Glasgow Central

2015 Result:
Conservative: 2359 (6%)
Labour: 12996 (33.1%)
Lib Dem: 612 (1.6%)
SNP: 20658 (52.5%)
Green: 1559 (4%)
UKIP: 786 (2%)
TUSC: 119 (0.3%)
Others: 229 (0.6%)
MAJORITY: 7662 (19.5%)

Category: Semi-marginal SNP seat

Geography: Scotland, Glasgow. Part of the Glasgow council area.

Main population centres: Glasgow.

Profile: Covers the city centre itself and the main commercial and shopping areas of Glasgow, plus the two city centre university campuses, Glasgow Caledonian and the University of Strathclyde. The economic renewal of Glasgow since the 1990s has led to rapidly rising property prices and some gentrification, especially in the areas closest to the city centre, Merchant City and Glasgow Green - this makes this the most educated and affluent of the Glasgow seats, even though much of it remains deep in poverty. North of the Clyde the Calton area suffers severe deprivation with major problems of unemployment, crime, drug abuse and prostitution. Life expectancy here in the low 50s, below that in much of the third world. It has been troubled with sectarian and gang violence. Across the river the Gorbals have as bad a reputation, though of some of the most decayed tower blocks and worst slums were cleared in the 1990s. Further south Pollokshields, once a Victorian garden city development, is the heart of the city`s Muslim community, home to a large Pakistani population that provided the constituency with its last two MPs, Mohammed Sarwar and his son Anas.

Politics: Like most of the Glasgow seats, this was a safe Labour seat until the 2015 SNP landslide.


Current MP
ALISON THEWLISS (SNP) Former Parliamentary assistant. Glasgow councillor. First elected as MP for Glasgow Central in 2015.
Past Results
2010
Con: 2158 (7%)
Lab: 15908 (52%)
LDem: 5010 (16%)
SNP: 5357 (18%)
Oth: 2147 (7%)
MAJ: 10551 (35%)
2005
Con: 1757 (6%)
Lab: 13518 (48%)
LDem: 4987 (18%)
SNP: 4148 (15%)
Oth: 3627 (13%)
MAJ: 8531 (30%)
2001*
Con: 1082 (5%)
Lab: 13235 (65%)
LDem: 1105 (5%)
SNP: 3417 (17%)
Oth: 1626 (8%)
MAJ: 9818 (48%)
1997
Con: 1484 (6%)
Lab: 19616 (73%)
LDem: 1061 (4%)
SNP: 3748 (14%)
Oth: 904 (3%)
MAJ: 15868 (59%)

2015 Candidates
SIMON BONE (Conservative)
ANAS SARWAR (Labour) Born 1983, son of Mohammed Sarwar, former MP for Glasgow Central. Educated at Hutchesons Grammar. Dentist. Contested Glasgow region in the 2007 Scottish elections. MP for Glasgow Central 2010 to 2015.
CHRIS YOUNG (Liberal Democrat) Educated at St Andrews University. Student. Contested Glasgow Govan 2007, Glasgow Central 2010.
STUART MASKELL (UKIP)
CASS MACGREGOR (Green)
ALISON THEWLISS (SNP) Parliamentary assistant. Glasgow councillor.
KATIE RHODES (Socialist Equality)
JAMES MARRIS (CISTA)
ANDREW ELLIOTT (TUSC)
Links
Comments - 138 Responses on “Glasgow Central”
  1. Simon – just checked.

    In 2005 Others here were:

    Greens 5%
    SSP 4%
    BNP 2.5%
    SocLab 1%
    Christian 1%
    Comm. 0.3%

    Also spotted that Bill Kidd stood here for the SSP in 1989 and the SNP in 2005.

  2. It’s obvious there are significant numbers of people who vote Green on the list and SNP at other times. There’s no evidence of significant pro-Tory tactical voting. There is some pro-Lib Dem tactical voting where they are the main challenger, and possibly some pro-Labour tactical voting, but on a smaller scale, and more where they have a good candidate or there’s an issue such as in Edinburgh South. There’s no evidence of the sort of industrial scale of tactical voting that would be required to defeat the SNP in rural seats if the SNP get 40-45%.

