 | 'Remember, though, that the Tories didn't do particularly well in Glasgow East. Yes, they took third place instead of fourth. But that was because the plateau of Liberal Democrat support in 2005 collapsed. The Tories still lost ground slightly in terms of voting share in this by-election.' BBC Scottish Political Editor, Brian Taylor in BBC News, 25 th July 2008. |  |
Will there be a UK General Election off the back of the Glasgow East "earthquake"? No. Next question?
If Gordon Brown felt unable to go to the country last autumn, he will scarcely be more encouraged as a consequence of defeat in Labour's hitherto third safest seat in Scotland.
It is, however, entertaining to ponder the prospect, posed by David Cameron, the Tory leader.
It is amusing, further, to note that Mr Cameron didn't, to my recollection, issue such an immediate challenge after his own party won in Crewe.
Then, he said that New Labour was over - but that the Tories still had to build support to prove they were worthy of replacing the UK government.
Why the difference? Two reasons. Firstly, the "me too" factor. Mr Cameron wants in on the show, presently dominated, entirely understandably, by the victorious SNP.
As Leader of the Opposition at Westminster, demanding an election is his instant news hit. Secondly, Mr Cameron knows that the PM is damaged yet further by this calamitous defeat - and wants to add to his grief by highlighting that plight.
Remember, though, that the Tories didn't do particularly well in Glasgow East. Yes, they took third place instead of fourth. But that was because the plateau of Liberal Democrat support in 2005 collapsed. The Tories still lost ground slightly in terms of voting share in this by-election.
Can we, however, draw lessons from this result for the general election? Extrapolating the swing, we find that Labour would be left with but a single seat at Westminster from Scotland.
I expect that Tom Clarke would perform personfully in that solitary role, Labour's answer to David Mundell.
Of course, this is nonsense. By-election swings are just that - they do not read through fully to general contests.
To be fair, the SNP are making no such claim - while, reasonably, delighting in a little mild sport at Labour's expense.
However, add Glasgow East to Crewe and to Henley, where Labour came fifth, and you produce a potent stew. Folk are plainly deeply discontented with the UK Labour government - and have deftly discerned the various ways to express that.
Is that solely down to Gordon Brown? No. It is a factor of the political cycle - they've been in power for more than a decade.
It is a factor of the news cycle - voters are collectively bored with them, just as they were with John Major's Tories.
It is a factor, above all, of economic difficulties. Folk are upset and looking for someone to kick.
Would changing the leader have made any difference? Don't think so. Do you seriously imagine that, in Shettleston, they were saying: "I won't vote for Gordon Brown. If only David Miliband were in charge.....where's that James Purnell....."
There is, however, an aspect where the leadership matters - and matters hugely.
If Gordon Brown isn't, solely, the problem, is he perhaps the solution? Does he have the answers, the qualities that matters to reverse this decline for his party?
If the party concludes that he does not, then there may be substantial pressure for him to step aside.
In which case, Britain would have the third Prime Minister from a single party within a single Westminster term. Which would not be credible. Which would mean a general election. Which Labour would not want. Which is why, further, it may well not happen, however grumpy individual Labour MPs may be.
Finally, for the avoidance of doubt, this blog should be read alongside my overnight contributions - which majored upon the SNP. More to come later.
Return to home page