How Labour beat the odds — and rocked the SNP
To be fair to the press pack, it was not just the commentators, pundits and bookies who rubbished the party's prospects in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. Some of the criticism came from inside the tent.
Last week, one Labour insider told The Times the party should expect to get 'quite considerably humped'.
Another told the Record: 'It was supposed to be a two-horse race between Labour and the SNP, but we selected a donkey and look like coming third.'
Jackie Baillie, Anas Sarwar and Davy Russell (Image: Colin Mearns/The Herald) The thing about donkeys though, is they are known for being sure-footed, steady and persistent — especially when the going gets tough.
Mr Russell, a well-known local figure who had been dismissed by some as the 'invisible man' after swerving media appearances and hustings, proved quietly effective.
READ MORE
The by-election was triggered by the death of SNP MSP Christina McKelvie in March. She was just 57 and had been on leave following a stage two breast cancer diagnosis.
In 2021, Ms McKelvie won the seat with 46% of the vote and a majority of 4,582.
Labour's victory was narrow — they took 31% of the vote, winning by just 602 votes. The SNP's Katy Loudon took 29.4%, while Reform UK came a close third, with 26.2%.
It was, in the end, unquestionably a three-horse race.
'At the start, we were not picking up a lot of support for Reform,' one Labour MSP said.
'And that did change. Reform supporters became more vocal and visible at the start of the by-election. I think, truthfully, what everyone was hearing is that the voters were happy with none of us. That is really how it started.'
But that presented the party with an opportunity.
'We were able to really promote Davy as a local champion — somebody who will stand aside from what is going on nationally and just be at a grassroots level, take up the issues of the people here and really fight for them.
'We saw a glimpse of that when Davy was at a visit and journalists were there and he was asked about Winter Fuel Payments. He said this should be reinstated across the board. He did not look for lines to take — he just said what he believed. And I think people like that.'
The party source also said not to underestimate the power or popularity of lawn bowls in South Lanarkshire.
Mr Russell is a keen bowler, playing to a high standard. He was due to take part in a big international tournament on Saturday.
Behind the win was what Labour insisted was a textbook ground operation.
'We worked unbelievably hard to get our voters out,' Labour's Michael Marra told The Herald on Sunday at Friday's victory rally.
'The numbers in the result were the numbers we were seeing in our campaign. So in that respect, I was not surprised.
'But given everything that has been said against us in recent months, it is a big change — a shift in momentum towards the Labour Party — and it means there is now the real prospect of a Scottish Labour government next year.'
By polling day, Labour's campaign had identified 7,000 likely supporters — and then mobilised an army of activists to get them to the ballot box.
Labour spin doctor Ollie Milne, Anas Sarwar, Party general secretary Kate Watson, and MP Joani Reid (Image: PA)
'We would have known about a lot of postal voters who had already told us they had voted Labour, so we would not have gone back to their doors in the final days or on polling day. Polling day was really focusing on people who were Labour promises,' one campaign insider said.
That highly targeted get-out-the-vote strategy paid off.
'We had big teams of Labour students, people from the local party, neighbouring constituencies as well — lots of Lanarkshire members and councillors out — but also people from all over the country, including Scottish Parliament candidates, who understood that a Labour defeat in this by-election would have been bad for their campaigns. A Labour victory would really turbo-boost their own.'
READ MORE
There is still some anger in the party about the SNP's treatment of Mr Russell.
'It was really unfair,' one source said. 'Some of our opponents said Davy was in hiding, but he was on the doorstep.'
There are some in the SNP who believed the party's attacks on Mr Russell went too far — made their campaign seem 'middle class' and detached — and ultimately backfired.
'We played the man, not the ball,' said one MSP, asked why they thought the party had fallen short.
Others, however, are not letting his victory get in the way of their aspersions.
Former SNP MP John Nicolson took to social media to suggest Mr Russell — a former senior council official in Glasgow, responsible for a team of 2,000 workers — would not be clever enough for Holyrood.
The ex-broadcaster said Mr Russell would find committee work 'a struggle'.
'But brighter members will cover for him, at least initially,' he added.
Party activists watch the counters at Thursday's by-election count (Image: PA) Polling expert Mark Diffley said the result should not have surprised those looking at the numbers in recent polls.
'The SNP has lost on average 15 percentage points in the polls between 2021 and now, and Labour has only lost two,' he said.
