SNP came ‘frustratingly close' to victory in Hamilton, says Swinney
The SNP came 'frustratingly close' to winning the Hamilton by-election, First Minister John Swinney has said.
Scottish Labour's Davy Russell won a surprise victory on Thursday, with the SNP coming second and Reform in third.
The by-election had been sparked by the death of Scottish Government minister and SNP MSP, Christina McKelvie, who had held the seat since 2011, with the party hoping to keep it in the fold.
Despite the First Minister's claim that the contest was a straight fight between the SNP and Nigel Farage's surging Reform UK, the Labour candidate won with 8,559 votes to the 7,957 of the SNP's Katy Loudon.
Speaking to the PA news agency in Glasgow, the First Minister said the party had made 'modest progress' since its collapse at last year's general election – when it dropped from 48 MPs to just nine – but had further to go.
'We had a very strong campaign in Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse,' he said.
'We had hundreds of members of the party that came to make their contribution to the by-election campaign – we've got to build on that.
'We've got to learn the lessons of the by-election.
'We came very close, it was frustratingly close.'
Coming second in the vote, the First Minister said, is an 'indication that we are still able to perform strongly electorally'.
The First Minister added that his party lost the overlapping seat at Westminster – Hamilton and Clyde Valley – by 9,000 votes last year and by just 600 on Thursday.
'So, we are quite clearly in a position where we can achieve electoral success, but we have got to build on that and make sure we're stronger for 2026,' he said.
In the final weeks of the campaign, the First Minister predicted the contest would be between his party and Reform UK but, asked if such an assertion – which turned out to be wrong – cast doubt on the data used by the SNP, he appeared to suggest it was based on his own perception.
'I'm just making two points about the by-election, two observations,' he said.
'One was that Labour support was collapsing, and from last year to Thursday, Labour support collapsed by 20%, came down from 50% to 30%.
'And I observed, secondly, that Reform support was surging and it was, so my analysis of the by-election was absolutely correct.
'I simply said to people if you want to stop Reform, vote for the SNP.'
Despite the by-election loss, the party continues to lead in the polls ahead of next year, with Mr Swinney saying the Government must 'deliver on the priorities of the people of Scotland'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
29 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Britain Counts the Mounting Cost of Taxing Wealthy ‘Non-Doms'
As the pace of wealthy individuals leaving London quickens, the numbers are starting to stack up: Labour's flagship 'tax the rich' policy risks becoming a net drain on the UK economy. Barely a day passes by without a big investor or entrepreneur exiting after the government abolished a two-century-old tax break for non-domiciled residents — well-heeled residents hailing from overseas. Billionaire founder Guillaume Pousaz and Nassef Sawiris, Egypt's richest man, are among those fleeing to European and Middle Eastern financial centers with promises of a lighter tax load, as what began as a trickle of exits quickly turns into an exodus.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump plans memorial to his mother on new Scottish golf course
Donald Trump is creating a memorial garden to his Scottish mother on the site of his new golf course in Aberdeenshire. The main feature of the garden will be a tribute carved in stone imported from Mary Anne Trump's birthplace, the Isle of Lewis in the Outer Hebrides. The announcement of Mr Trump's tribute to his mother came as Trump International Scotland unveiled the layout for a new course alongside the existing links course on his Menie estate. It is set to formally open this summer. Known officially as the Old and the New, the courses will combine to create what the company describes as ' the greatest 36 holes in golf' on the Aberdeenshire coast. The US president's mother was born Mary Anne MacLeod on Lewis, but emigrated to New York in 1930 when she was 18. She was one of tens of thousands of Scots who travelled to the US and Canada in the early years of the last century looking to escape economic hardship at home. She was hired as a domestic servant at the Carnegie Mansion on New York's Fifth Avenue and six years later married Frederick Trump, the successful property developer son of German migrants, and one of the most eligible men in New York. The US president was the fourth of the couple's five children. Mr Trump has spoken fondly of his mother, who died in 2000, aged 88. He said in an interview last year: 'The Scottish very great people, they're tough people. They're good fighters. [My mother] was funny, she had a great sense of humour.' Sarah Malone, the executive vice-president of Trump International, said: 'With the New course opening now fast approaching, we are delighted to share the final layout of this extraordinary links and the completion of The Greatest 36 Holes. 