KILMARNOCK AND LOUDOUN
Winner in 2017: Alan Brown (SNP)
ANOTHER seat that was a Labour-SNP sub-marginal in times past was Kilmarnock and Loudoun. Particularly in the 1990s, it was often cited as one of the very few central belt constituencies that the SNP might have an outside chance of nabbing if they enjoyed a particularly good night. But unlike Ochil, the elevated level of support wasn’t in any sense a relic of a past history. In fact, the MP for Kilmarnock in that decade had been none other than the high priest of “anti-separatism” himself, the long-serving Labour secretary of state for Scotland Willie Ross. Even at their high watermark in October 1974, the best the SNP could do was to keep Ross’s margin of victory down to 16 points.
The local SNP outperforming their colleagues elsewhere in Scotland was thus a much later phenomenon. The first signs of it were seen in 1987, when the SNP candidate George Leslie polled four points higher than the party’s national share. But things really took off when Alex Neil became the candidate in 1992 and secured a remarkable 31%. He went even better at his second attempt by taking 35% in 1997, by which point he was out-polling the national SNP by a striking 13%.
Disappointingly, the party slipped back somewhat in subsequent Westminster elections, but they did manage to carry over their relative run of success into Holyrood elections once the devolved parliament was set up in 1999. After a couple of near misses, Kilmarnock and Loudoun was one of the minority of first-past-the-post Holyrood seats that the SNP gained en route to winning power for the first time in 2007.
With a track record like that, it’s no surprise that the Westminster constituency emerged from the post-indyref realignment as one of the safest SNP seats. It’s one of four potential Labour target seats that the SNP would narrowly hold on a uniform swing if Labour draw level across Scotland. At this late stage in the campaign there seems to be no danger of the race getting that close. The SNP’s Alan Brown should retain his seat with ease.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here