  3. @ Simon – Tactical voting in favour of Labour is prominent among Lib Dem voters in seats where the Labour party are well ahead (around central Scotland).

    Just look at the results in Glasgow Central:

    2010:
    5,010 Liberal Democrat votes

    2015:
    612 Liberal Democrat votes

    The Liberal Democrats have been a comparably “unionist” party in terms of support compared to Labour, so it’s not unreasonable to assume that the majority of that vote went to Labour: remember the Lib Dem’s were in a coalition with them between 1999-2007 and that Labour are realistically only non-SNP party who can win in Scotland/most Scottish seats. If this same pattern is repeated in Glasgow Kelvin then Labour will not have as devastating a defeat in the seat as you might think, but a large defeat none-the-less.

    You could arguably say the same about Tory voters: voting Tory on the list. The Greens did not stand any constituency candidates in 2011, so it’s hard to call how the Green vote will go: while the 2015 vote demonstrates that the Green vote is perhaps less open to voting Green in constituency votes (or UK General Elections), yet with Patrick Harvey standing in the seat it’s clear that the party expect the Glasgow Kelvin constituency results will be their most promising constituency result of the night. It is also important to keep in mind that in Scotland the Greens are actually represented in Holyrood, so this could attract more Green voters to vote Green on both ballot papers.

  4. I don’t think you have the evidence to draw that conclusion.

    The Lib Dems got 612 votes in seats like this because there are very few Lib Dems left. Going into coalition with the Tories doesn’t tend to go down well in Glasgow Central. Their decline is (largely) not a tactical vote, it’s a full scale rejection of the party. I’d also guess that more of their 2010 vote went to the SNP than anyone else in seats like this.

  5. I am quite frankly amazed the Lib Dems managed to actually get any votes at all in some places in Scotland!

  6. They tried very hard not to get any votes in quite a few places…not just Scotland…there are quite a few seats where they lost around 90% of their vote from 2010 eg Rossendale, Scunthorpe, Walsall S, Dudley N

    More than 80% down in the Plymouth seats as well…and Bristol NW

  7. 88% in Edinburgh South I believe… I remember working it out a few days ago, but I could be wrong.

    @ Simon – Yes, there will be elements of rejecting the coalition which prompted Lib Dems to vote Labour, but then again, look at the results in East Dunbartonshire and Edinburgh West – the Lib Dem vote held up quite strongly, suggesting that Liberal Democrats in other constituencies tactically voted for other candidates.

    Wait a moment here…. So Liberal Democrats are not voting tactically here? But the SNP are tactically voting Lib Dem in the Berwickshire seat even with the coalition… Hmmmmmm…. Yeah I’m sure all the SNP voters in the borders questioned the polls but that wasn’t true in Glasgow, because…?
    “…not a tactical vote, it’s a full scale rejection of the party.”

    I suppose it’s as solid as your conclusion that Greens will tactically vote SNP in Glasgow Kelvin whilst Lib Dems and Tories won’t tactically vote Labour, because…

    Well opinion polls suggest otherwise, and you selectively accept
    them when they suit the SNP.

    Let’s not forget that some 75% of Lib Dems voted against independence, and there are clear examples of Lib Dem tactical voting right across central Scotland.

    I’d imagine that the SNP’s vote in Glasgow Central largely came from former Labour voters who voted Yes, who bought their message/perceived the Labour party to be a “branch office” of the UK Labour Party and who usually don’t vote.

    Ofcourse I’d imagine a sizeable chunk of the Lib Dem vote here went SNP – possibly upto 35%? – yet I’d imagine most 2010 Liberal Democrats in the seat went Labour.

    Do you have any evidence to suggest otherwise? You know if you’re idea that everyone-but-the-tories went SNP in 2015 then the SNP would have a much larger share of the vote than they ended up with.

  8. The Lib Dems lost their deposit in 47 out of 59 seats. They did similarly badly in 2011 generally, when there would be less of a reason for them to vote tactically for Labour as it was thought very unlikely that anyone could form a majority government at Holyrood. In 2015, across the whole of the UK, they polled 8%, and lost the vast majority of their seats, whoever was challenging them. I’d suggest that’s a full scale rejection of the party.

