Polling opens in Holyrood by-election that Swinney says is ‘two horse race'
Voters are going to the polls in a Holyrood by-election that Scotland's First Minister has said is a 'two horse race' between his SNP and Nigel Farage's Reform.
Polling stations are now open in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse seat following a high profile campaign dominated by the rise in support for Reform.
The by-election is taking place following the death of the SNP MSP Christina McKelvie, who had been receiving treatment for breast cancer.
Today is polling day in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. @KatyLoudonSNP has shown she would be an outstanding MSP.
This is now a two-horse race between @theSNP and Farage.#VoteSNP to stop Farage and for a better Scotland. Vote Katy Loudon. pic.twitter.com/UAHcMnHEv4
— John Swinney (@JohnSwinney) June 5, 2025
She had held the seat since 2011, winning it comfortably in the 2021 Scottish election with a majority of 4,582 over Labour.
But SNP leader and Scottish First Minister John Swinney has said it is now Reform UK that are the main threat to his party there – claiming the contest is a 'two horse race' between the two parties.
Mr Swinney, who has made several campaign visits to the area, has spent much of his time attacking Nigel Farage and his party.
Reform have also come under attack from Labour, with a furious row prompted by an online ad which alleged Scottish leader Anas Sarwar would 'prioritise' the Pakistani community.
Labour have branded that 'racist', but as the war of words between the parties escalated, Mr Farage used a rare visit to Scotland earlier this week to accuse Mr Sarwar of 'sectarian politics'.
It's polling day! Great opportunity to show the momentum we have, vote @CllrRossLambie and @reformparty_uk
Vote Reform. Get Reform pic.twitter.com/RzxwQviIuz
— Reform UK Scotland (@ReformUKScot) June 5, 2025
Mr Sarwar still insists his party's candidate Davy Russell can win the seat, despite him coming in for criticism over his failure to take part in a TV debate.
Speaking on Wednesday, the Scottish Labour leader branded Mr Farage a 'pathetic, poisonous little man'.
Hitting out at his rivals Mr Sarwar said: 'Reform have chosen a campaign of dirt and smear, the SNP have lacked all ambition, the best they can offer is 'vote SNP to stop Farage'.'
Stop SNP waste. Stop SNP incompetence. Stop SNP failures.
Elect the local champion that can beat them. Vote Scottish Labour. pic.twitter.com/eQAyS7bdNl
— Anas Sarwar (@AnasSarwar) June 4, 2025
Mr Swinney however was adamant that people needed to vote for SNP candidate Katy Loudon if they wanted to 'stop Farage'.
The First Minister insisted: 'People face a simple choice in this by-election.
'They can either vote for the SNP – elect an SNP MSP – or they will end up with a Reform MSP. That's the simple choice.'
The election comes as polls show a surge in support for Mr Farage's party in Scotland.
While Reform have not yet won an election north of the border, one poll last month suggested they could come in second to the SNP in the May 2026 Holyrood elections.
Polls are open in the constituency till 10pm, with the result expected to be known in the early hours of Friday morning.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cruise Scotland warns government against ‘damaging' levy proposal
The Scottish cruise industry has lashed out at the government's proposals to introduce a cruise ship levy over fears it would deter cruises from visiting its ports. The Scottish Government announced earlier this year that it is considering a proposal to allow local authorities to create a visitor levy on cruise ships docking at its ports. During the consultation, Cruise Scotland, a membership-based marketing organisation that represents key cruise industry players, issued a warning to the Scottish Government that the levy could damage the sector. The organisation expressed its concern in its formal submission to the government consultation on implementing a cruise ship levy, saying that cruises will become discouraged from visiting Scottish ports. 'Scotland must decide whether it wants to attract or deter a sector that delivers over £130m annually to the national economy and sustains jobs in some of the most remote and economically vulnerable communities,' Rob Mason, chair of Cruise Scotland, said. Mr Mason also claimed that if the levy was mishandled, it could result in job losses, cause a slump in local business growth and disrupt a tourism model that benefits communities. Cruise Scotland said that the government's plans are so far too ambiguous, stating that prolonged uncertainty regarding the levy is 'damaging' as cruise operators cannot plan accordingly. The group also warned against creating devolved powers for individual councils to implement the levy, as it claimed this would create competition between areas and would require port authorities to function as tax collectors. 'We must remember that this is a movable market that does not need to come to Scotland, despite all we have to offer, and neighbouring regions in the North Atlantic and Northern Europe are strongly positioned to benefit from any displacement,' Mr Mason added. While the chair said Cruise Scotland 'fully acknowledges' the need for targeted investment, he called upon the government to be more transparent in its decisions around the levy and asked for 'close collaboration' with the industry. The organisation said it remains engaged in discussions with policymakers. Cruise Scotland says that 1.1 million passengers visited Scottish ports in 2024, contributing over £130 million to local businesses and communities. Kirsty Hutchison, Cruise Scotland's market development manager, said that this number could see a drop if a levy were implemented. 'Introducing a levy could send the wrong signal to cruise operators at a time when Scotland is successfully growing its reputation as a responsible and attractive destination,' Ms Hutchinson said. 'The evidence from other markets suggests that a levy risks reducing visitor numbers, along with the significant revenue and opportunity they bring.' The levy has received support in other areas. The Scottish Greens are in favour of the potential to cut climate emissions, while the Orkney Islands Council said it would welcome the revenue it would generate for the communities. The consultation on the levy has now closed, and responses will be analysed over the summer to inform ministers the next steps they can take.
