This is what the Hamilton by-election tells us about SNP chances for 2026
The swing implied by the Norstat poll a few days ago suggested that the SNP ought to defeat Labour in the by-election by a tiny margin of less than one percentage point, whereas in fact Labour came out on top by just over two points.
That's a trivial difference, and thus the result lends support to the main message of the polls, which is that the SNP enjoy a substantial nationwide lead on the Holyrood constituency ballot.
Hamilton should not be mistaken for a bellwether constituency.
READ MORE: SNP campaign chief addresses independence focus after by-election loss
It's significantly tilted towards Labour, in the sense that if support for the SNP and Labour was roughly tied across Scotland, Labour would likely be winning Hamilton by a double-digit margin. It's absolutely possible for the SNP to remain the largest single party in the Scottish Parliament if they lose in Hamilton again next May, and even if they lose by a bigger margin than they did in the by-election.
The potential problem, however, is that by-election results do not just passively provide insights into the present state of play. They can also in themselves be drivers of public opinion. In particular, surprise by-election outcomes often generate snowball effects in favour of the winning party.
The SNP are still haunted by the memory of how their unexpectedly heavy drubbing in the Rutherglen & Hamilton West by-election in 2023 provided Labour with a springboard that helped propel Keir Starmer to a majority of Scottish seats in the 2024 general election.
Fortunately, there's a good reason for doubting that a similar effect will occur after Hamilton.
The UK Labour government is one of the most hapless administrations in living memory, and it seems entirely plausible that within a few days the afterglow of the by-election result will be overshadowed by yet another misstep from Starmer or Rachel Reeves.
If the SNP can just weather the short-term storm of a few painful headlines, it's conceivable that within a few months they'll look back at this by-election as having no real significance beyond the obvious fact that it reduced their contingent of MSPs by one.
That said, it's also important to consider the question of the dog that didn't bark.
The only reason the Labour win comes as a surprise is that expectations of a massive Reform UK breakthrough, and a two-horse race between the SNP and Reform, had been allowed to run away with themselves.
If the result had played out in line with those expectations, there was a theory that John Swinney would have been in a no-lose situation, because he could have used any Reform win to rally the anti-Farage vote behind the SNP, who would have looked like the only remaining alternative to a Reform-led government in Edinburgh.
READ MORE: 'We have work to do': John Swinney reacts to shock Hamilton by-election loss
Instead, Anas Sarwar has been reconfirmed as the leading challenger to Swinney, albeit only just - and it's obviously a lot harder to paint Sarwar as a bogey-man.
But in truth it's perhaps just as well for the SNP that Reform weren't able to use Hamilton to establish themselves as the main opposition party in Scotland.
If they had done, there's a danger that the rump Tory vote might have moved across to Farage en masse, and pushed Reform to the type of vote share where they could have seriously threatened the SNP on the constituency ballot next year.
There's something to be said for staying in the more familiar territory of an SNP v Labour battle, not least because Starmer's unpopularity ought to ensure there is a hard ceiling on Labour support next May.
Another consolation for the SNP is that they can point to their narrow defeat as a timely wake-up call for the independence movement.
The Scottish Green candidate in Hamilton took 695 votes, amounting to a 2.6% vote share. If there had been no Green candidate, and if the SNP had taken at least 87% of Green votes, Labour would have been defeated.
In practice that's not what would have happened in the real world, so the Green intervention did not cost the SNP victory. But it's now clear that there are some central belt constituencies that the SNP will not win next year unless they can squeeze votes from smaller pro-independence parties, and unless they can persuade disillusioned SNP voters not to stay at home.