    I think your analysis is backwards. I think the Lib Dem vote held up in seats they were defending, because they were the beneficiaries of tactical voting. I’ve always accepted that many Tory and Labour voters could bring themselves to vote Lib Dem to defeat the SNP. Not all Tory and Labour voters, but a good number.

    I don’t deny that a small number of Tories may vote tactically for Labour. I do think that this only really occurs in significant numbers in a few cases. Edinburgh South would be an obvious example. East Renfrewshire is probably another, but it doesn’t happen on a big scale all across the country. As an example, if we compare the Tory performance in Edinburgh West, where we can all agree there was a lot of tactical voting, to North and Leith, where getting a lot of tactical votes could really have helped Labour, then I think it’s obvious that Tory voters are much more likely to vote tactically for the Lib Dems than Labour.

    I suppose there may be a Labour supporter or two who would vote Tory to keep out the SNP but the numbers must be vanishingly small.

  9. As an aside, I suspect that the 2010 Lib Dem voting population would be less unionist than the (much smaller and more right wing) Lib Dem voting population in 2011 or 2015.

  10. On the Greens in Kelvin, I think the problem that they are likely to face is that Green voters are used to voting for other parties in first past the post elections. You can see, for example, that in most of the Edinburgh seats they got about 5% last month. In Council elections and in the Lothian list they do significantly better. Yes, they’ll get a bigger vote than 5% in Kelvin because Patrick Harvie is standing, and he’s a good candidate, but unless they can show they have a realistic chance of winning, then they will lose votes to the SNP, especially as Sandra White is the sort of SNP MSP who appeals to Green voters.

  11. On the face of it, the Lib Dem vote held up very well in East Dunbartonshire. 36% compared to 38%. However, that probably hides a lot of vote switching. For example, the Tory vote went down by nearly 7 percentage points. Where did all those ex-Tory voters go to? It’s not very likely they switched to Labour, especially as the Labour vote went down by an even bigger change. To the SNP? Pro-Unionist Tories switching to the SNP? Hardly likely. That leaves the Lib Dems. That is the most likely explanation for the fall in the Tory vote, especially when you bear in mind the massive effort the Lib Dems put into persuading Tory voters to vote for them. So, perhaps 7 percentage points of the Lib Dem 36% came from Tory voters. So if we ignore the boost the Lib Dems got from Tories voting for them tactically, that means that the Lib Dems hung onto 29 of their 38 percentage from 2010. That’s a fall of 24%. Or to put it another way, they hung onto 76% of their 2010 voters. Of course, all that is based on no switching of Labour voters voting tactically so the situation might actually have been even worse.

  12. @ John – you forget turnout was higher – I’m not going to properly examine that just now but you should be looking at number of votes as opposed of % of the vote. The SNP will have a higher % of vote as more people who don’t usually vote will have supported them.

    @ Simon – Yes I accept that (the Lib Dems support have left in them in response to the coalition), but in turn many of those who have rejected the party since 2010 would be most inclined to support Labour. And obviously a higher proportion of 2011 Lib Dem voters were supporters of the union than that of 2010: yet that doesn’t take away from the fact that most 2010 Lib Dems still supported the Union (the figure I pointed to – 75% – was featured across most polls, and is demonstrable by the large No vote across most Lib Dem areas such as Orkney, Shetland, Gordon, Fife North East, East Dunbartonshire, Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross and Edinburgh West).

    As for 2011: there are a few things to remember here.

    1. Coalition was early days.
    2. Lib Dem support was more widely spread throughout constituencies, whereas in 2015 their support was largely concentrated across a small number of seats.
    3. The raw number of Lib Dem votes in 2015 went up.

    Lib Dem’s were certainly among the most likely to tactical vote, and added to the national deterioration in their support it’s natural to assume most former Lib Dems supported Labour (and possibly even the Tories in seats along parts of the north east/borders).

