Dunfermline is the final resting place for nine kings, five queens, six princes and two princesses of Scotland. By the early hours of yesterday morning it became stark that the Labour Party had also been buried there. The by-election result in Dunfermline & West Fife was a sensation, its impact enhanced because it seemed to take the victorious candidate by surprise, and humiliated his most prominent new constituent, the Chancellor. The outcome also brought little cheer to the SNP or the Conservatives, but they are inconsequential actors in this drama. There is a clear message for Labour here and a more complex one for Liberal Democrats.

Tony Blair and Mr Brown have set aside much time of late in calculating how best to deal with David Cameron. In Westminster terms, the two men executed an effective ambush at Prime Minister’s Questions this week. This is, however, the sort of spectacle that impresses West End audiences only. It does not inspire normal voters. They are rightly more concerned with bread-and-butter issues and whether they sense that the Government is realising their ambitions and expectations.

On that score, Labour plainly has a profound problem. There were doubtless local matters a-plenty about which voters were aggrieved, but it would be a rare by-election where there were none of those for the opposition to exploit. The outcome reflects the reality that even in Labour’s natural territory, electors find it hard to work out what ministers are doing for them and why they should be grateful. It is not that new Labour has lost its appeal but it is looking stale. Renewing new Labour is a huge and immediate challenge.

There will be those attending the party’s subdued centenary spring conference this weekend who would not want to make the effort. The loss of a “heartland” seat to a party that campaigned to their left will lead them to conclude that the party should change its leader as soon as possible and retreat to ideological myths. If it does, Mr Brown, MP for the adjacent constituency, will not stay long as Prime Minister. To avoid a short and embarrassing time in 10 Downing Street, he and Mr Blair now need to co-operate on the transition more than ever.

For the Liberal Democrats, this triumph could be a curse in disguise. It will encourage many in their ranks to assume that their plausibility at a national level is inconsequential provided they they field astute individuals and adopt smart short-term populism. That similar by-election successes in the past have not led even to a share of power will be disregarded. In their different ways, both Simon Hughes, emphasising his undoubted political passion, and Chris Huhne, placing the weight on his obvious novelty, are offering their party more of the same.

Intelligent Liberal Democrats will recognise that this is not enough. If their party is to be a credible and respons-ible potential partner in office, what it needs is not passion or novelty but change. Much has been said, often harshly, about Sir Menzies Campbell’s age as his liability in this contest. The more relevant point is that, perhaps paradoxically, it is the oldest contender in this competition who is the most committed to the modernisation of his party. It is thought that Sir Menzies will benefit from this by-election upset in his own backyard. If he does not, the longer-term prospects of his party as well as Labour might be no better than the deceased royalty of Scotland.