Lawyers Prepare Landmark Case Over Lost Votes (from The Herald Election Site)

Thousands of people could be contacted and asked which way they meant to vote in last week's election under a landmark legal challenge.

Lawyers plan to submit papers at the Court of Session challenging the result of the regional list ballot in Glasgow, where around 9000 votes were discarded.

It has also emerged Labour Party lawyers will ask for a manual recount of all the votes cast in the Cunninghame North constituency, which they lost by just 48 to the SNP.

Mike Dailly, a solicitor at the Govan Law Centre, said yesterday he had been contacted by several voters in Glasgow since Friday who believe their votes were among those disregarded.

He said they had wrongly placed two crosses on the regional ballot and none at all on the constituency form.

Mr Dailly said that if the votes had stood, it could have resulted in a seat for Tommy Sheridan's Solidarity Party or another MSP for the Greens and a different national result.

He said: "What we've got in Glasgow is a situation where people who cast their vote have had their vote discounted.

"This is quite important because if a number of those had gone to Tommy Sheridan or the Greens, then clearly that could have meant a different result on the Glasgow list.

Mr Dailly said he planned to raise his legal challenge under Article 3 of the first protocol of the Human Rights Act, which guarantees that citizens should have the conditions in which to express freely their views in an election.

He said he would be looking for two possible outcomes from the legal challenge. "We can either rerun the Glasgow list election, or the returning officer can contact those 9000 people and ascertain their clear intention," he said.

Mr Dailly said contacting each of the voters would be possible because the number of the ballot paper is written beside their name when they turn up to vote.

He said: "It was a farce. People have expressed their opinion legitimately, but the ballot paper being so complicated wasn't their fault."

A spokesman for the Greens, which has submitted a Freedom of Information request to every returning officer in the country asking for copies of every discarded ballot paper, said they would "watch with interest" Mr Dailly's legal challenge.

The Herald revealed on Saturday that Labour officials in Ayrshire were considering a legal challenge into the result in Cunninghame North where Kenneth Gibson of the SNP narrowly defeated Labour's Allan Wilson, former Deputy Lifelong Learning Minister.

At the heart of the challenge is Labour's claim that Ian Snodgrass, the returning officer at the count, had turned down their request for a manual recount of all the ballot papers.

Allan Wilson said yesterday: "The prospective challenge arises from concerns that have been expressed to me by local party members, and more importantly local people, about the conduct of the ballot in Cunninghame North."

Mr Wilson also rejected accusations by the SNP that the potential legal challenge was "sour grapes" on Labour's part, adding: "Everybody understands a manual recount could even increase the SNP majority."

Mr Snodgrass, who is also chief executive of North Ayrshire Council, said: "We've had no contact whatsoever with Mr Wilson since the election. If he contacts us we will give careful consideration to all his concerns."

This numpty, Allan Wilson (what a shambles of a speaker he is - Enterprise Minister? FFS someone has a sense of humour!) is only trying to subvert a democratic result, no doubt with the acquiescence of the Labour party. The case is basically "we lost, and that's not meant to happen, ergo there must be something wrong and it needs to be re-run until we win. Can I now request a re-run of last season's 2nd division playoffs because Morton lost 1-0 to a disputed penalty, so obviously it was really a draw as near as makes no difference so... you get my point? Wilson, you lost. Accept it and feck off!

This numpty, Allan Wilson (what a shambles of a speaker he is - Enterprise Minister? FFS someone has a sense of humour!) is only trying to subvert a democratic result, no doubt with the acquiescence of the Labour party. The case is basically "we lost, and that's not meant to happen, ergo there must be something wrong and it needs to be re-run until we win.

Can I now request a re-run of last season's 2nd division playoffs because Morton lost 1-0 to a disputed penalty, so obviously it was really a draw as near as makes no difference so... you get my point?

Wilson, you lost. Accept it and feck off!

