A Disaffection
The last time Labour in Scotland gained a Westminster by-election was fifty-nine years ago when the party won Rutherglen from the Conservatives in 1964. This was the start of an era of Labour dominance in Scotland which lasted for fifty years up until 2007. Yet a 37.19% turnout at Rutherglen is hardly a ringing endorsement of a new era birthed into being not by some dazzling candidate, some visionary oratory or a new political pathway, but by the stupidity of Margaret Ferrier and by a dysfunctional SNP. But to put it in context this is a Labour ‘gain’ of a seat that they would normally win. It is not an aberration. It is significant not seismic.
Rutherglen and Hamilton West parliamentary by-election, result:
LAB: 58.6% (+24.1)
SNP: 27.6% (-16.6)
CON: 3.9% (-11.1)
LDEM: 2.9% (-2.2)
GRN: 2.0% (+2.0)
REF: 1.3% (+1.3)Labour GAIN from SNP.
— Britain Elects (@BritainElects) October 6, 2023
The results bodes ill for Humza Yousaf, only a few months into his leadership, and the subsequent feeding frenzy of the Unionist press and the party itself – many who will feel the cold chill of electoral vulnerability for the very first time – will make his position extremely difficult.
But if anything the result, despite a huge media investment, and huge party resources being plowed into it, is about a disaffection rather than the dawn of a new era.
As Darren McGarvey writes what was utterly lacking was anything specific about the actual constituency (‘Scotland Deserves Better then this Circus‘): “The whole campaign has been an exhibition of nervous insincerity …The sheer volume of heavy-hitters who have made cameo appearances to bolster both campaigns speaks to the height of the stakes here — and to the painful truth at the heart of this by-election: the most deprived locals are merely useful pawns in a tribal game.”
The reality is that none of the candidates, none of the parties and none of the political campaigns have anything like answers to the areas endemic issues of disfiguring poverty and ill-health. As McGarvey puts it, this is a constituency with bouncers on the doors of Tesco Express and more foodbanks than McDonald’s:
“Poor health and poverty are also embedded across this part of the country. Three years ago, South Lanarkshire Council published public health statistics that didn’t make comfortable reading: two in three people were deemed overweight. One in three was obese. Just 19% of babies were exclusively breastfed — significantly lower than the Scottish average of 27% — and around 20% of children lived in poverty. Out of a population of over 300,000, 41,000 were income-deprived. And the poorest residents of Rutherglen and Cambuslang — two areas which fall within this well-publicised contest – were, at that time, regarded as among the unhealthiest in Scotland.”
Of course Rutherglen is far from alone. These conditions are replicated across Scotland.
The result, if it is indeed a stepping-stone for Labour resurgence will be the restoration of a political class, and a restoration that will be wildly celebrated by the media class that inter-mingles with it. It may also be a moment in the inevitable result of what some have called a Macron election (a government everyone votes for but nobody wants). We are deep now in an electoral Doom Loop, where the political goal is to eject a party and a regime so dysfunctional and repellent that you are forced to avert your gaze from the reality that the alternative is pitifully lacking in substance.
The difference is this time we know this in advance. There is no need to wait till you are disappointed by the actuality of Labour in office. There is no sell-out, there is no disparity between Manifesto and Reality. This time we can fast-forward to disappointment because they’ve told you in advance they will do nothing, their hands are tied, their is no money left (etc). As the scribes and columnists celebrate the victory with glee, the grim reality of socio-ecological breakdown will continue undisturbed by the spectacle of party politics.
This was always going to be difficult. I think our greatest problem is disillusion with politics – apathy. We need to have a credible, basic alternative to avoid a drift to the right. Acknowledge there isnt an easy solution, try not to demonise Labour (although its going to be tempting). The result at Rutherglen is very familiar to me as I live in Ian Murray’s constituency. I’d be interested to know more about the composition of the Labour vote, how much was it drawing from the Tories? Quite a lot I’d hazard. That kind of breakdown, including any insights into why SNP voters stayed at home will be essential for the debriefing.
