THE Scottish Labour leadership race is coming to an end, with today the last day for members to cast their votes.
On Saturday, we will know who will be the man to replace Anas Sarwar.
His former right-hand man Michael Marra or the self-described “East Kilbride Obama” Joe Fagan.
But does anyone actually care?
It is a flippant question, of course. I’m sure much of what remains of Scottish Labour’s membership does. But it is a question that is hard to escape having watched this dreary 2-month long slog of a contest from the beginning.
I went along to the first hustings in August when Monica Lennon was still in the race. Even then, with a more left-wing candidate offering members an alternative to the two men now left standing, the atmosphere was hardly electric.
Of course, the party had just come off of its worst result in the history of the Scottish Parliament – returning just 17 MSPs. There were plenty of familiar words about rebuilding, reconnecting and changing the party. But as STV political editor Colin Mackay put it: “I can't see much on offer to do so.”
At one point, after the hustings, a Labour member approached a journalist nearby and asked how they thought the hustings had gone. I mean, if you have to ask?
Story after story has eclipsed this leadership election throughout the summer.
The renewed argument over independence for one, with the recent meeting of Scottish, Welsh and Irish devolved leaders putting constitutional questions back into the headlines.
Neither Fagan nor Marra have really engaged with that question, nor has it been easy to see a big argument at the centre of the race at all.
There are differences between the two men, of course. But there has been a striking absence of the kind of political confrontation and vision which makes people outside a party's membership pay attention.
Hell, even within the membership.
“I am aware of a number of members, including myself, who are not voting in this leadership election due to the lack of real choice on the ballot,” Lauren Harper, who sits on the party’s Scottish Executive Committee (SEC), told me.
“I fully expect the turnout at this internal election to be historically low.”
She also argued that any future ballots “should have an option to spoil your ballot” as it would give a more accurate picture of member engagement.
Meanwhile, another member – Adam McBain – said: “While the rhetoric from these candidates often hinted at an inspirational tone, they did not seem to reflect this in their political substance.
“There was no radical policy shift. There was no cutting analysis of previous failures. There was no clear and differing moral vision for society from either candidate.”
He added: “I think the debate completely failed to materialise between the two candidates we got.
“I attended a hustings in Stirling and both candidates had similar answers to all of the questions that were asked. In the wider conversation, I didn't really see any great disagreements between the candidates either. The policies that did materialise didn't come from any chasm of political difference.”
There will be those within the membership who have a different analysis of the race.
But a leadership election should be an opportunity to really energise a party’s wider membership and properly introduce its next leader to voters across Scotland.
This contest hasn’t done that. And so, whoever wins on Saturday has a herculean task ahead of them.