The nationalists are clearly quite happy for this election to count even although the views of over 80,000 voters have not been taken into account. The Labour Party only lost 4 seats, so it is clear that the SNP gained their seats from those that were lost by the small parties. This is a total travesty, and the Labour Party are quite right to challenge the decision in Cunninghame North. For many years, recounts were the order of the date in the constituency of Ayr, hotly contested between the Labour and Conservative Parties, where the majority very often ranged between 60 and 80. Neither of these parties would ever have questioned the other's right to ask for a recount, yet the SNP now accuses anyone questioning anything of 'sour grapes'. Is this the kind of banana republic or brave new world that we now live in, under Alex Salmond?

The Labour party are sounding very childish, "the toys are out of the pram" The elections organised? by the London administration were a shambles but I think reopening Wilson contaest would lead to a snowball effect and a rerun election for the whole country. Grow up and accept defeat

Lynne, what makes you think that the majority of those 80,000 rejected voters would have voted Labour?

If Mr Wilson or any other candidate was unhappy with the count they should have asked for a recount there and then.

You're a bad loser. Bear in mind this shambolic system was introduced by David Cairns and Douglas Alexander of the London Labour Party.

The Labour-run Scotland Office are responsible for this farce of an election.

Labour employed DRS Systems to operate the counting machines - DRS Systems have one Neil Kinnock as non-executive director.

Labour change the ballot forms, plus give DRS Systems a final veto over their design.

Labour ignore everyone's advice to hold separate Parliamentary and Council elections.

Labour attempt to extend their Tammany Hall brand of democracy to our Parliament and council chambers.

And now a Labour member disnae like it and wants a court case.

Irony at its finest.

It's completely unrealistic to have a partial re-run in a given area.
That would make a mockery of the democratic process, with new tactical voting coming into play from voters knowing the previous results..

100,000 votes please and every single one should be counted.

100,000 votes plus the lost postal voters, whirl them through those machines please to give Labour 130 seats.

Lynne wrote:
The nationalists are clearly quite happy for this election to count even although the views of over 80,000 voters have not been taken into account. The Labour Party only lost 4 seats, so it is clear that the SNP gained their seats from those that were lost by the small parties. This is a total travesty, and the Labour Party are quite right to challenge the decision in Cunninghame North. For many years, recounts were the order of the date in the constituency of Ayr, hotly contested between the Labour and Conservative Parties, where the majority very often ranged between 60 and 80. Neither of these parties would ever have questioned the other's right to ask for a recount, yet the SNP now accuses anyone questioning anything of 'sour grapes'. Is this the kind of banana republic or brave new world that we now live in, under Alex Salmond?

Lynne it sounds like sour grapes! what a bitter diatribe. But Hey! As an SNP supporter I'm happy to have a re-run. Then the SNP will have an even bigger majority!!! Lets get it on!!

Lynne wrote:
The nationalists are clearly quite happy for this election to count even although the views of over 80,000 voters have not been taken into account. The Labour Party only lost 4 seats, so it is clear that the SNP gained their seats from those that were lost by the small parties. This is a total travesty, and the Labour Party are quite right to challenge the decision in Cunninghame North. For many years, recounts were the order of the date in the constituency of Ayr, hotly contested between the Labour and Conservative Parties, where the majority very often ranged between 60 and 80. Neither of these parties would ever have questioned the other's right to ask for a recount, yet the SNP now accuses anyone questioning anything of 'sour grapes'. Is this the kind of banana republic or brave new world that we now live in, under Alex Salmond?

Lynne it sounds like sour grapes! what a bitter diatribe. But Hey! As an SNP supporter I'm happy to have a re-run. Then the SNP will have an even bigger majority!!! Lets get it on!!

How can the SNP object to a recount where the majority is 48 when Alex salmond demanded a recount in Aberdeen Central for no apparent reason where the Labour majority was 382 and the recount made 2 votes of diffrence.

Ah but Lynne those recounts in Ayr never included the already discounted/spoiled ballots, they only included the valid ones.

Sore loser Darryl? Live with it - you will learn a lot about life's injustices.