    Take Aberdeen South or Edinburgh North & Leith for example, another two Lib Dem/Labour marginal seats.

    In 2010 the Lib Dem vote in Aberdeen South was 12,216 and 2,252 in 2015. The Labour vote in 2015 was down by -9.8% (a relatively lower margin compared to other seats in Scotland) at 12,991 (down around 2,000 votes) while the Tory vote rose from 8,914 to 11,087. With a much less crushing defeat for Labour in the seat and a rise in the Tory vote, even with an increased turnout, it’s quite clear that most of those ex Lib Dems switched to the Tories, explaining their rise in share of vote, and Labour: filling in the void caused by a switch to the SNP among many of their 2010 voters.

    Compare that to a result in say Glasgow NE which has had virtually no Lib Dem presence: the Labour vote here collapsed from 20,100 to 12,754.

    As for Edinburgh N&L the Labour vote went up by 2,000 votes, the Tory vote went up by 2,000 votes, the Lib Dem vote collapsed by 13,500 votes. I’m very very sceptical that this quite strongly unionist party vote – compared to Labour – voted more in favour of the SNP than Labour voters in the area…

    Your theory is very confused. You admit that tactical voting occurred in certain constituencies: even when it makes no sense! Such as Berwickshire: Scottish National voters DID NOT tactically vote Lib Dem here atleast more so than Tories – and you even admit Tories seem more inclined to tactical vote, a contradiction it seems -, and again, this contradicts your statement that they have experienced a national decline from their support in the coalition. Remember when the media suggested all-but-one seat would go to the SNP? When Lord Ashcroft had 1 seat not SNP, and that seat had the SNP in second place… 54% SNP in a poll (which was well publicised)?

    I think Liberal Democrats are definitely more likely to tactically vote Labour than Labour voters Lib Dem – shown by the results in Edinburgh South compared to Edinburgh West.

    And regardless, with this decline, and the fact that most Liberal Democrats across Scotland largely rejected independence, it is natural to assume that they largely voted for Unionist parties, and with a marginal increase in the Tory vote in Glasgow Central, it is quite easy to therefore assume that most of the 2010 Lib Dem vote in the area voted Labour in 2015.

    You’re reasoning is quite flawed, to suggest that in Lib Dem seats in 2010 which went marginally SNP that those from other parties voted Lib Dem while the 2010 Lib Dem vote totally abandoned their party to go SNP… What? I’m not really sure the points you’re raised properly address most of what I’ve said…

    As for your theory on council elections – I believe (not sure) that the physical number of first preference Green votes in the council elections were smaller than the 2015 General Elections, as Greens are more likely to turn out and vote. However, there is a sense of that… As I’ve mentioned though, in the AMS election Green voters will be more likely to vote Green on both ballot papers are atleast one of their votes are more likely to be “meaningful” than in UK General elections – the Greens are represented in Holyrood.

    That doesn’t mean that most Lib Dems/Tories will tactically vote Labour – because they won’t – they’ll vote Lib Dem/Tory, but I suspect with the coalition, unionist tendencies within the Liberal Democrats and some unionist tactical voting Labour will pick up much of the Lib Dem vote of 2011 – more so than the SNP.

  13. You also need to keep in mind that the Labour vote deteriorated far greater to that of the Tory vote in 2015 (the Tories even had more raw votes and were incumbents/favourites/second place in just 6 or 7 constituencies – this is due to the SNP picking up much of the ex-Labour vote), as such, a rise in Labour vote would suggest a greater level of support among Liberal Democrats (to fill the void created by voters moving to the SNP), so I’d imagine quite a considerable number of Lib Dems supported Labour in Aberdeen South and Edinburgh N&L in particular.

  14. Unless something dramatic happens in Scotland over the next 5 years this will be the only Glasgow constituency that Labour will put any effort into in 2020…..even then just as a longshot….