Derek Thomson was a Scot. And he had become sickened by it.
Darren’s right: the whole campaign lacked anything specific about the actual constituency; it was all about Labour vs. the SNP; unionism vs. independence. As such, it’s symptomatic of the all-consuming binary polarisation that’s currently impoverishing our political discourse in Scotland generally.
True- but how does this come about ? Partly by a media that does not by any stretch represent the majority of the country . When you have constant anti-SNP ( rightly or wrongly ) and muted discussion of the merits or otherwise of Labour , Conservative policies , then the playing field is bound to be distorted .
”Debate ” programs on TV/Radio are invariably constructed to become nothing more than shouting matches between those for or against a particular issue or political stance .
Megaphone Politics discussed as sound-bites leaves no room for real discussion .
I agree, James. As I said, the megaphone politics that we saw during the by-election, and which we see in the quasi-debates that are regularly broadcast as entertainment through the media, are symptomatic of the all-consuming binary polarisation that’s currently impoverishing our political discourse.
But I was heartened by the fact that 62.8% of the electorate in the republic of Rutherglen and Hamilton West couldn’t be *rs*d taking part in the whole farce.
The dust has yet to settle here in Cambuslang. It’s obvious however that the young people did not come out to vote. These young folk are most definitely our future. They are under such pressure financially that looking after themselves and any children they might have is their top priority. They must look at the SNP MPs and wonder seriously what they are doing down there to really affect any protection for them from the rip off energy companies and other shareholder pleasers.
Time now for a return of our MPs to work with Holyrood directly into their constituencies. It is essential that they consult and work directly with local folk in all areas of their lives.
Rutherglen in the 1950s and early 1960s was a relatively prosperous place, with a fine tree-lined avenue as its main street, along which fairly smartly dressed citizens perambulated with a degree of purpose, self-assurance and even grace which would dumbfound or rather ‘gobsmack’ the grotesquely inelegant and anaemic-looking denizens of what remains today of a community which voted Conservative while the industries which supported it drew in workers from the grimy grimness of a visibly declining industrious Glasgow, who trudged in long lines back over the Clyde Bridge at the end of the working day or took the bus or the tram home, quite a few of them stopping for refreshment along the way, needless to say.
The interesting shops are all gone now, from the Grain Store to the drapery shops and the grocery stores, all apparently not even surviving as a memory among most of the stunted population now staggering in ungainly lumps in track suits and trainers towards a Tesco Express with bouncers to keep the emaciated bounders in some semblance of lawful order. This is what is left after decades of industrial decline, mass emigration and catastrophic local government in the entire Glaswegian conurbation, not to mention the failures of devolution in recent years.
In the 1950s and early 1960s a schoolboy heading for the public library in Rutherglen or even the admirable Edwardian public library at Bridgeton Cross far away over the Glasgow boundary would have hoped and perhaps expected that the Rutherglen and certainly the Scotland of the 2020s would be something worth looking forward to. How would the disappointed little chap have voted yesterday had he not long since removed himself to pastures new in one of the overseas territories of the wicked British Empire that was? Possibly he would not have voted at all.
Labour failed. The SNP has failed. Scotland has failed.
Are inferring that little chap should have voted Tory.
Does that little chap not recognise the damage that Thatcherism in 80’s, austerity from 2010 and Brexit have done to economic and social fabric of Scotland.
Perhaps not and the little chap is completely at odds with the overwhelmingly majority of electorate in Scotland who reject Conservative creed of greed, nastiness and xenophobic British nationalism.
You should always vote, Duncan, even if it’s for ‘None of the Above’.
Imagine the furore that would have erupted among the political establishment had ‘None of the Above’ won the by-election with 62.8% of the vote!