If there is any recount I will demand a check of signature at application against postal votes. Labour supporters are openly boasting at how they shafted the SNP with unwitting ballots being cast for Labour. Certain parts of Govan it was rife. The disabled and minorities were particularly targeted. Just compare the signatures. It's not rocket science.

[quote][bold]Jason Jack[/bold] wrote Labour supporters are openly boasting at how they shafted the SNP with unwitting ballots being cast for Labour[/quote] I came across a guy on polling day who tried to vote at the polling station, only to be told he had already applied for a postal vote. This was news to him and his wife, who had done no such thing. He hadn't received any ballot papers, and I had to tell him it was likely his papers had been sent to another address. Coincidentally, he had received a phone call from the Labour party a few weeks previous, asking if he wanted a postal vote (no) and how he'd be voting (SNP). I advised the guy to contact the police and get it reported. There were a few other rumours doing the rounds in Govan, which I won't repeat under defamation laws. I will say Govan Labour party did not come out smelling of roses. [bold]And still they lost![/bold]

Jason Jack wrote
Labour supporters are openly boasting at how they shafted the SNP with unwitting ballots being cast for Labour

I came across a guy on polling day who tried to vote at the polling station, only to be told he had already applied for a postal vote. This was news to him and his wife, who had done no such thing. He hadn't received any ballot papers, and I had to tell him it was likely his papers had been sent to another address.

Coincidentally, he had received a phone call from the Labour party a few weeks previous, asking if he wanted a postal vote (no) and how he'd be voting (SNP).

I advised the guy to contact the police and get it reported. There were a few other rumours doing the rounds in Govan, which I won't repeat under defamation laws. I will say Govan Labour party did not come out smelling of roses. And still they lost!

It's over Jack. Go home. Spend some time with your family.

The Scottish people simply will not tolerate another four years of Labour.

They voted for change. Labour lost. The SNP won.

lets move on.

Labours posturing and denial of reality really is distasteful to behold.

Embarrasing and petty in the extreme.

Let it go lads.... your time is up.

Bob Linklater, you sound like you *want* the country to do badly now.

Just like some of the Labour politicians I saw on TV during the campaign, you very obviously would like to see Scotland decline and do badly, as it "confirms" your pathetic cringe and conviction that we are too weedy to "go it alone".

Grow up - if people like you actually wanted the country to do well, there might be a lot less talk about independence.

Recounts are called by an aggrieved candidate or agent, before the declaration is made. That was what happened in Aberdeen Central , when the original result was upheld. I do not believe a recount was requested in Cunninghame North prior to the declaration. The threat to go for legal action came after.

Wrong, a recount was requested and denied

Democracy is under attack from all sides. Labour are clearly at it, they are probably planning all sorts of subdifuge. They haven`t even congratulated the winner as is custom, bitter and sour lot that they are. [bold]Over 50,000 more people voted snp than labour[/bold] so it is only right that the snp have more msps. And yet labour want to reopen cunninghame north. [bold]They should thusly be persuing all 100,00, or so, lost votes in a non partisan way in the interests of all the electorate.[/bold] Add to this the stance of the lib dems. Who will not support a referendum despite the fact that there is a hugh majourity of votes and msps who want more power for hollyrood. And despite the fact that they themselves support it they have rejected the chance to achieve it. Their london colleagues probably won`t let them. But then we can rest assured that our democratic rights will be pursued and protected by our national press.....maybe not then. ( this critisicism is not of the herald)

Democracy is under attack from all sides. Labour are clearly at it, they are probably planning all sorts of subdifuge. They haven`t even congratulated the winner as is custom, bitter and sour lot that they are. Over 50,000 more people voted snp than labour so it is only right that the snp have more msps. And yet labour want to reopen cunninghame north. They should thusly be persuing all 100,00, or so, lost votes in a non partisan way in the interests of all the electorate. Add to this the stance of the lib dems. Who will not support a referendum despite the fact that there is a hugh majourity of votes and msps who want more power for hollyrood. And despite the fact that they themselves support it they have rejected the chance to achieve it. Their london colleagues probably won`t let them.
But then we can rest assured that our democratic rights will be pursued and protected by our national press.....maybe not then. ( this critisicism is not of the herald)

