THE SNP stand on the cusp of power in the city of its origins for the first time in its 80-year history, Labour's last outpost in its once unassailable Scottish empire falling on a day more tense than dramatic.
A decade ago the party had a presence of just four councillors in Glasgow, a city then of 79 elected members. Today, unless Labour U-turns on its public pledge not to go into power with a resurgent Tories and the Greens then join their Unionist alliance, the SNP will be confirmed as the minority administration in charge of Glasgow in the coming days.
There was no shock that Labour, Glasgow's party of power for the past 40 years, should be ousted. It had not been expected to win five years ago. No-one was predicting victory now.
Of surprise though was the narrowness of the SNP win, falling five short of the overall majority predicted for the party both internally and amongst opponents and eight seats ahead of Labour.
But arguably the story of the day at the city's landmark Emirates Arena was the emergence of the Tories as a credible political force in Glasgow's municipal politics for the first time since the 1970s.
Claiming the Unionist tag as its own since 2014 and successfully fanning the flames of Scotland's constitutional question, the Tories ended the day with eight councillors in a city where it has had a lone presence since 1999.
The party returned three in the city's east end, in Shettleston, Baillieston and the Calton, neighbourhoods not known for their Tory heritage but with some pockets of affluence, aspiration and a blue vote tinged with Orange.
The Greens also had their best ever day in Glasgow, with seven councillors elected. Like the Tories, the geography of their successes was a telling as the level of their new representation.
"We've moved out of the west end into the east end with Dennistoun and into Govan now", said one party staffer.
By late morning as the first results came through, there was already a sense that there would be no SNP tsunami in Glasgow. Its strategy of fielding 56 candidates in the hope of securing 44 was already seeing the margin of error erode.
"We're happy but not as happy as we should be", said one prominent member of its council grouping. "We've worked for a majority, that's been the plan and the strategy but it might not work out that way."
The morning and early afternoon also suggested rumours of Labour's total collapse in a city central to its sense of self may have been exaggerated. It was nip and tuck with the SNP, which was moving ahead in the tally but with Labour returning two councillors in some wards it had not been expected to.
At one point mid-afternoon there was a sense of fear and crisis within the Nationalist ranks, with not only a majority off the table but a final result of seat numbers in the early 30s from 85 available being openly discussed.
With over half declared the SNP finally saw the success it had hoped for earlier in the day, returning two councillors in several three-member wards.
Around 4pm, two hours later than had been touted, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon arrived with Susan Aitken, Glasgow's leader-in-waiting, declaring victory and how the SNP would seek to run a minority administration in the city. Even the Greens, the most likely coalition partners, suggested this too would be their preference.
But where now for Glasgow Labour? The party gloss was the SNP's share was plummeting since the 2015 General Election when it swept the boards.
Now former council leader Frank McAveety clutched for some sense of victory. "They thought they were shoo-in a few days ago but they underestimated a wee guy from the schemes again" he was overheard telling a broadcaster of his team's final tally of 31 seats.
But he was the man at the helm when Labour's grip on Glasgow was finally cut. It is questionable if he will remain longer term the leader of the opposition as Labour looks at a period in the political wilderness.
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