The SNP is suffering for various reasons some self inflicted including:
incumbency during difficult economic times
naievity in a devolved government trying to push forward with policies without broad popular support in face of cynical Westminster opposition. (contrast with drug consumption rooms which has been advanced with electorate support where Westminster has had to back down)
poor governance in some policy areas (eg ferries) and in internal party affairs
failure to outline a feasible plan for achieving independence in light of Westminster opposition. Many voters (myself included) are lending or vote to SNP to achieve independence.
The loss of a charismatic, internationally recognised leader with followed by a low quality leadership election.
A hostile Westminster government with little interest in welfare of electorate in Scotland.
A deteriorating economic background excacerbated by policies of Westminster government.
A hostile national media almost uniformly opposed to independence and SNP.
I see little prospect of this changing prior to general election and possibly even the next Holyrood election. (If SNP were to change leader again most people would think they should call a Holyrood election.)
I would add that with little prospect of achieving independence with Westminster opposition unless independence support reaches 60% this is depressing for supporters of independence in short term.
However demographics are on the side of independence and with medium term economic prospects appearing pessimistic maybe best scenario is the SNP coming 2nd to Labour in next GE and Labour forming a unionist coalition at Holyrood. This will give SNP time to regroup without responsibility of office, get rid of some of the current faces and engage with wider independence movement and public.
I can easily see Labour in power becoming unpopular in Scotland such that support for independence increases.
With Labour losses at next GE the SNP (or equivalent independence party) could make the following Holyrood election all about independence. With demographic changes and disillusionment over Labour it is possible for support for independence at this election to reach 60%+ level at which point Westminster opposition would be futile.
All it requires is for independence movement, especially SNP, to get their act together.
It may be nearly 10 years away (nearly 20 years from last independence referendum) but maybe that is timescale electorate in Scotland need to be convinced. There was 18 years of Tory government between 1979 to 1997 to convince electorate to really support devolution and independence is a far bigger step than devolution.
The SNP must make the next election the Independence Election to dissolve the Union.
People are suffering so the SG must use its powers to raise the public funds it needs to support everyone with a UBI of £200 per week and get it in their hands before the GE.
They have the power. It just needs commitment and people will see the link
Graeme – I do not disagree with you but I think your scenario, however much we may want it to happen, is unlikely to be successful because of current unpopularity of SNP due to reasons Mike and myself have outlined above.
Labour actually got 700 votes less than they did in 2019. That’s “seismic”?
The SNP getting 15,000 votes less than the previous election is the seismic shift.
The major takeaway from yesterday’s by election is that SNP voters don’t like the rain!
There was one phrase David Olusoga used (indeed, stressed) in his Union history series for BBC with OU, I think in an Irish context but it could have echoed resoundingly through the whole suite of programmes: “systems failure”.
The same judgement was made by Priyamvada Gopal in the book Insurgent Empire: Anticolonial Resistance and British Dissent, when describing Keir Hardie’s 1907 fact-finding mission to India. Hardie may have got on with some of the ‘reforming, liberal’ colonial administrators, but it was the *system* which imposed grinding conditions for the mass of Indians.
Court politics (royalist or parliamentarian), colonial administration, today’s party politics: the fundamental flaws in the system are not addressable by replacing one chief with another. This is why systems thinking is essential to develop the next iteration of our political system, solving some problems and no doubt creating others that the next generation will have to address. The British imperial theocratic quasi-Constitution has not had a fundamental change (avoiding revolutions, codified constitutions etc) for hundreds and hundreds of years. And it shows. There is no credible response to today’s problems, social sicknesses, environmental degradations and threats. No wonder there is disaffection.
“the fundamental flaws in the system are not addressable by replacing one chief with another” – yeah, exactly
@Editor, I have now finished reading Darren ‘Loki’ McGarvey’s article and pretty much agree with what he says, including the tendency:
“we vote for whichever party we believe is the least terrible option that year”
which is the “lesser of evils” approach.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lesser_of_two_evils_principle
It just produces and sustains evil politics. Intersectionally, some option will be a lesser evil than another on some criteria of discrimination. And as human psychology is pretty much geared to prioritise such choosing mechanisms, it can be readily exploited.