'It has been a phenomenal journey to create two truly exceptional world-class championship golf courses, across this magnificent stretch of North Sea coastline. 'The Trump family has a deep affection for Scotland, not only as the home of golf, but as the ancestral home of President Trump's beloved mother, Mary Anne MacLeod.' The plans for the second course were approved in 2019 alongside proposals for 550 new homes, shops, offices and restaurants. Planners received 2,921 valid representations from the public about the plan, 2,918 of which were objections and just 3 supported the Trump Organisation application. But despite the significant local opposition, Aberdeenshire council approved the £150 million plan. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
The charts that show why Reeves's spending plans are a fantasy
Rachel Reeves claims she is investing in the country's Chancellor was cheered on by her front benches as she announced more money for the NHS, defence and schools in a move she boasted would lead to 'a national renewal'. In some senses, there were few surprises on Wednesday. We already knew how much Reeves had to dole out in her maiden spending review. The NHS gobbled up most of the money, with day-to-day spending on the Department of Health and Social Care growing by an average of 2.8pc a year over the forecast period. Defence spending has also received a significant boost as pressure from Nato mounts. Other departments, notably the Home Office, were squeezed as Reeves sought to make the sums add up. But while the numbers may tally on paper, economists are already questioning whether they will work in reality as pressures build from a more dangerous world and an older population. There are also fears that Reeves's announcement will pave the way for massive increases in council tax to keep Britain's streets safe. Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), says that while health and defence are big winners 'in pounds and pence, even here, one has to wonder whether this will be enough'. There are other pressures elsewhere. The Chancellor once vowed to never make an unfunded spending commitment but this week announced she will restore winter fuel payments to most pensioners with no clues as to how it will be paid for. She has also announced a Fair Pay Agreement for social care, which will set minimum terms across the sector without any clarity on how the proposals will be funded. Welfare spending, which sits outside Whitehall budgets, is poised to keep ballooning over the next five years as the Government prepares another about-turn to planned cuts to disability benefits. And unresolved questions over levies such as fuel duty will also pile more pressure on the Chancellor. While Reeves's statement is meant to set in stone government spending plans for at least the next three years, her £40bn tax raid last year may not be enough to foot the eventual bill. The tax burden is already on course to reach a peacetime high, but JP Morgan and Capital Economics both believe that Reeves will have to raise taxes by more than £20bn in the Budget this autumn to cover her increased spending plans and fend off increasing pressure from Reform. 'The spending review contains few surprises,' says Elliott Jordan-Doak, at Pantheon Macroeconomics. 'The question is only how big tax hikes will be in October.' The Government hinted on Wednesday that council tax would rise sharply to pay for policing after Reeves cut the Home Office budget by 2.2pc. Reeves claimed 'police spending power' would increase by 2.3pc in the coming years, which documents suggest could include more money from council tax. The Liberal Democrats said families in typical Band D households now faced a £395 increase in council tax by the next election. While the NHS is clearly a winner, there are already questions over whether the money will be enough to keep the health service running. Analysis by the IFS shows there have been just two occasions – in 1991 and 2004 – where health spending grew more slowly than envisaged in the spending review. More often, governments have been forced to top up health budgets to boost day-to-day health spending, which is on course to rise from a 26pc share of Whitehall budgets in 1999 to more than 40pc by the end of the decade. Reeves has set out plans to increase the NHS day-to-day budget more slowly than its historical average – by 3pc in real terms compared to 3.6pc – despite growing pressures on the health service. The plan set out by the previous Conservative government assumed real-terms funding increases of around 3.6pc per year. Johnson says: 'Aiming to get back to meeting the NHS 18 week target for hospital waiting times within this parliament is enormously ambitious – an NHS funding settlement below the long-run average might not measure up.' The plans also revealed the front-loaded nature of many of the settlements, with NHS capital spending set to remain flat in real terms for the rest of the decade after this year. The Office for Budget Responsibility, the Government's tax and spending watchdog, believes pressures from an older and sicker population will increase demand for NHS services by 1.1pc per year alone. 