Is anyone else tired of hearing how complicated the ballot papers were? I am. I read the instructions first. I studied the ballot paper carefully and I completed it correctly. What is difficult about that? It may be true that the Scottish Parliament and Local Council elections should not have been held on the same day but are we really suggesting that certain votes have to be re-run simply because an awful lot of people were too stupid to understand what to do or too lazy to seek assistance? It is absurd. What I would like to have an answer to however is the fact that votes from the Islands initially suggested Labour had won four seats and then after a recount it was suddenly discovered they only had two. Now THAT needs explained!

Is Mike Dailly in charge of the 'get Tommy Sheridan reelected campaign' ? or is this about the wider benefit of having a recount to satisfy human rights violations (such a questionable claim, coming from a scots lawyer these days whose motives may not be what they seem..)

James Brown Read the article before you spout nonsense. Wilson DID ask for a manual recount. It was refused. When Alex Salmond asked for a recount in Aberdeen which was won by nearly 400 votes it was granted. Allan Wilson even says in the article that a recount could increase the SNP majority. I tell you this, had Wilson won by 48 votes you and all the other SNP supporters would be on here spitting blood if a recount had been denied. You are a bitter old man, James Brown. Your posts attacking the dead were some of the vilest I have ever seen. But surely even you must respect people's right to vote.

James Brown

Read the article before you spout nonsense. Wilson DID ask for a manual recount. It was refused. When Alex Salmond asked for a recount in Aberdeen which was won by nearly 400 votes it was granted.

Allan Wilson even says in the article that a recount could increase the SNP majority. I tell you this, had Wilson won by 48 votes you and all the other SNP supporters would be on here spitting blood if a recount had been denied.

You are a bitter old man, James Brown. Your posts attacking the dead were some of the vilest I have ever seen. But surely even you must respect people's right to vote.

But that will cause the SNP to challenge every seat they lost where the discarded ballots outweighed the majority! I think they should do it all again without the council selections. Do the council elections on a different date. Then no one can complain! Just as long as Jack isn't first minister and whoever is in power down South can't just do what they like and have our "government" up here say "Yeth mathter!", Oh! That's what we're going to have now... does Gordon not like whats happened aaaaaaw.

(yes it's supposed to be "th" = Igor a.k.a. Jack with a lisp).

"What I would like to have an answer to however is the fact that votes from the Islands initially suggested Labour had won four seats and then after a recount it was suddenly discovered they only had two. Now THAT needs explained"

Actually, it was three. But that was yet another recount the SNP asked for and got. Are they the only party entitled to recounts?

What a bunch of cheaters - they have the brass neck to complain about their own conspiracy

Please sign this petition on the Scotish Vote Scandal. Do more than this - forward detals to others, as many as you can. Dont let the politicians sweep this under the carpet as part of a deal. One tenth of us have been cheated of our right to vote

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ScottishVoteScandal2007/

Since when was it possible for the goverment able to tell who people voted for? Is there nobody else concerned about this?

I'm sorry, but am I the only one in Scotland who thought the ballot papers were really pretty simple and straight forward?! It wasn't bloody rocket science...it was clearly explainedo n the papers and the the clerk in the polling place. If you aren't clever enough to work out where to but your mark (doesn't even invovled spelling) then quite frankly, you don't deserve to have your vote counted as you probably 'don't have the first idea who you're voting for in any case...the result MUST stand...anything else and Scotland's reputation will suffer even more... Labour, you lost...get used to it and leave us Scots to get on with our country's future without stucking your oar in...

