When this newspaper first wrote about Labour's Falkirk problems, most people believed it raised issues that were confined to one Scottish town in the central belt.
Unite's blatant attempt to help Karie Murphy by recruiting new members seemed suspicious, but no-one predicted the ructions it would cause.
Five months after our first story, it is now one of the major political stories of the year and has presented Ed Miliband with his biggest crisis.
Not only has the row created a standoff between Labour and Unite, the party's biggest donor – but it was followed by the resignation of election co-ordinator Tom Watson and the suspensions of Murphy and local constituency chair, Stevie Deans. More importantly, it seems inevitable that Falkirk will lead to the most radical set of internal reforms since Tony Blair's Clause 4 moment.
The end result will be a redrawing of the historic relationship between affiliated unions and the party. As we reveal today, the fiasco is spilling out into other areas of public life.
According to a Unite official, the union threatened to shut the refinery in Grangemouth unless Ineos rescinded the suspension of Deans, who works at the plant.
Many of the new members recruited by Unite apparently worked for Ineos.
Strike action would have been catastrophic: the plant is one of Scotland's lifelines, and a shutdown would have had costly implications.
This never-ending saga comes back to one key point: Labour's refusal to publish its report into what happened in Falkirk has backfired badly.
It has also undermined Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont, whose own party executive has not been given a copy of the report.
Miliband should realise the damage this secrecy is causing and release the dossier as soon as possible.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article