  15. 2020

    Prudence Jock (SNP) 23,434
    Anas Sarwar (Lab) 13,032
    Rifkind (Con) 2,392
    MacGregor (Green) 1,654
    Maskall (UKIP) 803
    Beecham (LD) 604 (unfortunately)

  16. 2020

    Prudence Jock (SNP-SF) 16,013
    Alexander (Lab) 15,957
    Helmer (UKIP) 3,930
    Rifkind (C) 2,391
    Brinton (LD) 477

    SNP Maj 56

  17. This is now technically one of Labour’s better prospects if they are going to come back in Scotland; but 10% is a big swing to achieve. In this seat matters may also be complicated by the substantial ethnic minority vote.

    The 2015 election was remarkable not just for the number of seats the SNP won but also for the large majorities they achieved.

  18. Miriam Purdom @ your joke about Malcolm Rifkind standing here.

    I had always wondered the impact that Teddy Taylor would have if he fought Glasgow South in 2015 (more or less his old Glasgow Cathcart)? The Tories took 4752 (9.7%) compared to 15950 (41.8%) when he lost his seat in 1979. Boundary changes in 1983 favoured the Tories (creating a notional Tory seat that John Maxton had to ‘re-gain’) but helped Labour again in 1997. Major boundary changes in 2005 (that included the name change) were neutral, so overall this has more or less the same political balance as his constituency had in 1979. I could see Taylor boosting the Tory vote from 4752 to around 5500 but not 6000.

  19. ”I do think that this only really occurs in significant numbers in a few cases. Edinburgh South would be an obvious example.”

    Yes, that’s true. I remember the BBC’s Nick Robinson saying during the Election campaign that he spoke to a staunch Tory-supporting family in Edinburgh South that were prepared to vote Labour just to keep the SNP out of the seat.

  20. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-33797255

    Ruth Davidson to switch from Glasgow to The Lothians next May. She says that she wants to be based closer to Holyrood but her opponents will accuse her of Chicken Rnunning as the Conservatives Glasgow list seat is not as secure as the top seat in The Lothians.

    The Tories took over 6% in Glasgow in 2011 with the Greens taking 6% (1 seat), Respect 3% and the Lib Dems 2.5%. The most serious threat for the Tories in Glasgow would be their vote dropping and the Greens taking 12%.

  21. Certainly doesn’t look desperately courageous, although you’d have thought the Tories should hold on to a seat in Glasgow. As long as they can more or less hold on to the votes they have, it would require a particularly unfortunate distribution of votes among the other parties to shut them out.

  22. Actually, they may be in more danger than I thought. The de facto threshold for getting in on the list is around 5.5% – the lowest successful score anywhere in Scotland was the Lib Dems in the South with 5.4% – so the Tories wouldn’t need to lose much at all to be at risk in Glasgow.

  23. Indeed, if the SNP do a clean sweep in Glasgow but also hit +50% in the list, they could still snatch a list MSP; with Labour’s constituency losses you would expect them to pick up at least one, up to 4; Patrick Harvie is all but guaranteed to hold a list seat for the Greens, and two seats isn’t beyond question; then there’s the parties from the Left Project, which are likely to make Glasgow their main target seat.

    Could be interesting.

  24. The most vulnerable places for the Conservatives failing to win a list seat are City of Glasgow and Central Scotland.

    If the Tories do drop below 5.5% (as Simon says) they could be in trouble. Here are the significant factors –

    1) Tories drop below 5.5%
    2) SNP poll well over 50% in list vote.
    3) Greens poll strongly…12% plus…over double Tory vote.
    4) Labour lose all their constituency seats in the respective region.
    5) United Far Left Wing Unity Candidate (covering Respect, SSP, Solidarity) out polls Tories.
    6) Lib Dems recover and outpoll Tories (very unlikely).

  25. Davidson actually appears to have had a positive effect on Conservative prospects in the Glasgow electoral region for 2016.

    By-elections, triggered as a result of some of Glasgow’s SNP councillors being elected as MP’s, have consistently shown a positive change in Conservative vote share compared with 2012 (demonstrated below):

    Anderson/City: +0.8 CON
    Langside: +1.5 CON
    Calton: +2.1 CON
    Craigton: +2.5 CON
    Average (for 4 wards above): +1.7 CON

  26. NTY

    I would suggest that’s more likely to be the effect of differential turnout.