'The pressure to spend more on the NHS will still be great even after today's announcement,' says Jordan-Doak. Economists also questioned whether the health department's pledge to find £9bn in efficiency savings by the end of the decade was credible. Labour will unveil a refreshed NHS 10-year plan in the coming months, which is expected to demand more spending on staff and equipment to deal with Britain's demographic challenge. Another winner from Wednesday's spending review was defence, with spending in this area on track to rise to 2.6pc of GDP by 2027. But there was no mention of a 3pc target which Sir Keir Starmer has committed to, let alone the 3.5pc goal Nato is piling pressure on countries to reach. Increasing defence spending from 2.5pc of GDP to 3pc represents an increase of £17bn by the end of the decade. That's the equivalent of an extra 2p on income tax. Johnson says: 'On defence, it's entirely possible that an increase in the Nato spending target will mean that maintaining defence spending at 2.6pc of GDP no longer cuts the mustard.' There are also doubts about whether Reeves will be able to force through the cuts envisioned for the departments that lost out in Wednesday's announcement – including the Home Office, transport, Foreign Office and environment departments, which will suffer cuts in real terms. Even schools will get a real-terms freeze if you strip out the cost of expanding free school meals. In fact, departmental spending to 2028 will on average grow more slowly than under plans Rishi Sunak set out in the Conservatives' last spending review in 2021. 'We think that these real-terms spending cuts will be impossible to deliver given the pressure on public services and voters' demands for increased spending,' says Jordan-Doak. Then there are the Chancellor's investment plans. Capital spending is set to rise by £113bn over this parliament, with money going on everything from transport to green energy, new prisons and housing. Reeves is gambling that this investment blitz can kick-start growth. But as with any gamble, there is a risk it could go wrong. 'If the Government insists on accumulating the extra spending it's planning over the full parliament, it seems only fair to also draw attention to the £140bn of extra borrowing we're forecast to do over the same period,' says Johnson, at the IFS. Extra borrowing will keep Britain's debt pile rising every year until the end of the decade. 'That borrowing incurs a cost in the form of additional debt interest – and one that's bigger than it was a year ago,' says Johnson. The question was always whether the extra investment would bring sufficient benefits to make that worthwhile.' Government borrowing costs rose in the immediate aftermath of Reeves's announcement. Andrew Goodwin, at Oxford Economics, calculates that the Chancellor's already wafer-thin £9.9bn headroom to meet her borrowing rules has already been eroded by £2.5bn as a result of higher gilt yields. And while Reeves boasts about all the extra investment being pumped into the economy, another key question is: will she be able to get all of that money out the door? Previous analysis by the Resolution Foundation shows that successive governments of all stripes have struggled to spend all the money they wanted. Just £1 in every £6 in planned investment spending over the past seven spending reviews since 1998 actually went out the door. Why? Governments are often too optimistic about when projects become shovel-ready. There may be planning hold-ups, and the construction sector may not be able to cope with all that extra demand for engineers, project managers and construction workers to deliver these projects. 'We now know more about what sorts of projects the Government plans to invest in,' Johnson says. 'The focus must now shift to delivery and avoiding the all-too-common project over-runs.' Governments have in the past raided capital budgets in order to make their day-to-day spending budgets add up. New safeguards have been introduced to in theory prevent this from happening again. But this may simply make it harder for Labour to meet spending demands if plans go awry without putting up tax. Ben Ramanauskas, at Policy Exchange, casts doubt on Labour's ability to live within its means. He says: 'While the uplift to the defence and criminal justice budgets are welcome, this is unlikely to go far enough. Instead the Chancellor has chosen to prioritise the NHS by giving it even more money, without insisting on productivity improvements.' All this is expected to keep the size of the state permanently bigger than its pre-lockdown size. Ramanauskas says: 'The Government is yet to set out how it will fund its largesse to the public sector. However, it will almost certainly have to place even greater strain on the public finances by increasing borrowing or adding extra burdens to households and businesses by raising taxes.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more. Sign in to access your portfolio