I don’t believe in good and evil, only in desirable and undesirable outcomes. And whether an outcome is desirable or not, and whether any given outcome is more desirable or less desirable than another, depends entirely on whoever’s doing the desiring.
That’s the challenge of modern political campaigning: to convince the voter that you’re offering something that’s desirable to them; or, at least, to convince them that what your selling is something less undesirable to them than what the competition’s offering. That is, political campaigning has become a matter of product marketing.
It’s hard to get people to turn out to vote when all you can offer them is something that they don’t want to buy, but don’t want it less than they do the other guy’s sh*t.
‘We are deep now in an electoral Doom Loop, where the political objective is to eject a party’.
This is true but it is not entirely new; ‘kicking the rascals out’ has been part of democratic politics since the extension of the vote to the masses over a century ago.
More worrying is the absence of any political party capable of energizing and enthusing voters. The SNP did so briefly from 2007 till 2015. As its failure has become more and more apparent, there is no alternative – particularly on the left, where the working class has traditionally placed its hopes.
Yesterday, the Scottish Socialist Party candidates got 0.9% of votes. The same candidate got triple that in the 2005 general election.
Across Europe, new parties – often call insurgent parties – have emerged. The level of political commitment needed to create such a party in Scotland appears to be missing.
The ‘spectacle of party politics’ has its limitations but it is vastly preferable to any likely alternative.
Labour in 1997 also promised very little, but expectations remained high regardless. Arguably they achieved a lot, but in very different circumstances
The Labour Party promised a whole manifesto of policies, which it branded as a ‘Third Way’ synthesis of traditional ‘left-wing’ and traditional ‘right-wing’ politics that overcame/went beyond/surpassed them limitations of both.
In particular, it promised: to increase the share of national income we spend on education; freeze the basic and top rates of income tax; provide the conditions for stable growth and low inflation; get more young people into work or education; abolish child poverty; rebuild the the welfare state on a foundation of care in the community; reduce the time it takes persistent juvenile offenders to come to court; develop an integrated transport policy to reduce congestion and pollution; decentralise power throughout the UK through a process of devolution; and counter the antipathy towards the Union of both the ‘right’ and the ‘left’ and establish the UK as a leading influencer in European decision-making
The main interpreter of the ‘Third Way’ in Britain was the sociologist, Anthony Giddens, who saw it as a rejection of scientific state socialism, which seeks to abolish capitalism as a mode of production or ‘form of life’ and modernity as the cultural expression of that mode of production, in favour of an ethical communitarian socialism that seeks only to remove the the unjust elements of capitalism by providing social welfare and other ‘solidarities’.
The Third Way was and still is criticised by the conservative left as a betrayal of tradititional left-wing values and by the conservative right as a betrayal of traditional liberal and libertarian values. But it was on this promising manifesto that Labour generated that tsunami of expectation that swept the country and Labour into power in 1997.
Interesting to note that Labour got 43.7% of vote in 1997 which generated such a massive majority.
Conservatives got 40% of vote in 2019 elections and an 80 seat majorities.
Both Labour 1997 and Conservatives 2019 election victories were described as an overwhelming endorsement of their policies.
In 2021 Holyrood election SNP got 47% of vote in constituency and 40% of vote in list (average 43.5%) but this did not give them a majority. This was described in many quarters as a failure by SNP .
I am a proponent of proportional representation as the parliament better represents how the public have voted overall and it encourages people to vote for their preferred option rather than against their least preferred option.
The outcome and descriptions of these elections in such vastly different terms on such similar voting shares show that context is everything.
Yep, any voting system that prevents a single party from gaining a majority of the seats in our legislative assemblies would get my vote.