    I think there’s a great deal of truth in the theory that Conservatives are more likely to turn out at council by-elections and other elections often seen as “minor” (also European elections).

    In unit terms, the Conservatives seem to be down almost everywhere except Craigton, where they were up, but only by eight votes. That’s not to say it’s a poor result by any means, but to put it down to some kind of Davidson effect seems implausible, especially given the poor Conservative showings in Glasgow in the General Election.

    Having said that, the Conservatives seem to have raised their actual vote in recent Aberdeen by-elections (perhaps due to the 2012 presence of independents). From a Conservative point of view, Ayr East will be an interesting by-election next month, as they and the SNP were neck and neck in the ward in 2012.

  27. I wonder if Corbyn will help Labour in Yes areas.

    My view is that he could have a positive effect but the swings from Lab to SNP were so massive (a record 39% in Glasgow NE) that the SNP can afford to lose many of these votes in the 7 Glasgow seats. It’s only the semi marginal Glasgow Central that could be interesting in 2020.

  28. In a Westminster context I doubt it, and in any case he has explicitly said he would partner with the SNP if necessary in government so what’s the point of voting Labour. The more interesting question for me is whether Scots give Labour a break in Holyrood next year in the interest of keeping the Sturgeon administration on its toes; surely even SNP voters realise that a one party state makes for very bad government.

  29. Glasgow Central is currently not a plausible Labour gain at Westminister, however the party could potentially squeeze in between a strong Green performance and the SNP at Holyrood in the equivalent Glasgow Kelvin seat. Odds still favour the SNP quite substantially however.

  30. If Glasgow Central is not a plausible gain for Labour in 2020 where, is?

    The SNP not only had a landslide in terms of the number of seats they won, but also in terms of the very large majorities they gained.

    I cannot see the SNP having such a monopoly for more than a few years, but the question is where the challenge will come from.

  31. @ Frederic:

    The more marginal Scottish seats at Westminister rank as follows:

    CONSERVATIVE
    1. Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk – 0.6% SNP lead
    2. Dumfries and Galloway – 11.5% SNP lead
    3. Aberdeenshire West and Kincardine – 12.8% SNP lead

    LABOUR
    1. East Renfrewshire – 6.6% SNP lead
    2. Edinburgh North and Leith – 9.6% SNP lead
    3. East Lothian – 11.5% SNP lead
    4. Paisley and Renfrewshire South – 12.3% SNP lead
    5. Aberdeen South – 14.8% SNP lead

    LIBERAL DEMOCRAT
    1. East Dunbartonshire – 4.0% SNP lead
    2. Edinburgh West – 5.9% SNP lead
    3. Fife North East – 9.6% SNP lead
    4. Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross – 11.2% SNP lead
    5. Gordon – 15% SNP lead

    Glasgow Central has a 19.5% SNP lead and appears to have voted in favour of independence in the Scottish Independence referendum. It is by no means a plausible gain for labour in the current political context.

  32. Labour pretty much unexpectedly held their high 1997 watermark in 2001 with loses like Romford and Upminster being offset by gains in Dorset South and Yns Mons.

    The SNP could do the same in Scotland in 2020.

  33. Unless Labour can successful create an impression amongst the “Red (or should I say ‘Yellow’) Clydeside” electorate that they are “to the left” of the SNP and would effectively represent them more competently and effectively than the SNP they will make NO gains in the City of Glasgow, Lanarkshire and Inverclyde in 2020.

    The central reason why the SNP are so electorally successful is because they campaign on an issue which has no strict association to the left or right of the political spectrum, that being “Scotland”.

  34. Thanks NTY UK

    So it appears that the main challenge to the SNP, albeit on a small scale, could come from a LibDem revival, paticularly as the two parties are clearly differentiated on independence and on European policy.

    As in the 1960s, the LibDems might make more progress by concentrating on target seats in Scotland than by coming back from their disaster in England.