I'm sorry, but am I the only one in Scotland who thought the ballot papers were really pretty simple and straight forward?! It wasn't bloody rocket science...it was clearly explainedo n the papers and the the clerk in the polling place. If you aren't clever enough to work out where to but your mark (doesn't even invovled spelling) then quite frankly, you don't deserve to have your vote counted as you probably 'don't have the first idea who you're voting for in any case...the result MUST stand...anything else and Scotland's reputation will suffer even more...

Labour, you lost...get used to it and leave us Scots to get on with our country's future without stucking your oar in...

Just a wee note to Lynne would posted 2nd above...

For your information, the Cunningham North result has ALREADY UNDERGONE A RECOUNT ...this happened on the night when the LOOSER Allan Wilson demanded it...he's already had his legal righ to a recount...and the recount revealled for a second time that HE LOST!!

Labour are quite simply sore losers...it's as simple as that...

It has always been possible to trace who has voted for whom. Each ballot paper is numbered and the Polling Clerk writes this number beside the name of the voter on the electoral roll in front of them. It is therefore possible to match up the name with the vote. There appears to be a huge anount of confusion amongst the labourites regarding the Arran vote.One report has them complaining about 100 missing votes, another suggests there was 100 extra votes! In any case, the Returning Officer has pointed out that the Arran votes were checked manually, and there was no discrepancy. The 5% spoiled ballot papers and the missing postal votes are other questions entirely, worthy of a judicial enquiry.

It has always been possible to trace who has voted for whom. Each ballot paper is numbered and the Polling Clerk writes this number beside the name of the voter on the electoral roll in front of them. It is therefore possible to match up the name with the vote.

There appears to be a huge anount of confusion amongst the labourites regarding the Arran vote.One report has them complaining about 100 missing votes, another suggests there was 100 extra votes!
In any case, the Returning Officer has pointed out that the Arran votes were checked manually, and there was no discrepancy.

The 5% spoiled ballot papers and the missing postal votes are other questions entirely, worthy of a judicial enquiry.

Another election is the only way to get a conclusive result now. All of Scotland, not just Labour lawyers in one constiturecy.

If only the Scots could see past their own noses that when you have parties bankrolled by millionaires and clearly part of the establishment it doesn't matter who gets in, their primary goal will be to keep their millionaire backers happy and continue the inequality that has remained due to Scotlands election system that FAILS us all time and again. True democracy is about giving us all the right to freely vote that cannot occur as the media ensure they concentrate SOLELY on the establishment parties with their RICH funders. NONE of these parties have any interest in the VAST majority of Scotlands people.We as a group have experience of dealing with those parties at Holyrood and have seen the complete lack of attention to constituents who have been fleeced through the star chamber court system that has destroyed Scots who successfully beat deprivation and went on to build up homes and capital only to be asset stripped by the despots controlling our courts. ALL of the MSP's that Scotland voted for are the same bunch of mobsters who did NOTHING repeat DID NOTHING to improve this situation .Instead ignored the massive amounts of evidence that show Scotlands wealth is not harmed by political gangsters but the non elected shadow legal gangsters who are causing massive injustice in our courts. Courts that have been highjacked by mobsters who are running them for their own financial advantage while greatly undermining ALL scottish people that are dragged through a disgusting and lengthy spectacle of injustice that makes even Hitlers mob pale by comparison.ANYONE as yet who has not faced Scotlands civil courts will only understand the true depths Scotland has plunged when they do finally get dragged through those courts AND MOST OF US WILL IN TIME. The charlatans disguised as our MSP's of ALL persuasions are the cause of that system continuing to produce daily massive homelessness and deprivation on a GRAND SCALE.For anyone fooled by the constant rhetoric that those we are forced to vote for with little choice will somehow change the legal landscape of Scotland with urgency clearly have been fooled by ALL the information we get from, primarily the media ,that seems hell bent on keeping Scotlands failed democratic process in perpetuity. Scotland needs independence from ALL establishment parties and that requires monolithic change and SCOTS refusing to accept what we are given as some form of DEMOCRACY. THAT IT IS NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LJPR LEGAL JUDICIAL POLITICAL REFORMERS http://www.ljpr.cjb.net

If only the Scots could see past their own noses that when you have parties bankrolled by millionaires and clearly part of the establishment it doesn't matter who gets in, their primary goal will be to keep their millionaire backers happy and continue the inequality that has remained due to Scotlands election system that FAILS us all time and again.

