Better schooling is the easiest way to dry Glasgow's tears

Those who believe he was on the right track will hope that his successor continues these reforms, rather than reining them back, as one suspects some of his unreconstructed Old Labour colleagues might wish to do.

Glasgow is certainly not a failed city. On the contrary, it does some things supremely well, and it has the zest and glitter of a successful metropolis. It has a lively arts scene, smart fashionable shops and handsome residential districts, including the renovated Merchant City. It has hosted a successful Garden Festival, made a success of its year as European City of Culture and will, I'm sure, make an equal success of the Commonwealth Games in 2014. There has been a deal of urban regeneration, even though there are still too many areas of wasteland, even near the city centre.

But if it is not a failed city; it is one which apparently fails too many of its citizens. The glitter cannot hide the grime. The statistics are depressing and disturbing. Life expectancy is below the Scottish average, four years less for men, two and a half less for women. Obesity rates are among the highest in the world. There are high rates of alcoholism and drug addiction, while almost a quarter of the working-age population is on benefits, many claiming incapacity benefits.

Glasgow has higher rates of teenage pregnancies than Scotland as a whole. Around a third of children in the city live in a household where nobody is employed; in poor quarters of the city this figure rises to 50 per cent. About four in every ten schoolchildren in the city qualify for free school meals – double the Scottish average, which would itself, of course, be much lower if Glasgow was excluded from the table. Finally, a depressingly high number of children leave school with no qualifications or very few.

Glasgow has, of course, suffered the ravages of de-industrialisation, but it is not unique in having undergone this painful experience. Cities in the north of England, such as Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Newcastle, have gone through it too, and their social and economic problems are not now as bad as Glasgow's. Moreover, as Carol Craig points out in an important new book, The Tears that made the Clyde, "for decades now massive amounts of money have been invested in Glasgow in an attempt to improve health and social problems.

"The housing stock has been given numerous facelifts and millions spent to transform and improve communities in a myriad of initiatives." Investment has also led to "a growing middle class. A rise in median earnings, higher levels of employment – developments which ostensibly create the opportunities for social mobility." And yet, decade after decade, the figures remain grim.

Craig argues that inequality is at the root of the problem – and no-one doubts there is indeed gross inequality in Glasgow. She draws on the work of Professor Richard Wilkinson, of Nottingham University, who "presents international evidence which shows that in societies where income differences between rich and poor are not too pronounced, then the quality of social relations is better."

No doubt this is true, and no doubt there is, indeed, marked inequality in Glasgow.

It does not, however, follow that inequality is the cause of poverty – poverty of expectation as well as absolute poverty. Indeed, though awareness and resentment of inequality may lead many to see no point in striving to improve their lot and to acquiesce in a life on benefits, it must equally be the case that the inequality she identifies is a consequence of this poverty which is expressed in low aspirations, family breakdown, and educational failure. No doubt the two play off each other – poverty resulting in inequality, inequality aggravating poverty, but we are back with the old question: which came first? The chicken or the egg?

What can break the vicious circle? Craig is certain we must "make the health, wellbeing and development of children" the priority. She calls for "a fundamental restructuring of government spending and attention to prioritise maternity care and the under-fives". But this can only be a first step. Equally important is to improve the quality of Glasgow's schools, both primary and secondary, and the results achieved. Failing schools decant school-leavers prepared only for failure in the adult world.

Craig quotes several contemporary novelists, often appositely. But there is one book she doesn't quote, though it is very germane to her argument. This is Alan Spence's marvellous collection of linked short stories, Its Colours They Are Fine. It shows us a group of eager, vibrant and happy Glaswegian boys, and then tells of how for those who do not respond to school, horizons shorten and they become less than they might have been, less than they promised to be. Only the fortunate few move on to embrace a rich adult life – and I mean rich in experience and in the ability to evaluate that experience.

There is more than one form of deprivation, and to deprive boys and girls of the sort of education which enriches them and fits them for the adult world of work and responsibility is to cheat them of what they are capable of becoming and to prepare them to suffer all their grown-up lives from the multiple deprivation which Craig persuasively describes. They will then undoubtedly find themselves unequal, but they will be unequal primarily because too little has been done to make them equal to the demands of adult life.

"Let Glasgow Flourish" – fair enough; but if Glaswegians are to flourish, their schools must be improved. Too many young people are now released, after a dozen years of compulsory education by the state, fit only for a life on benefits. This – not sectarianism – is Scotland's shame. Improve the schools and the rest will follow, including greater equality.