The Hamilton by-election shows that the ground is shifting in Scotland

4 min read06 June

Labour’s win in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election certainly wasn’t expected. But it matters.

Not only because the seat changed hands, but because it exposes how quickly assumptions about the Scottish political landscape are being overturned, how inaccurate the polls were, and how critical the next year in Scottish politics will be.

The by-election was triggered by the death of SNP MSP Christina McKelvie. She had represented the seat since 2001 and during that time had increased her majority to over 4,500 in 2021. Labour’s path to victory required a significant swing, achieved in a low-turnout context and against expectations that Reform could overtake them. That they won at all, with a relatively low-profile candidate, a limited media operation, and no campaign visit from Keir Starmer, is politically significant.

Crucially, this wasn’t a case of the SNP taking their eye off the ball. They ran a full campaign. John Swinney visited multiple times, the message discipline held, and they put proper resource behind it. Their candidate, Katy Loudon, is experienced and well-known within the party, but this was her third defeat in the area in under two years. The SNP message clearly didn’t land.

But the most disruptive element of the result is Reform UK. With over 7,000 votes and a credible third place, they showed their appeal in working-class, post-industrial parts of Scotland is no longer hypothetical. Many of those voters came not from the SNP but from Labour’s own soft base: older, economically frustrated, and deeply sceptical that any party is offering serious answers.

They ran a campaign without infrastructure, without a recognisable candidate and without a serious presence on the ground. Yet they came close to overtaking the SNP. That should concern both main parties.

However, Reform also made critical mistakes. The advert attacking Anas Sarwar, which misrepresented his comments and racialised the campaign, was a misstep. Intended as a provocation, it instead undermined the party’s credibility, and voters noticed. In Scottish politics, attacks like that rarely land well, and in a contest defined by local trust and personal connection, Reform looked like outsiders trying to inflame rather than represent.

Labour, by contrast, focused on what they do well. They ran an efficient, targeted ground game, drove up turnout where it mattered, and benefited from a candidate with local recognition and a clear NHS message. Davy Russell lives in the constituency, has long-standing ties to the community, and wasn’t seen as a careerist or parachuted-in name, and that fact mattered more than the SNP or Reform seemed to realise. It helped Labour cut through late, especially among undecided voters. And crucially, it aligned with the party’s strongest asset — a well-executed ground operation. This was not a win based on enthusiasm for Labour, but one built through discipline and contact rates. Reform still doesn't have that kind of organisational capacity. The SNP did, but increasingly looks unable to capitalise on it.

Nationally, the result changes the dynamic leading into 2026. For Swinney, it confirms that the SNP’s vote is fragile, even in areas they once considered relatively secure, and people still haven’t returned to the party. For Labour, the win marks a recovery. Just a few months ago, it was clear Scottish Labour had lost momentum and there was no path to Bute House. That context makes this win more significant.

It also strengthens Sarwar’s hand within the party. His team delivered this with minimal support from the UK leadership and against a backdrop of falling poll numbers. They will now expect greater say over messaging, policy and resource allocation heading into 2026.

Hamilton doesn’t predict the next government. But it confirms that the ground has shifted. Labour can win, the SNP can lose, and Reform is no longer a fringe irritant. But it’s a reminder that even a narrow win can disguise long-term vulnerabilities. Neither Labour and the SNP can afford to just hold their vote together with good local campaigns and turnout machines. They need to offer something ambitious, and more emotionally resonant to voters who are tempted by Reform’s message, even if they don’t fully trust the party delivering it.

All three parties now have to reckon with a, albeit slightly, different map. The ones who move fastest will define the next year.

Jen Watson is Account Director and Policy Lead at iNHouse.