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The tightrope Farage is walking on race – and why he can only lose
What were Reform playing at this week, apparently allowing their newest MP Sarah Pochin to ask Keir Starmer at Prime Minister's Questions whether he would follow other European countries and consider banning the burka? After all, it seems to have led to the resignation of their successful chairman Zia Yusuf. To answer this question, it is worth looking at Reform's other interventions on cultural issues in recent times. For there have been a number of occasions when senior Reform politicians have brutally engaged in the most sensitive and controversial cultural areas. There is a clear pattern. Just recently, Nigel Farage made clear he felt Lucy Connolly, the mother jailed for posting offensively on social media about the riots that followed the appalling murders of children in Southport, should not be in jail. Last July, Connolly posted on X hours after Axel Rudakubana murdered three girls in a knife rampage at a Taylor Swift-themed holiday club in Southport. She wrote: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f---ing hotels full of the b------s for all I care, while you're at it, take the treacherous government politicians with them. I feel physically sick knowing what these [Southport] families will now have to endure. If that makes me racist, so be it.' Politicians from across the political spectrum have said that the punishment meted out to Connolly was disproportionate. Farage went further than most, saying: 'The sentence that was given to her was absolutely excessive and while she should not have said what she said, understand there were millions of mothers at that moment in time after Southport feeling exactly the same way.' The Reform leader also recently said we need to choose which migrants from which countries come to Britain. At the same time, he has been vocal about the grooming gangs that existed across northern England, refusing to condemn some of Elon Musk's increasingly-bizarre social media commentary about the issue at the start of the year (Musk falsely claimed that the Home Office had sent a memo to police ordering them not to investigate alleged abuse because young women had 'made an informed choice about their sexual behaviour'). There are many other examples of Farage seeking to intervene on cultural issues, while carefully walking along a tightrope. In the past, when Farage was merely the most prominent politician in two start-up parties – Ukip and the Brexit Party – his strategy was obvious: simply to generate attention. At that time, he could say things which many (even most) people found offensive, because all that mattered was going up a few points in the polls by attracting small numbers of people who agreed with him. But Reform now engage in these sorts of culturally assertive interventions for a different reason: to provoke a reaction from opposing politicians, putting them in a hopefully impossible position with some of their working-class voters. That mentality was clearly at play when Pochin asked Starmer this week whether he would 'follow the lead of France, Denmark, Belgium and others, and ban the burka' – and Yusuf, before he resigned, seemed all too aware of it, writing on social media: 'I do think it's dumb for a party to ask the PM if they would do something the party itself wouldn't do'. And for interventions that don't involve a public question to the Prime Minister – such as Farage's pronouncements in speeches and Q&As – Farage and his team know full well that their influence in the media is such that political opponents will be asked for a response. The ideal scenario for Reform is for Keir Starmer, Kemi Badenoch, and their collective MPs to say, no, they do not agree with Reform's latest cultural pronouncement. The resulting clips, usually without the context of Reform's original comments, can look as if the politicians in question were going out of their way to, for example, support Lucy Connolly's imprisonment, or, in this week's case, for the normalisation of the burka. Reform seem to think there is no risk in campaigning like this. They assume their core and prospective voters will not be offended by their own comments, but might be irritated watching opposing parties disagree. And, to be fair, you could see that Starmer did not want to engage on the burka this week, presumably for fear of looking like he was going out of his way to support it. But this is another example of Reform being stuck in their own past. They still campaign like a little party, as if their primary objective was to get to 15 or 20 points in the polls, not to form a government. This week's intervention was a mistake, and not just because it cost them a competent chairman; it risked making the party look eccentric at best and sinister at worst. On the specifics of the burka, the opinion research is hard to read, not least because voters are nervous talking about it. While there has been little recent polling, in 2017, a YouGov survey found that 48 per cent would support a burka ban while 42 per cent would oppose it. My very strong impression is that most voters would not like to see significant numbers of people wearing the burka, because of the physical barrier it places between the wearer and everyone else; it is obviously also something which has barely been seen in this country, even as multi-racial Britain grew post-war. However, if they were asked to consider the implications of a legal ban, I suspect most voters would not want the state to get into the business of policing clothing, because they believe personal choice should be respected (yes, there is a debate about how much choice wearers have, but this will be lost on the majority of voters). Most voters would, in turn, be horrified to see women in burkas being physically barred from particular places, let alone arrested. While 'classical liberalism' in Britain