Murphy is the best hope for uniting Scotland's centre-left

His talent as an energetic innovator was perfectly demon­strated during the referendum debate when he literally rolled up his sleeves and took to the streets. Undoubtedly his actions made a definite impact on the final result. In so doing he worked positively with Liberal Democrats, including Willie Rennie, who is another in the mould of being a fighter for the people.

Scottish Labour urgently needs a leader who can work with others on the centre-left. It is unlikely that Scottish Labour will win a majority in the 2016 election. However, by uniting behind Mr Murphy the party would have the best chance of forming a balanced coalition of moderate progressives capable of governing in the next decade.

Allan C Steele,

22 Forres Avenue,

Giffnock.

DOUG Maughan (Letters, November 1) raises a number of issues which are worthy of discussion regarding the current position of the Scottish Labour Party, including that of the nature of the politicians Labour produces.

I have a great deal of sympathy with his argument, especially regarding the decline in representatives who came up through the shop floor trade union route. Most trade union MPs were non-ideological types who could be trusted to represent the aspirations of their constituents and members realistically and pragmatically. This started to come to an end in the early 1980s, when their place was increasingly taken by middle-class "left-wing" professionals who had little experience of the shop floor or working-class life. (I blame Tony Benn and his acolytes for their attempt to turn the Labour Party into a party of socialist ideological purity.)

The result is that many representatives appear to be out of touch, although the example of Nicola Sturgeon and Johann Lamont seems to throw some doubt on whether being a professional politician is a disadvantage. Ms Sturgeon has been a career politician all of her adult life, having first stood for election as an MP at the age of 21 and is now the epitome of the media-groomed, manufactured public figure. Johann Lamont taught in Glasgow schools for 20 years before even thinking about standing for election, and looks and speaks like a normal person, flaws and all. Who is now about to become First Minister?

Be that as it may, Scottish Labour members now have an interesting choice of leaders. Jim Murphy has an impeccable working-class background, witnessed the injustice of apartheid South Africa, had the moral courage not to serve in the racist South African army, and chose instead to return to unemployment in Scotland. Neil Findlay worked for years on building sites as a bricklayer and then trained as a teacher. Sarah Boyack is steeped in the politics of devolution and is committed to local government and service to local communities.

None of the candidates for the leadership fits the identikit researcher-to-safe-seat stereotype: all three have a great deal to offer Scottish Labour and the people of Scotland, so we can look forward to a lively and worthwhile debate. Bring it on.

Peter A Russell,

87 Munro Road,

Jordanhill,

Glasgow.

IF Labour in Scotland are not to be rejected by the electorate at the forthcoming General Election there must be some radical changes.

How many times in the past have we witnessed Scottish Labour MPs voting as instructed by Westminster whips, often contrary to the needs of their constituency?

A leader must be chosen from the Scottish political arena. Surely the party has learned from the referendum by the way people voted in Glasgow and Dundee to see that Jim Murphy would be an unsuitable leader?

Labour in Scotland requires to divorce itself from the party in England and create policies beneficial to Scotland. MPs should then take instruction from the Scottish leadership and cease toeing the line of Westminster whips.

Brian Chilles,

18 Cleuch Drive.

Alva.

I WAS surprised to see the front-page space you afforded to Alistair Darling's decision to step down as an MP and his attacks on the SNP and others ("Darling quits and rounds on Labour, Cameron and SNP", The Herald, November 3).

Mr Darling is surely only stepping aside in preparation for the elevation to the House of Lords almost certainly promised him when he took leadership of the Better Together campaign. He reminds us that his side won that campaign and he is of course correct. However, as he said on multiple occasions, a vote for No was not a vote for the status quo. Although he failed to name a single "job-creating power" when challenged by Alex Salmond, he repeatedly talked of devo-max and extensive new powers for Holyrood. Time will tell if these materialise with any substance and to a reasonable schedule. There will be major consequences if they do not.

Mr Darling likes to think of himself as the Chancellor who steered us through the global financial crisis. I (and I think many others) prefer to think of him as the Chancellor who added the icing and the cherry to Margaret Thatcher's banking deregulation which, combined with the greed of many bankers, created the crash. He and Gordon Brown are happy to take praise for "saving the banks" but they did this at the expense of every taxpayer and resident of the UK and failed to jail a single banker for the irresponsible behaviour which precipitated the crash. Their spectacular failure will be a burden on UK citizens for generations to come. Iceland demonstrated that there were alternative and better ways to protect their citizens, while holding their banks and bankers to account.

Finally, Mr Darling did indeed contribute to securing a No vote. His actions helped to postpone Scottish independence, but as last week's polls demonstrate, momentum continues to build and it is surely now only a matter of when.

Dr Ron Dickinson,

Flat 8,

12 Kirklee Gate,

Glasgow

I REFER to your front-page headline and must say that for someone who won the referendum and saved the Union Alistair Darling does seem a wee bit crabbit. Still, the ermine of the Upper House will no doubt cheer him up.

Roddy MacDonald,

1 Glenmount Place,

Ayr.