'Cards on the table, I thought the SNP would win narrowly, because actually their vote share in Hamilton went down by more than what the average opinion polling is telling us — by about three points.
'And had they gone down by what I thought — 13 or 14 points — they would have won the seat.
'I also think, you know, some politicians said this was a two-horse race. That was really never going to be the case. I think a lot of people did get sucked in. It was always going to be close.'
In his final appeal to voters, Mr Swinney said voting for the SNP was a chance to 'defeat the gutter politics of Nigel Farage'.
Speaking to journalists, he said Labour were 'out of it' and it was a straight fight between his party and Reform.
'I think the First Minister framed it like that because he wanted to appeal to Labour voters,' Mr Diffley added. 'It was the Labour voters that decided this election. They got 32% in 2021. Where were they going to go? And it turns out a lot of them stayed with Labour.'
Reform's Thomas Kerr said the First Minister's comments undoubtedly helped his candidate, Ross Lambie.
'It highlighted us — got us more publicity than what we were getting. The more John Swinney and Anas Sarwar were talking about Reform, the better we were going to do, because people saw it as a sort of cynical political establishment stitch-up against us.'
Reform candidate Ross Lambie, deputy leader Richard Tice and Cllr Thomas Kerr (Image: PA) 'I think everyone who was listening to John Swinney's spin on this will now take what he says with a massive pinch of salt,' Mr Marra said.
'The campaign the SNP ran, trying to embolden and push Reform forward at every opportunity, was not just disingenuous in terms of the result — it was also dangerous, let us be clear about that.
'It was a strategy to get them to 2026, to not talk about their record — about the state of our hospitals, about NHS waiting lists, about the state of our schools. I do not think that is now an approach that can hold.'
However, Mr Kerr was willing to give the First Minister the benefit of the doubt.
'I am willing to take John Swinney at his word,' the Glasgow councillor added. 'I do think he genuinely thought that was the case. I do not think he was playing games. I genuinely think he was a bit shaken about the support Reform was getting.'
At his press conference on Friday, Mr Swinney insisted there had been progress for his party, when the result was measured against their dire performance at last year's general election.
'Last summer, I think people would have doubted the SNP could have been in contention to win a by-election in Hamilton after the severe loss we suffered. But we were in contention. We were not strong enough to win, but we were in contention — and we will build on that.'
'There has been progress — but that, in of itself, is not enough,' one SNP MSP told The Herald on Sunday.
'The party needs to stop talking to itself and take a step back and reflect on ordinary people's perspective. It should have been doing that years ago. Here we are a good way through some really tough times — where people are hanging on by their fingernails — and we have been tinkering.
'It simply cannot be enough to rely on Labour to fail.'
They said it was time for Mr Swinney to make changes in his top team.
'I think a proper ministerial reshuffle is required, and an exercise undertaken to seek new policies. For example, I would call in the former MPs who have experience but have had time to refresh their perspective.
'I can sense that many — for the first time — are now nervous, and rightfully so.
'On independence — again, it can never be enough to simply run a competent devolved government without a vision of what could be.'
On Friday, Mr Swinney said he would 'consider all issues around the ministerial team'. Cabinet Secretary for Net Zero, Màiri McAllan, he added, would return from maternity leave soon.
READ MORE
Another senior SNP insider said they were not surprised by the defeat.
'I knew that we were going to lose it. What was the reason to vote SNP? We are not inspiring anybody on independence, because we are not talking about it — and it is nowhere to be seen in the party's message.
'Then we are pitching ourselves against Reform in a way that I think is totally unhelpful — and it backfired massively. It is almost like trying to replace the old SNP v Tory or SNP v Labour strategy.
'You cannot do that with a party that has never been in government — that does not carry that baggage — that does not have that resentment.
'People are voting Reform from all directions, including many former SNP voters. What is the reason for SNP? Well, it is independence.'
(Image: PA)
'I think it is really disappointing the way the leadership has chosen just not to talk about what the SNP stands for,' they added.
'It is a very odd thing. I joined in 2007 when Nicola and Alex were the joint ticket and was very much attracted to that partnership because it spoke to different parts of Scotland.
'Right now we have got John and Kate, who are, I think, speaking to one part of Scotland. I am not sure they are talking to everybody.'
While they thought Mr Swinney's leadership was safe, they predicted the internal elections for key posts — national secretary, party president, maybe even depute leader — could get 'spicy'.
'I think we will see some movements in those spaces.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Glasgow Times
30 minutes ago
- Glasgow Times
University of the West of Scotland staff ballot for strikes
The University of the West of Scotland (UWS) branch of the Educational Institute of Scotland University Lecturers' Association (EIS ULA) opened a statutory strike ballot on Monday, June 23, in response to the university's refusal to guarantee no compulsory redundancies under its Organisational Change Project (OCP). The ballot will close at noon on Tuesday, July 22. READ MORE: 22 powerful images showing thousands marching in Glasgow to support refugees Garry Ross, EIS National Officer for Higher Education, said: "It is deeply regrettable that the University of the West of Scotland has chosen to make this large number of job cuts and pushed staff to the point of balloting for strike action. "The proposed redundancies are a short-sighted and damaging strategy that will have a devastating impact on the livelihoods of dedicated staff, many of whom have worked at UWS for years. "Furthermore, it will inevitably lead to a decline in the academic provision, research capacity, and overall student experience at the university. "We urge UWS to step back from this path and engage meaningfully with the EIS ULA to secure a no-compulsory-redundancy guarantee." READ MORE: Council reprimanded by watchdog over delays affecting abuse survivors The ballot follows ongoing disputes with university management over the OCP, which includes plans to cut 75.2 full-time equivalent academic posts. The union has raised concerns about transparency and consultation during the process, lodging a formal dispute in March. EIS ULA argues that compulsory redundancies threaten job security, academic standards, and research at UWS. The union said it has a strong mandate for industrial action following a previous consultative ballot that showed broad support for a strike if redundancy guarantees were not provided. READ MORE: Work begins on 'major' school expansion to increase capacity by 500 pupils Members are determined to protect jobs and maintain the university's role within the Scottish higher education sector. EIS ULA is urging UWS management to re-enter negotiations and work towards an agreement that avoids compulsory job losses and safeguards the institution's future. The union said it remains committed to finding a negotiated solution but is prepared to take strike action if necessary to protect its members and academic standards. UWS has been approached for comment.
The Herald Scotland
33 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Our industrial decline gives a lie to Better together claims
The collateral damage has been massive with whole communities, dependent on these jobs, being virtually abandoned. The subsequent social damage is all too obvious with the skilled jobs that sustained previous generations being replaced by a gig economy characterised by short-term, poorly-paid and often unskilled work. The consequences are there in plain sight – growing levels of poverty, lengthening queues at food banks and the scandal of children going to school poorly clothed and hungry. Of course, a healthy economy depends to a certain extent on inward investment but over the last decades the ownership of a whole host of British companies has moved overseas. Scotland has been hit particularly hard with the loss of control over our once-famous banking and finance sectors. Scottish Power and SSE are largely owned by Iberdola and a Qatari investment company. While foreign capital investment must be welcomed, it brings with it the constant threat of closures and asset-stripping. Regrettably however, it is not just our industrial and financial sectors that have been taken over but vast sections of our utilities and public services as well. In a famous speech in 1964, Harold Wilson slammed the Tories for glorying in a country "where the rewards go to land racketeers and property spivs". It was Neil Kinnock who described the then Conservative government's privatisation policies as "selling off the family silver". However successive governments both Tory and Labour have overseen vast swathes of our public services falling into private hands. So, for example, there are now 27 separate rail companies operating in England and Wales and 10 water companies. The long-suffering public have experienced worsening standards of service and ever-mounting costs while huge bonuses and dividends are being paid out to bosses and shareholders. What makes the situation even worse is that the Government pays out vast sums in subsidies to these failing companies. When you consider that in England large sections of welfare, care, probation, prisons, schools and even the NHS are now in private hands then it is no wonder that our national debt continues to soar while public complaints about failing standards rocket. Is this really the future promised by the Better Together campaign? Eric Melvin, Edinburgh. Read more letters Indy would mean 'normal' politics John NE Rankin (Letters, June 20) is obviously a stickler for accuracy. He castigates attributing the "ongoing ferry shambles" to Calmac rather than Caledonian Marine Assets Ltd and, ultimately in Mr Rankin's opinion, the SNP Government. He cannot then resist taking a swipe at supporters of