A CONTENDER for the Scottish Labour leadership has distanced himself from a trade union backer's personal attack on a rival candidate.
Left-wing MSP Neil Findlay said there was no place for anyone in his campaign who tried to personalise the election, after Unite general secretary Len McCluskey described MP Jim Murphy as the "candidate of division".
All three hopefuls - Findlay, Murphy and MSP Sarah Boyack - were taking part in a Scottish Women's Conference hustings in Glasgow at which they laid out their positions on abortion, gender equality and reconnect the party with the public.
However, a well-mannered debate ended with a question about attacks made on Murphy over the last few days.
McCluskey, whose union has endorsed Findlay and is helping fund his campaign, had written that Murphy stood for "reheated Blairism", which "will be a sentence of political death for many Scottish Labour MPs".
He said ending factionalism was "beyond Jim Murphy's skillset", adding: "He is an advocate - and, let me acknowledge, a powerful and committed advocate - for the policies which have led Scottish Labour to its present pass. His victory would be all the SNP's Christmases come at once."
By contrast, he said of Findlay: "He has the commitment to social justice and a progressive agenda essential to reconnect Labour with what were its natural supporters among working-class communities across Scotland."
Asked by a party member how each candidate felt about "personal attacks" made by "certain" trades union leaders, Findlay said he would "never" apologise for the involvement of trades unions in the party.
However, he added: "This is a debate about policy and the direction of the party. This is not about people or personalities. I said to my team, the first words I said, 'If anyone wants to make this a personality contest, there's the door, leave now'. I cannot control what people outside my campaign do or say."
Murphy responded by saying he wanted a "partnership" with the unions, but added that "it can't be a partnership based on that sort of acrimony".
McCluskey and Murphy have loathed each other since last year's Falkirk selection debacle, in which Unite was accused of signing up more than 100 new members in a bid to help the union's favoured candidate, Karie Murphy.
Murphy blamed "external interference" in the selection process and said one union had "well and truly overstepped the mark" in Falkirk - views that angered the Unite boss.
Karie Murphy was outside yesterday's hustings wearing a pro-Findlay T-shirt.
After the event, Findlay said of the McCluskey article: "I didn't know anything about it. He wrote that piece. Len is not involved in my campaign."
Murphy told the Sunday Herald: "I'm not going to get drawn into Neil's relationship with Unite. This has got to be a great advert for the Scottish Labour party. It will be a decision for people in Scotland, trades union members and party members in Scotland."
Asked what he thought about McCluskey's "division" jibe, Murphy said: "Shrug of the shoulders really ... I've had bigger and stronger people wanting to have a pop at me."
Meanwhile, all three candidates asserted their belief in a women's right to choose a termination.
Murphy, a practising Catholic, said he disagreed with his Church's view on the issue, and described himself as pro-choice.
Findlay and Boyack also supported the right to access abortion services, but none of the three want the controversial issue devolved.
The candidates for the deputy leadership - MSP Kezia Dugdale and MP Katy Clark - also went head-to-head at the event.
Dugdale, who represents the Lothians, cited "occupational segregation", affordable childcare and education as her priorities.
Clark said Scottish Labour must rejuvenate itself with a set of far-reaching policies, adding: "These elections offer us the opportunity to take our party back, to bring it home, to return it to its values of social justice and equality."
The SNP's James Dornan said: "On the same day that the SNP passed its leadership from one political giant to another, the Scottish Labour party was seen to be still stuck in the past and fighting the political battles of the 1970s."
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