A few constituencies here or there could make all the difference between retaining the pro-independence majority at Holyrood, and losing it.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Reform UK may be doomed if Nigel Farage can't keep talent in the party
SIR – First it was Ben Habib, then Rupert Lowe, and now Zia Yusuf ('Reform civil war over burka ban', report, June 6). Reform UK has lost big hitters who have all played crucial roles in its success. Will Nigel Farage be the last man standing? Henry Bateson Alnwick, Northumberland SIR – Any organisation that expands rapidly will experience growing pains, when disagreements test the leadership. Management students will recognise this as the 'storming' period of team-building. We are witnessing Reform UK's storming period. To move beyond it, the party needs to have a strategy behind which the entire leadership can unite, providing clarity of purpose. It cannot be defined only by what it is against. This is Reform's challenge. It is gaining at the moment because of the complete breakdown in trust in Labour and the Conservatives, yet has grown quickly, without an established policy platform. Until it sets out what it stands for, it will struggle to progress further – and risks falling back. It still has an opportunity – and a bit of time, but not too long – to present a disciplined front and clear objectives. Phil Coutie Exeter, Devon SIR – Banning the burka would be as illogical as banning the kilt or pinstripe suits. Prohibiting the use of a specific item of clothing is pointless – and an affront to personal liberty. What would make more sense is to ban all face coverings, including balaclavas, helmets and ski masks, in particular locations where security may be an issue, such as banks, jewellery stores, courts and tribunals, airports and military establishments. This would not be an insult to any specific section of the community, just common sense. Dr Chris Staley Bredwardine, Herefordshire SIR – Suella Braverman MP is a prominent example of that peculiar 21st-century phenomenon, the authoritarian Tory ('Women should not be veiling their faces in Western society', Comment, June 5). Previous generations of Conservatives viewed banning things as a last resort, to be used very sparingly, and usually in response to political violence. Banning Sinn Fein from the airwaves during the Troubles is an example. Mrs Braverman's concern about our national cohesion is laudable. I happen to agree with her that face coverings are to be deprecated. However, she is quite wrong in seeking to ban them as a first resort. What is wrong with trying peaceful persuasion? If she has tried it, she did not mention it in her article. David McKee Borehamwood, Hertfordshire Leadership of the BBC SIR – The BBC's habitual missteps in coverage of Gaza ('BBC Israel-Gaza report 'fixed on words of Hamas spokesman'', report, June 6) and mishandling of the Gary Lineker saga speak not so much of poor journalism but more of weak populism at the very top of the corporation. It is for the Director-General and Chairman to defend the BBC's journalism, not to launch yet another internal inquiry. It is for those same leaders to act decisively to defend the BBC's independence and reputation above any single star, no matter how popular they might be. The BBC's golden years were in the 1960s, 1970s and early 1980s, when Margaret Thatcher campaigned to weaken it. Then, the BBC was peerless – admired by the good and feared by the bad across the world. Its leaders were cut from different cloth. They were former Servicemen, warriors and statesmen, and won worldwide respect. They knew the corridors of Whitehall and Westminster and had learnt the delicate art of navigating them to the benefit of the BBC and the British public. The BBC desperately needs that type of leadership now. Stephen R W Francis BBC historian Droxford, Hampshire SIR – The refusal of Russell T Davies to make Doctor Who less woke is typical of someone who is paid by a public corporation where the laws of supply and demand no longer apply. Single-handedly, he is destroying a valuable British asset in order to promote his woke agenda. Kelvin Trott Heckington, Lincolnshire Squeezed by Labour SIR – The national debt costs us roughly £274 million a day in interest payments (Letters, June 6), and the Government is adding to this burden every month. Parliamentarians, civil servants and trade unions are protected from the pain experienced by the self-employed and workers in the private sector, who are being catastrophically squeezed. Meanwhile, our wealth creators are leaving by the plane-load. What can we do, when those in power are seemingly unaware that our once-proud, innovative and capable country has become a soft-touch non-entity, unable to do anything right, but still arrogantly claiming to the world that they know best? Malvern Harper Ripley, Derbyshire SIR – Never mind the energy bill burden (Letters, June 5), what about business rates? My rateable value went from £22,000 to £44,000 in April. The amount payable was £23,000, reduced to £13,000 with relief. That's a sum of more than £1,000 a month for a small business, in return for nothing. The impact on the Government's coffers will be negative when I have to make 12 people redundant. Reginald Chester-Sterne Blackfield, Hampshire SIR – Michael Miller (Letters, May 24) says that 'taxes are the membership fee to live in a civilised society'. Perhaps there lies the root of the problem: with increasing worklessness, and claims for sickness and other out-of-work benefits ballooning, not enough people are now paying that membership fee. Mike Hughes London SW10 Beckham's honour SIR – David Beckham is to receive a knighthood for being able to kick a football (report, June 6), while Kevin Sinfield, who led Leeds Rhinos to seven rugby league Grand Final victories and has raised more than £10 million for the fight against motor neurone disease, still awaits his. I'm afraid that this shows anti-Northern bias and reflects the country's obsession with football. Stanley Surr Leeds, West Yorkshire NHS walk-in centres SIR – Wes Streeting's 'raft of changes' to the existing model of healthcare provision, including a plan to keep all but the seriously ill or injured out of A&E, is most welcome (report, June 6). However, while the idea of introducing same-day treatment centres is wonderful, it is not new. A few years ago, I felt the need to visit my (long-since closed) walk-in treatment centre. I was swiftly diagnosed and treated for a condition that would have become life-threatening had the centre not been there for me to use. All those walk-in centres, now shut, were invaluable in bridging the gap between GP provision and A&E. I wish Mr Streeting success with his 'innovative' policy. A city celebrates SIR – Robert Hill (Letters, June 4) says that English and French football supporters would do well to learn some manners from Napoli fans. It is a pity that he didn't look closer to home. I was in Liverpool for the long weekend of May 24-26. I have never experienced such large crowds of football fans, despite being a lifelong Liverpool supporter who is lucky enough to be able to travel to Anfield several times a season. Hundreds of thousands of people filled the streets of the city to celebrate winning the Premier League. You could hear singing and merriment everywhere. I marvelled at what an incredibly diverse bunch of people we Liverpool fans are, with all ages and ethnic groups well represented. Over the three days I did not see anything except joy and kindness, and we non-scousers were made to feel very welcome. Great credit must also go to the blue side of the city, which did nothing to dampen the spirits. It was very sad that the event ended with the incident in Water Street, but even then the city and the club showed their character, pulling together to help those affected. Christine Oxland Wellingborough, Northamptonshire Tailored thanks SIR – My husband was the chief fundraiser for a development mission based abroad, and sought donations from all over the world. I became his thank-you-letter writer (Letters, June 6), and it was my intention to write a letter to each person or company who sent a contribution. They were not always posted, once emails came in, but at least an early response was assured. Learning how to offer appreciation in a different way each time was an interesting challenge, but it is astonishing how it can be achieved with a little thought. For the five years we were abroad, I kept a record of all donations and could make sure that, if somebody sent a second one, the letter would reflect their previous generosity. These things can be done, and are always worth the effort. Jennifer Marston Prinsted, West Sussex SIR – When my son was young, he'd write: 'Thank you for the £2 gift, please up it to £4 next year.' We made him do several more drafts – until he could be polite. Farmers are the custodians of our countryside SIR – I recently drove through the Cotswolds to Wales. The weather was amazing. We had the roof down for nearly 1,200 miles, and were captivated by the countryside: not just the hills and trees, but the corn beginning to ripen, grass being cut for silage, and cows and sheep grazing in neat fields with hedges. We farmers are criticised – at times fairly – but this Government seems intent on getting rid of us. What will the countryside look like in the future, and who will be its custodians, as we have been for hundreds of years? David Taylor Bicester, Oxfordshire SIR – When British consumers go food shopping, they want high-quality, affordable food, with a lower impact on the environment. Supermarkets and farmers work together to deliver this, producing some of the best British food on offer, from delicious strawberries to tasty cheddar. British food is renowned across the world, in part because of its high environmental, animal welfare and food safety standards. Yet these come with costs. Since Brexit, farmers in England no longer receive subsidies for producing food, only for delivering environmental improvements, helping the Government meet legally binding targets. This funding lets farmers invest in protecting rivers and wildlife, planting trees and hedges, and growing food in a more environmentally friendly way. All this is at risk if investment in sustainable farming is cut at the upcoming Spending Review. Much of this vital work would stop, putting farm businesses at risk. We therefore urge the Chancellor to protect the sustainable farming budget. Letters to the Editor We accept letters by email and post. Please include name, address, work and home telephone numbers. ADDRESS: 111 Buckingham Palace Road, London, SW1W 0DT EMAIL: dtletters@ FOLLOW: Telegraph Letters @LettersDesk
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Rayner faces Labour backbench call to ‘smash' existing housebuilding model
Labour's Chris Hinchliff has proposed a suite of changes to the Government's flagship Planning and Infrastructure Bill, part of his party's drive to build 1.5 million homes in England by 2029. Mr Hinchliff has proposed arming town halls with the power to block developers' housebuilding plans, if they have failed to finish their previous projects. He has also suggested housebuilding objectors should be able to appeal against green-lit large developments, if they are not on sites which a council has set aside for building, and put forward a new duty for authorities to protect chalk streams from 'pollution, abstraction, encroachment and other forms of environmental damage'. Mr Hinchliff has told the PA news agency he does not 'want to rebel' but said he would be prepared to trigger a vote over his proposals. He added his ambition was for 'a progressive alternative to our planning system and the developer-led profit-motivated model that we have at the moment'. The North East Hertfordshire MP said: 'Frankly, to deliver the genuinely affordable housing that we need for communities like those I represent, we just have to smash that model. 