this government, which he says "could not run a country". Whether or not the SNP could successfully run an independent Scotland is a matter of opinion. What is a matter of fact, however, is that Mr Rankin's opinion of the SNP would be tested by the Scottish electorate in all subsequent elections post-independence. The SNP would stand or fall on its record of government alone. In other words, we would have "normal" politics where voting would be dominated by the same concerns as every other Western European democracy. And, oh yes, the Scottish electorate would not have its near neighbour's choice imposed on it by sheer weight of numbers. David S McCartney, Forres. Make Scotland a beacon for peace Watching the latest developments in the Middle East war from Scotland can make you feel depressed and powerless. Yet Scotland is involved, and should be taking a strong stance against the war. Firstly Scotland is acting as a staging post for the US bombing missions in Iran and their assistance to Israel's war. Prestwick Airport, which is owned by the Scottish Government, has seen large numbers of US war plans landing and being refuelled on their way to wage war on Iran and to assist the Israeli war effort. It's time the Scottish Government closed this route for war by banning US warplanes at Prestwick. Secondly if this war in the Middle East extends to a global war Scotland's nuclear base at Faslane will be the number one target for attack and if it's hit then much of Glasgow will disappear surely it's time that this expensive and ineffective nuclear base was closed. Thirdly Scottish arms industries are supplying the Israeli war machines with vital spare parts and it's time this was ended. Of course I realise that none of this can be achieved while Scotland is part of the UK and where Keir Starmer's Labour Government is guilty of failing to condemn Israel for genocide in Gaza or the US for its warlike interventions' instead they are grovelling to Donal Trump in the hope of crumbs from his table. Support for Scottish independence has reached a new high of 56% recently. Now let's turn that into a pro-independence majority in the Scottish elections next year. If that happens the Scottish Parliament should declare our independence and end our complicity in war and instead make Scotland a beacon for peace in the world. Hugh Kerr, Edinburgh. • I'm an idiot. I admit it. I believed Donald Trump when he said before his election that there would be no more of America's endless wars far from America's shores. Instead he has thrown in his lot with America's triad of evil – the military industrial complex, the Neocons, and the powerful Israeli lobby. Benjamin Netanyahu, facing three charges of corruption at home, has achieved his long-held ambition of bringing the United States into a war with Iran. Trump promised to end the war in Ukraine. He hasn't. He promised to bring peace to the Middle East. He hasn't. Instead he has continued with his country's history of bombing countries and killing thousands. Hiroshima. Nagasaki. Vietnam. Cambodia. Laos. Iraq. Somalia. Libya. Syria. Yemen. Iran. Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. William Loneskie, Lauder. Donald Trump (Image: PA)Give us back our licence fee BBC Scotland boasts that Scotland gets 90% of its licence fee for funding. Given the heavy Anglo-centric bias of the BBC platforms funded by the UK-wide licence fee (BBC News 24, Radios 4 and 5 etc), why don't we have 100% of our licence fee back, and use it in Scotland to make programmes relevant to us, our history and culture? Scots traversed Europe for 500 years, then the globe for the next 300, so it need not be parochial. There is also income from BBC Commercial, which brings in a couple of billion pounds a year. Why does Scotland not share in that? GR Weir, Ochiltree. Politicising the bus pass The US Government's cackhanded launch of a 'Trump card' golden visa scheme, its promotional card bearing the visage and signature of that country's current elected head of state, conflates state functions with the personal identity of an incumbent officeholder. That sort of nonsense befits authoritarian tyrannies not democracies Sadly but somehow not surprisingly, the shambles echoes the sorry state of Scotland's bus passes. Rather than simply calling them bus passes, as happened for decades, the separatist regional government emblazons them with the crux decussata. They carry the irrelevant legend 'Saltire cards' (not even their formal name), predictably stylised without a space. English bus passes are at least more suitably named to reflect their purpose. They do bear a St George's Cross though: Scottish separatists' divisive identity politics have spread poison down south, alas. Ought one, though, to call Scotland's bus passes merely 'bus passes'? The scheme's website describes what is properly known as the national entitlement card as 'Scotland's National Smartcard', again grammatically wrong as well as ideologically questionable. In principle, enabling some local government services to be offered digitally could be a helpful move. But an overtly politicised design combined with the Orwellian whiff of identity cards introduced by the back door bear the grubby fingerprints of nationalist authoritarianism. Witness their unthinking use on buses even by primary school pupils. Christopher Ruane, Lanark.
