Posted by 
General elections in Scotland have been notoriously noncompetitive affairs since the 1970s. One party – first Labour and then the SNP – has typically won large landslides. In 2015, when most seats changed hands, the SNP wave was unstoppable.
But this time, it’s much more of a two-party contest. While Labour have mostly led in the polls, they’ve hardly dominated them as they have in England. In the nine Scottish polls carried out since the election was called, Labour have led the SNP 35% to 31%.
Dissatisfaction with politics in both Edinburgh and London is a boon for Scottish Labour. Both governments have been bedevilled by problems with public services – in Scotland particularly, NHS waiting times and falling educational outcomes – and revelations of corruption and scandal.
Labour is sweeping up disaffected voters of both governing parties. Former Labour voters in Scotland’s urban areas appear prepared to give them another shot. They also have a boost with a rare media endorsement from the Daily Record, which hasn’t backed a party in a Westminster election since 2010.
The party’s dominance in Scotland was always been underpinned by the first past the post electoral system. While recently, this system has rewarded the SNP, the even spread of the nationalist vote share across the country means that Labour could bring in an impressive haul of seats (and the SNP can lose very, very many) with only a narrow victory.
There are a number of tightly fought SNP-Conservative marginals in the north-east which Labour are largely staying out of (even to the point of redirecting their volunteers to other constituencies). These could be the SNP’s only chances of gains this election, and possibly result in something akin to the Conservative wipeout seen in Scotland in 1997.
Want more election coverage from The Conversation’s academic experts? Over the coming weeks, we’ll bring you informed analysis of developments in the campaign and we’ll fact check the claims being made.
Sign up for our new, weekly election newsletter, delivered every Friday throughout the campaign and beyond.
Like the rest of the UK, the cost of living is at the top of the agenda for voters. Scottish independence has become less important (though has not seen a reduction in overall support). This is bad news for both the SNP and the Conservatives, who had done well out of the polarisation around the constitutional issue.
The SNP used to monopolise the pro-independence vote in Westminster elections. Other pro-independence parties had minimal support, or (like the Scottish Greens) reserved their resources for Scottish parliament elections, where the proportional electoral system is friendlier to smaller parties.
But since the breakdown of their coalition with the SNP at Holyrood, the Scottish Greens have become vocal opponents, standing in most constituencies for the first time. While the Greens stand little chance of winning seats, a leakage of left-leaning voters could make a difference in close races. Added to this is Alex Salmond’s Alba party nibbling away from the right (although less successfully).
This election has resurrected the SNP v Labour dynamic of the 1990s and 2000s. And the key danger for the SNP is the loss of votes to Labour. With independence sliding down the list of priorities, some pro-independence voters can countenance voting for a unionist party for now, especially given there seems to be no clear route to independence in the near future.
Standing up for Scotland
The enduring question is of which party can “stand up for Scotland” more effectively. In this election, Labour leader Anas Sarwar is arguing forcefully that his party will be able to give Scotland a bigger voice in Westminster. Yet it seems unlikely that with such a large majority a Labour government would need to consider the opinions of Scottish Labour MPs, or that these MPs would even act in a unified and distinctive manner.
The SNP argues, in return, that only MPs independent of any UK-wide party can effectively champion Scotland’s interests. However, while this may have been a powerful selling point in recent cycles, it is undermined this time by the first minister, John Swinney’s declaration that a majority of SNP MPs would constitute a vote for independence.
In past cycles, many voters who are unsure about, or opposed to, independence, were willing to give their votes to the SNP as a defender of Scotland’s interests, safe in the knowledge this would not be read as a vote to leave the union. With this approach, Swinney threatens to drive away more moderate voters. But he was forced to offer the pledge to appease a party membership impatient with the lack of progress on independence.
Labour appear to be set for victory this time. But for this to be a long-term turning point in Scottish politics, Labour will need to demonstrate that they can deliver for Scotland. And it will need to happen quickly, given the relative immediacy of the 2026 Scottish parliament elections.
Sarwar and Swinney (or maybe SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn, who has had a very good election and is considered to have performed well in TV debates) are clearly gearing up for a tight contest. They will be battling for the position of first minister, and using this election as a test run.
In this sense, the Westminster election is a bit of a second-order election in Scotland. Like local elections, voters are more inclined to deliver messages of dissatisfaction to national governments, rather than back a new direction for the country.
While UK elections do matter for Scotland (with some key policy areas still the preserve of Westminster), devolved issues such as health, education and transport are dominating this campaign, and Labour is focusing its attacks on the SNP’s record in government. While independence may not be a dominating factor in the race between the SNP and Labour, the politics remain as distinctive and interesting as ever.
Jonathan Parker does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
