Scotland on Sunday highlights lingering questions over what precisely tipped Mr Purcell over the edge a couple of weeks ago, and the paper has also looked into one of his babies - a construction quango called City Building - which its alleged doubled its wages bill to the benefit of Labour members and also lavished money on hospitality benefiting the party.
Meanwhile, an extremely lengthy piece in the Sunday Times outlines links between the former Glasgow City Council leader and top Labour donor Willie Haughey, in what it describes as a "cash for favours/access" row. Mr Haughey refutes the links with Mr Purcell, and a shorter story in the Sunday Herald highlights his denial.
Back to SoS, and in view of the fact that much comment has been passed to the effect that Mr Purcell merely stoked the flames of intrigue by hiring his own legal and PR team to handle his resignation, particularly interesting are comments by his media guru Jack Irvine, who has responded to criticism regarding his handling of the affair by saying:
There are many hidden issues and many layers to this. All sorts of issues about internecine Labour strife, and Old Labour versus New Labour in the council. It was not in my client's interests for all this internecine stuff to come out.Well if that's the case why highlight this now? Surely this only adds to the intrigue? Thus Mr Irvine either seems to have further fanned the flames or he's trying to divert the fire away from Mr Purcell and on to the wider Labour movement in Glasgow.
And back in the Sunday Times commentator Gerry Hassan continues his Byzantine Labour theme, and suggests that the party must take the bull by the horns and renew itself to invigorate Scottish politics, calling this possibility Scottish Labour's Clause IV moment:
The party has dramatically and publicly to change, to renew itself. It has to announce this change and attempt to reintroduce itself to the public. This would involve a Labour leader having the courage to say openly that the old ways don’t work any more and are counterproductive, that the party was going to dismantle the old Labour state and embark on a new era of politics.Thus could the Purcell affair represent a turning point in Scottish politics of revolutionary magnitude, or could the whole thing fizzle out as per previous scandals? Who knows, but there certainly does seem to be something in the air. On the other hand, like the Westminster expenses scandal as the precursor to epoch-making reform in London, after a bit of cosmetic change and a few people hung out to dry, things might well continue largely unchanged.
This would be Scottish Labour’s Clause Four moment and could be bigger than that. It would be a moment of epiphany, igniting Scottish politics and terrifying Labour’s opponents.