The Herald Scotland
33 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
Vested interests killed new national park - SNP should be ashamed
One of the key characteristics of the debate over the Park was inaccurate information in the media, which was distributed to residents via mail-drops. We noticed a similarity to the campaign against the deposit return scheme, another one of Action to Protect Rural Scotland's key areas of work, which was also subject to a campaign to discredit it. These tactics have, once again, proved extremely effective, and the plans for a new National Park in Galloway have been axed. A detailed look at the consultation analysis confirms that the anti-campaign had an insidious impact on the outcome. The Government made the decision to scrap the Park, despite their knowledge that most of the arguments being used against the National Park had no basis in evidence, whereas the arguments used in support were generally evidence–based. Read more Worse than this, the Scottish Government used the consultation process as a numbers game, something that consultations are not designed to do. Consultations are used to gather information about complex policy proposals, and, in this case, a proposal with a number of options: for the area that Park would cover, powers of the Park, governance arrangements, among other things. This consultation, though, has been used as a de facto referendum by the Scottish Government in their decision making, as evidenced by the Cabinet Secretary emphasising the exact numbers from the consultation response, despite the NatureScot report cautioning against the approach in their report. This problem was compounded by the Scottish Government failing to weigh any of the answers according to whether their objections to a National Park had a basis in fact. NatureScot reported that the core of the opposition was based on concerns over the potential negative impact of the Park but then said. 'We would note that many of these issues raised in the responses to the consultation are not supported by strong evidence of how existing National Parks in Scotland operate, or more detailed consideration of how a National Park could be tailored to Southwest Scotland to address these concerns.' In their detailed analysis of the reasons that respondents gave for being 'for' or 'against' the proposed Park, NatureScot assessed that 10 out of the 12 perceived drawbacks were not backed up by evidence, and two were uncertain. Campaigners worried about the impact of the Park on the region's economy (Image: free) These two are both about the impact of future wind development, which is classed as uncertain due to the Government signalling an intention to change policy in new National Parks. On the other hand, of the ten perceived benefits of National Parks in the consultation responses, 8 were judged to have strong or good evidence, and one a medium evidence base. It seems like a significant proportion of the people responding to the consultation have been persuaded by incorrect information. The Scottish Government, for whom supporting existing and new National Parks, is stated policy, failed to correct this tidal wave of inaccurate information before it had totally swamped all discussions of the National Park in Galloway. This left three voluntary organisations: Galloway National Park Association, the Scottish Campaign for National Parks (SCNP) and ourselves with the impossible task of trying to get the evidence-base out there, with our tiny resources (SCNP and APRS share one day a week of funded officer time dedicated to National Parks, GNPA have none). That the Government allowed misinformation to take hold, and then, to make things worse, converted the consultation into a de facto referendum, is totally at variance with the way in which Government policy should be consulted on and delivered. NatureScot themselves, in their reports, counselled against treating the consultation as a numbers game saying, among other things, 'treating these results as definitive is problematic' and 'Nor was the survey designed to be a simple poll. Our experience with the aftermath of the cancellation of the Deposit Return Scheme suggests that the Scottish Government will find that cancelling the new National Park will not draw a line under the issue. The deposit return scheme was cancelled, rather than going ahead without glass, which they could have done under the terms of the Internal Markets Act. This turned out to be the start of a whole new set of problems. It led to a loss of £8 million due to the bankruptcy of Circularity Scotland, being sued by Biffa for £200 million, and now they are having to implement a deposit return scheme without glass three years after it could have happened, while setting up all the structures once again, but burdened by a lack of trust from business resulting from the U-turn. Read more Similarly this will not be the end of the pressures from the anti-park campaign. Those who opposed the new National Park: the landed interests, farmers, forestry companies and huge power companies will be emboldened by this win. They won't be stop with taking down a Galloway National Park. The Government has to face up to the fact that anything that clearly benefits the environment but potentially reduces profits for vested interests attracts a powerful anti-lobby. This is no different from public health in areas such as tobacco, alcohol and processed food. Any government supposedly committed to stopping and reversing biodiversity loss needs to stand firm on positive change. Civil society, also, should be alert to the tactics that have been used to bring down the Galloway National Park. If the Scottish Government can't muster the energy to get a policy with such cross-party support, as a National Park over the line, how will we make the far more challenging changes we will need to stave off the nature and climate emergencies? Dr Kat Jones is the Director of Action to Protect Rural Scotland (APRS) which has been campaigning for more national parks for Scotland since 2013