'So, what I'm setting out is a set of proposals that would focus on delivering the genuinely affordable homes that we need, empowering local communities and councils to have a driving say over what happens in the local area, and also securing genuine protection for the environment going forwards.' Mr Hinchliff warned that the current system results in 'speculative' applications on land which falls outside of councils' local housebuilding strategies, 'putting significant pressure on inadequate local infrastructure'. In his constituency, which lies between London and Cambridge, 'the properties that are being built are not there to meet local need', Mr Hinchliff said, but were instead 'there to be sold for the maximum profit the developer can make'. Asked whether his proposals chimed with the first of Labour's five 'missions' at last year's general election – 'growth' – he replied: 'If we want to have the key workers that our communities need – the nurses, the social care workers, the bus drivers, the posties – they need to have genuinely affordable homes. 'You can't have that thriving economy without the workforce there, but at the moment, the housing that we are delivering is not likely to be affordable for those sorts of roles. 'It's effectively turning the towns into commuter dormitories rather than having thriving local economies, so for me, yes, it is about supporting the local economy.' Mr Hinchliff warned that the 'bottleneck' which slows housebuilding 'is not process, it's profit'. The developer-led housing model is broken. It has failed to deliver affordable homes. Torching environmental safeguards won't fix it—the bottleneck isn't just process, it's profit. We need a progressive alternative: mass council house building in sustainable communities. — Chris Hinchliff MP (@CHinchliffMP) June 6, 2025 Ms Rayner, the Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Secretary, is fronting the Government's plans for 1.5 million new homes by 2029. Among the proposed reforms is a power for ministers to decide which schemes should come before councillors, and which should be delegated to local authority staff, so that committees can 'focus their resources on complex or contentious development where local democratic oversight is required'. Natural England will also be able to draft 'environmental delivery plans (EDPs)' and acquire land compulsorily to bolster conservation efforts. Mr Hinchliff has suggested these EDPs must come with a timeline for their implementation, and that developers should improve the conservation status of any environmental features before causing 'damage' – a proposal which has support from at least 43 cross-party MP backers. MPs will spend two days debating the Bill on Monday and Tuesday. Chris Curtis, the Labour MP for Milton Keynes North, warned that some of Mr Hinchliff's proposals 'if enacted, would deepen our housing crisis and push more families into poverty'. He said: 'I won't stand by and watch more children in the country end up struggling in temporary accommodation to appease pressure groups. No Labour MP should. 'It's morally reprehensible to play games with this issue. 'These amendments should be withdrawn.'
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
DAILY MAIL COMMENT: Why the death of the Tory Party has been greatly exaggerated
Has the death of the Tory Party, like that of Mark Twain, been greatly exaggerated?There are good reasons to think that after nearly 200 years, it has breathed its last as a major force in British politics. The failure to properly address voters' concerns during a decade and a half in government led to a catastrophic collapse in public faith and electoral annihilation. With the Tory brand badly tarnished, the party languishes in the polls behind Labour and Reform UK. No wonder some have read it the last rites. And yet, under Kemi Badenoch there are encouraging signs the party is flickering back to life. She is a thoughtful leader who is determined to do the right thing – insofar as the Westminster circus will allow. She is also a politician of substance, rather than soundbite. It is understandable she wants to take time to put a coherent policy platform together, rather than indulging in knee-jerk politics. Her review into the European Convention on Human Rights, which enables activist judges to prevent the deportation from Britain of foreign criminals and Channel migrants, is a case in point. Like many, the Tory leader increasingly believes that you can faithfully adhere to the jurisdiction of the Strasbourg court, or have an elected Parliament that responds to the wishes of voters, but not both. But it's right she looks at all the issues involved in leaving. One reason for such huge disillusionment with the Conservatives is that in power they repeatedly promised one thing and then did another. This shabby habit has been taken to new heights by Labour. Does anyone seriously believe the Government, led by a die-hard human rights lawyer, will keep its word and legislate to restrict the abuse of the ECHR? With the comprehensive spending review due next week, another claim made by Sir Keir Starmer and his Chancellor will take a bashing: That Labour is fiscally responsible. Before the election, their mantra was never to 'play fast and loose' with the public finances. In fact, Rachel Reeves has made an unholy mess – awarding excessive public-sector pay rises to placate the unions, hiking taxes on businesses and letting borrowing go through the roof. She toyed with reining in the out-of-control welfare budget only to blink at the first signs of disgruntlement among Labour MPs. Then there is Nigel Farage. For all that he is a charismatic politician, with a gift for tapping into the concerns of ordinary Britons, his policies so far lack credibility. His plan to increase the tax-free allowance to £20,000 a year is a wonderful aspiration, but it would cost an eye-watering £80billion. And when one of the UK's biggest problems is the unsustainable rise of the welfare bill, his baffling pledge to end the popular two-child benefit cap would make things worse. Frequent damaging rows also erupt within Reform UK. Has the party the experience and temperament to run the country? As Sir Keir and Mr Farage try to outbid each other with extravagant promises, Mrs Badenoch has an opportunity. While re-energising the Tories, she must communicate vigorously that they represent common sense, law and order, fiscal restraint and controlled migration. She has an impressive team of shadow ministers. Could their talents be utilised more? It would be absurd to defenestrate Mrs Badenoch after just seven months. Anyone who thinks her party can suddenly jump to the top of the polls is delusional. But as Sir Keir's popularity sinks lower by the day, she is beginning to hit her stride.
