egos and agendas involved is one being glossed over by her supporters.

If Alexander fails to halt the SNP, does she have the leadership skills to keep everyone on the same page? If she loses Westminster seats to the SNP, will she be able to cope with the backlash from Scottish MPs, who will blame her and her MSP colleagues for their troubles?

To understand the scale of the challenge Alexander faces it helps to look back at Labour's history with devolution and that history's relationship to the SNP.

Labour in Scotland has always been a pragmatic alliance of True Believers and Cynics when it comes to devolution; those who believed in home rule for its own sake and those who saw it purely as a means of halting the SNP.

Labour proposed devolution in the Seventies because the True Believers convinced the Cynics that the tactic would beat back the SNP advances of 1974. In the late Eighties and Nineties, Labour's new-found enthusiasm for cross-party pro-devolution campaigning was a further triumph for the True Believers, who convinced a sceptical Labour Party that devolution reinvented would see off a resurgent SNP.

Alexander is a True Believer and, as such, her leadership strategy will be to expand the powers of the Parliament, once again seeking to convince the Cynics that this will outflank the SNP.

Her argument will be that when the people see Scottish Labour pursuing pro-Scottish policies and expanding (for instance) the Parliament's tax powers, then they will reconnect with Scottish Labour and 'devolution max' as an alternative to the SNP and independence.

The big problem with Alexander's solution is that True Believers are now in extremely short supply. All she is left with are the Cynics - and to say they are sceptical about the 'out-Nat the Nats' strategy these days is an understatement. They will support her because they know they need to change. They will, however, blame her if it doesn't work

Ultimately, it is difficult to see how it will work against Alex Salmond,

a formidable politician at the top of his game and with a strong team around him. Getting the better of him is no easy matter. He also has the tide running in his favour. He is popular and shows no sign of slackening off the pace he has already set. Labour pushing for more powers is also the move he wants and expects. Salmond will have no problem embracing the Labour party's conversion to the argument.

Scottish Labour is undoubtedly in trouble right now, but at least the party has internal cohesion. The 'devolution is an event not a process' consensus has served them well. Shaking that consensus up and taking the SNP on in what is a home fixture for Nationalists is a risky strategy. Doing it without internal consensus under the captaincy of an untried leader is risky in the extreme.

Gordon Archer was a senior adviser to former SNP leader John Swinney from 2001 to 2004