Both candidates for the Scottish Labour leadership have been quick to back greater autonomy from London.
Ken Macintosh, the underdog, said he wanted to lead an "autonomous party" that made a "positive choice" to stay part of the UK organisation.
Kezia Dugdale, at her launch in Edinburgh today, also used the A-word to stress how determined she was to be a leader in practice as well as in name.
The candidates have hit upon a vital issue. Scottish Labour, as Johann Lamont famously said, was treated like a "branch office" by the UK party after London-based officials removed her general secretary
Her toxic phrase hit a nerve and reflected a widely-held perception about the party, so it was encouraging to hear the candidates speak out.
However, there is a difference between words and deeds. While the candidates were paying lip service to autonomy last week, the UK party was pushing ahead with business as usual.
The UK party, in the middle of the Scottish Labour leadership contest, has decided to recruit new staff for the operation north of the border.
Under an autonomous party, the new Scottish leader would work out staffing needs and hire accordingly.
Under the status quo, UK Labour is the formal employer, pays salaries, and so leads on recruitment.
If either Dugdale or Macintosh is to have a chance of turning around Scottish Labour's fortunes, they must have full control of the machine. At that point, attention can be turned to strategy and policy.
Speaking to activists yesterday, Dugdale warned her party: "We may not be at the bottom of where the Labour party could get to in Scottish public life. There might be another storm coming."
Her party, which dominated politics for around half a century, has one final chance to tell UK Labour who runs the Scottish party.
Failure to do so could make May's general election disaster look like a staging post to even worse times.
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