THE extent to which Scottish Labour gave up on winning any constituency seats in its former Glasgow heartland in the May election has been laid bare by official election returns.
Labour’s spending halved across the city’s eight seats compared to the previous Holyrood poll, the biggest collapse of any mainstream party. Newly-released files show the party's spending was 52.4 per cent down across the city, from £66,560 in 2011 to £31,675.
LibDem spending also dropped dramatically, down 39.7 per cent from £12,324 to £7431, while Tory constituency spend fell from £13,055 to £12,230, a relatively modest 6.3 per cent. By contrast the SNP increased its outlay, from £65,224 to £84,616, up 29.7 per cent.
Despite her high profile, Nicola Sturgeon racked up the biggest bill in the city defending Glasgow Southside, spending £23,487, four times as much as her opponents combined.
She more than doubled her majority over Labour to 9,593.
In sharp contrast, former Labour leader Johann Lamont appeared to give up the ghost in her Glasgow Pollok seat, spending no money at all between the New Year and late March.
She lost to the SNP’s Humza Yousaf by 6,482 votes on a swing of almost 15 per cent.
Reflecting his growing importance to the SNP, Yousaf had the second biggest budget in the city, spending £19,188 compared to the £5,600 of his opponents combined.
In Glasgow Kelvin, one of just three Scottish seats where the Greens stood first-past-the-post candidates, Green co-convener Patrick Harvie spent £5315 to come second, forcing SNP incumbent Sandra White to lay out £14,673.
The figures cover the eight seats in Glasgow and do not include Rutherglen, which although part of the Glasgow region for Holyrood is in South Lanarkshire.
The SNP picked up all eight Glasgow seats, while Labour secured four on the list, the Tories two, and the Greens one.
Labour’s low spending reinforces rumours that the party has struggled for cash since the 2015 general election, when it splurged £1.64m on its campaign - £164,000 more than the SNP.
It was money down the drain: Labour lost 40 of its 41 seats as the SNP went from six to 56.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel