Not long ago, Labour thought it could win in Scotland. YouGov now suggests that they are running fourth in the country:
They could sink further, but I would not wish for that: I would not wish for Reform or the Tories to overtake them. Your Party could, though.
If Labour thinks they have any hope left, polls like this suggest that they are not, or at least, not in Scotland.
It's time for change - and they have failed to deliver just that.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Begs the question how this translates into seats. Scots have a very civilised PR system so on the current showing most of the parties would get at least a seat.
If I was the SNP I’d be offering municipal energy as a key policy a “sort-of” local gov driven community energy.
Agree with the municipal power. A lot more imagination needs to be put into the arena than the SNP has demonstrated up till now. It keeps hiding behind “energy is not a devolved power”.
The poll of voting intentions is very difficult to interpret. as to make any real forecast of parliamentary seat you need to have an understanding of intentions in both the constituency and regional vote. These are usually quite different and facilitate a lot of tactical voting.
There is a simple reason for Labours demise. They thought that Scotland was their feifdom, and they have never got over the shock of losing the 2007 General Election to the S.N.P. Their reaction since that day has been one of hatred, and a refusal to countenance any reasonable Government measure put forward to benefit the Scottish people. Certainly their “Change” slogan last year gave them a brief respite, but with Starmer making such a disastrous hash of matters at Westminster, it will be short lived.
Surely must be Labour out of Scotland for good after their dismal performance in their UK government.
I certainly hope so.
Someone mentioned in response to another blog that smaller populations are more unified and that the UK needs to break up into smaller regions for democracy to survive. Small countries also score higher in happiness indexes than larger ones. With this in mind, Scotland’s independence could benefit all of us. It would destroy the legitimacy of Westminster on the world stage and hopefully allow the rest of us to carve out a democracy we deserve. Seeing Scotland prosper outside the Union will not go down well with those of us South of the border, especially in the North of England.
I certainly hope and believe that Scotland will be independent in my lifetime (I’m 65)
More than that, I hope we can give hope, to our southern friends, that a new way forward is possible and give you the impetus to boot out the charlatans that keep holding you back. (And holding Scotland back whilst we’re still part of what is laughingly referred to as a “voluntary union”.
Nor us in the South West. I’ve glad to see the back of Westminster for many reasons.
I also follow Craig Murray, who provided this interesting article on unilateral Scottish independence via the UN and the implications for the UK Permanent seat on the UN Security Council
https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2025/11/un-reform-and-scottish-independence/
Food for thought …
For once, he makes a good point.
27% open to voting for the Greens! Happy days, and a clearly busy election season at that.
Craig Murray on Scotland
“… the current UN structure is outdated and indefensible, with five P5 states – US, China, Russia, UK and France – having a permanent seat and a total veto on the Security Council.
US abuse of the veto [on Gaza] genocide has been flagrant and caused outrage.
Africa and South America have no permanent representation or veto. … Imperial powers … UK and France veto is anachronistic.
…any change to the veto is subject to veto.
States … are desperate for a lever to crack open the P5.
Scottish Independence is that lever.
There is a … false assumption that England and Wales … would be the successor state automatically taking the UN P5 seat. … It is in fact extremely unlikely that England would retain its P5 status.
… some … reasons why:
1) Russia assumed all … national debt and … obligations of the former Soviet Union – a fundamental requirement for successor state status.
… the UK government has made it crystal clear England would not do this … seeking to offload debt onto Scotland.
2) … nuclear and chemical weapons facilities … in the other CIS states … were then dismantled under international supervision.
There’s no indication London would leave Trident in Scotland to be dismantled under international supervision.
3) The other CIS states all specifically agreed … that Russia would be the successor state and … would take the P5 seat.
There is no requirement for Scotland to do this – and … international recognition of Scotland may depend on not doing it, because the large majority of states want a lever for P5 reform.
4) Russia taking over the P5 seat was subject to a “no objections” mechanism … There were no objections.
There would certainly be objections to England.
5) Russia had huge international sympathy … the Soviet Union split amidst hopes for a new era of world peace.
… the UK is extremely unpopular … viewed by the large majority of states … as complicit in Genocide … attacks on Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya are not forgotten.
… the resentment caused by the massive cut in UK aid budgets under austerity; Starmer’s echoes of racist rhetoric have not gone unnoticed; The EU no longer can be counted on for automatic support.
Any attempt by England to take over the P5 seat would … go to the UN General Assembly … England would lose the vote …
[Thus] the P5 reform question would perforce be blown wide open.”
His assumptions may not hold true.
I doubt they will.