  35. Anas Sarwar is attempting to be selected for the Labour Glasgow regional list for Holyrood election.

    SLAB shortlists for regional ranking are out. In total 3 defeated MPs are trying a political comeback at Holyrood: Sarwar, Thomas Docherty (Dunfermline) and Fiona O’Donnell (East Lothians)

  36. Sarwar topped Labour Glasgow regional list ahead of Lamont. So he will go to Holyrood in May.

  37. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-35506730

    Glasgow Labour constituency MSP’s (other than Paul Martin or Patricia Fergusson) seem to have faired better than Glasgow Labour list MSP’s.

    One of the reasons for this is that the incumbent list MSP’s were perceived to be of low calibre because of the lack of competition though preventing list MSPs (other than Sarah Boyack) standing for the list.

    Under the new Labour rules, Pauline McNeill would almost certainly have had a good list ranking – being re-elected despite losing Glasgow Kelvin.

  38. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Tomkins

    Adam Tomkins, the lead Conservative list candidate for Glasgow is apparently a republican.

    If elected, he would surely become the first pro-republican elected representative to the centre right/ right of the political spectrum.

  39. Surely not the first. Even if some others don’t spring to mind, it’s ideologically consistent for a big free-marketeer to oppose inherited power (and speaking as a vaguely-royalist centre-lefty I’m used to ideological inconsistency). There are probably Tories in Parliament who don’t really think there should be a royal family. They’re just clever enough not to say so.

  40. Yes, I was going to say similar (though clearly it is very much a minority opinion, even among LAB MPs). I think most politicians would come to the view that even if they’re against inherited power the monarchy is on balance beneficial to the UK and that there are more important things to concern themselves with. Even Corbyn is really in this category – he may call himself a republican but that’s different from actively calling for the abolition of the monarchy which will almost certainly not be in his manifesto!

  41. I would love if the Scotland Vote projector could provide regional list estimates for each Scottish electoral region rather than just an overall list projection.

    What would be interesting would be to see the exact impact of Labour losing all or holding a few constituencies or the Tories winning 5 or 1 constituencies would have on the list MSPs.

  42. Britain Elects suggesting a wipeout for Labour in the Glasgow constituencies.

  43. Simon- what did you think about the front page of ‘The National’ today?

  44. I haven’t seen the front page of today’s National. It’s not usually the most interesting read. Is today’s different?

  45. Early indications seem to suggest that the SNP are doing well against Labour, maybe less well in more unionist areas against the other main parties. Lib Dems are said to be confident in Orkney and Shetland, and think Edinburgh West may be closer than 2015. Tories say they’ve held Ettrick, Roxburgh and Berwickshire.

  46. I assumed you would’ve heard about it (I’ve purposefully tried to avoid the Scottish election stuff as it is so painfully dull at the moment, but even I saw quite a bit online about it). Never mind. I don’t know anything about the newspaper either.

  47. I was going to look online, but then I realised googling “national front page” may not be wise.

  48. Looks like Max may be right about the Tories beating Labour. Labour seem to be doing pretty badly everywhere. Ayr too close to call so far apparently.

  49. Labour has been hit by a series of scandals and resignations on Glasgow City Council.

    Cllr Aileen Coleman (Bailie) has resigned from the Party to sit as an Independent. She’s a former Chair and Chief Whip of the Group. She’s married to an SNP MP.

    Last month, Lab Cllr Yvonne Kucuk resigned from her £35k appointed job with the People’s Development Trust, after an audit showed £10,000 had been paid out to cash using cheques.

    This now leaves Glasgow with:

    42 Labour Cllrs
    29 SNP
    4 Greens
    1 Con & Unionist
    1 Lib Dem
    2 Inds (who sit separately)

  50. On last week’s performance the Conservatives would retain their seat in Pollokshields and are almost certain to gain a seat in the new Kelvindale/Dowanhill. The Conservatives also have longer shots in Langside, Linn, Newlands and Partick West.

Leave a Reply

NB: Before commenting please make sure you are familiar with the Comments Policy. UKPollingReport is a site for non-partisan discussion of polls.

You are not currently logged into UKPollingReport. Registration is not compulsory, but is strongly encouraged. Either login here, or register here (commenters who have previously registered on the Constituency Guide section of the site *should* be able to use their existing login)