is dying – and with it the belief in a small state – this would still cross a line for most people. More broadly, this cultural intervention, and others like it, will only dissuade Reform's next set of target voters to back them. Given their objective is to form a government, they need to get to 35 points at least in the polls to give them a chance (they are currently probably just shy of 30 points). This means significantly expanding from their base of disaffected working-class voters (who will always be their most important) and going after people who only recently voted Tory or Labour. The primary barrier, for these voters, is absolutely not that Reform is insufficiently Right-wing, or insufficiently patriotic, or culturally assertive. The primary barrier for them is whether or not Reform looks professional, mainstream (of sorts), and will focus on things that really matter and that other parties fail to engage on. This group of voters will not vote for a party which looks like a European populist party, or indeed the Trump administration. A recent poll suggested Reform's lead over Labour had narrowed by a couple of points. You cannot make this assertion from one poll; polls move all the time. But there is no doubt Reform has had a bad couple of weeks. Firstly, their implausible mini policy package which promised massive spending paid for by cutting waste; and now a pointless row over the burka which appears to have cost them a chairman. Their focus on cutting conventional immigration, changing asylum laws, stopping small boats, reducing the influence of woke and getting the police focused on real crime will appeal to most voters; and the other parties are struggling badly to answer these policy challenges. When it comes to winning over the public, they would be well advised to stay focused on these issues and leave the cultural commentary to others. 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.
Epoch Times
2 hours ago
- Epoch Times
Calls to Ban Burqas in the UK Rekindle Debate Over Religious Freedom and Public Safety
Calls by British MPs to ban burqas have reignited public debate over the wearing of Islamic face veils in public spaces. The burqa, the most concealing of all Islamic veils, covers the face and body, typically leaving only a mesh screen for the wearer to see through. The renewed controversy was Starmer dismissed the suggestion, saying, 'I am not going to follow her down that line.' Pochin's proposal revealed internal divisions within Reform and opened the floodgates for broader political commentary. Party Chairman Zia Yusuf publicly criticised Pochin's question as Related Stories 1/2/2025 8/10/2018 He resigned on Thursday, citing that continuing in his role was no longer a 'good use of my time.' Other Reform MPs, however, backed Pochin's position. Richard Tice and They further Tice called for a 'national debate' and questioned whether burqa-wearing women were truly making a free choice. From the Conservative benches, Nick Timothy Advocacy group 'If you care about freedom, care about the women forced to wear the burqa. It's time to ban the burqa,' the group said. Zia Yusuf sits behind Sarah Pochin as she speaks at a Reform UK press conference in London on May 27, not all responses aligned with this view, as Liberal Democrat and Labour MPs pushed back. Lib Dem MP Joshua Reynolds Labour MP Mike Tapp Tapp added that if a woman is being forced to wear an item of clothing, 'then that's likely to be part of a bigger problem within that relationship.' He said the government is working to strengthen laws addressing violence against women and girls, including coercive control, making it as serious as physical abuse. The Muslim Council of Britain 'Instead, we will continue to focus on what matters to all Britons: the cost of living crisis, the strain on our NHS, and the need for unity, dignity, and real solutions,' it said. Recurring Debate in the UK This is far from the first time the UK has grappled with whether to regulate or ban Islamic face veils such as the burqa and niqab. While no nationwide ban has been enacted, the topic has surfaced periodically over the past two decades. The UK has repeatedly debated banning Islamic face veils like the burqa and niqab, but no national law has ever been passed. The issue gained attention in 2006, when then-Foreign Secretary Jack Straw publicly expressed discomfort with face veils, sparking national discussion and controversy. In 2013, Conservative MP Philip Hollobone introduced a bill to Local people protest following comments made by former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson against the wearing of Burkas by Muslim women, outside the Hillingdon Conservative Association office in Uxbridge, England, on Aug. 9, issue resurfaced in 2018 when His remarks were widely condemned as Islamophobic, though he defended them as a critique of oppressive dress codes. Despite periodic calls for bans, successive UK governments have upheld the Currently, a Bans Across the Continent Several European nations have already implemented full or partial bans on face-covering garments such as the burqa, often citing national security, social cohesion, and secularism. France led the way in 2011 with a nationwide public ban. Austria, In Germany, while some states prohibit face veils in schools and public spaces, there is no nationwide ban on wearing them publicly. In 2021, the EU's highest court ruled against two Muslim women in Germany who were suspended from their jobs for wearing hijabs at work, saying employers may require employees not to wear religious clothing if they work in a job that deals with the public. These measures have However, governments argue they are essential for promoting open communication and safeguarding public order. According to the The group, which includes leading legal and community figures, is expected to present its recommendations by August 2025. PA Media contributed to this report.