True democracy is about giving us all the right to freely vote that cannot occur as the media ensure they concentrate SOLELY on the establishment parties with their RICH funders.
NONE of these parties have any interest in the VAST majority of Scotlands people.We as a group have experience of dealing with those parties at Holyrood and have seen the complete lack of attention to constituents who have been fleeced through the star chamber court system that has destroyed Scots who successfully beat deprivation and went on to build up homes and capital only to be asset stripped by the despots controlling our courts.

ALL of the MSP's that Scotland voted for are the same bunch of mobsters who did NOTHING repeat DID NOTHING to improve this situation .Instead ignored the massive amounts of evidence that show Scotlands wealth is not harmed by political gangsters but the non elected shadow legal gangsters who are causing massive injustice in our courts.

Courts that have been highjacked by mobsters who are running them for their own financial advantage while greatly undermining ALL scottish people that are dragged through a disgusting and lengthy spectacle of injustice that makes even Hitlers mob pale by comparison.ANYONE as yet who has not faced Scotlands civil courts will only understand the true depths Scotland has plunged when they do finally get dragged through those courts AND MOST OF US WILL IN TIME.

The charlatans disguised as our MSP's of ALL persuasions are the cause of that system continuing to produce daily massive homelessness and deprivation on a GRAND SCALE.For anyone fooled by the constant rhetoric that those we are forced to vote for with little choice will somehow change the legal landscape of Scotland with urgency clearly have been fooled by ALL the information we get from, primarily the media ,that seems hell bent on keeping Scotlands failed democratic process in perpetuity.

Scotland needs independence from ALL establishment parties and that requires monolithic change and SCOTS refusing to accept what we are given as some form of DEMOCRACY.

THAT IT IS NOT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LJPR LEGAL JUDICIAL POLITICAL REFORMERS
http://www.ljpr.cjb.net

[quote][bold]Bob Linklater[/bold] wrote: The SNP administration is knacked before it's even begun. Let's see the dopey squad run by that smug p r i c k Salmond dodge along for the next 18 months and then have to apologose to Scotland for the baws he's made of things. Scotland has spoken and they don't want independence - otherwise the SNP would have a lot more seats and Labour ould have lost more than 4.[/quote] Can't spell "apologise" eh Bob? Were you just putting little "x's" beside all your choices? Labour are a shower of war-mongering has-beens and no one wants to hear from them...

Bob Linklater wrote:
The SNP administration is knacked before it's even begun. Let's see the dopey squad run by that smug p r i c k Salmond dodge along for the next 18 months and then have to apologose to Scotland for the baws he's made of things. Scotland has spoken and they don't want independence - otherwise the SNP would have a lot more seats and Labour ould have lost more than 4.

Can't spell "apologise" eh Bob? Were you just putting little "x's" beside all your choices?

Labour are a shower of war-mongering has-beens and no one wants to hear from them...

people like linklater are typical expressing the ignorant backward dependency culture the brit labour party have carefully fostered in scotland especially over the last 20 yrs ,the important indication of this election is that labour lost badly,the snp came from incredibly far behind to win the lp worry about one thing themselves and their carefully protected jobs for the boys attitude................i think the scots might just becoming wise to this

What's this about the ballot number being written beside your name when you vote? Whatever happened to the anonimity of the ballot box?

Surely nobody should be able to find out how individuals voted in an election, for fear of repurcussions!

But even if you were able to contact all 9,000 numpties who couldn't even read the instructions, who is to say they'd be willing to say openly who they wanted to vote for?

Sorry, trying to vote twice means you spoiled your ballot paper -- there's no two ways about it.

Why does the Labour candidate not listen to Professor John Curtice's view on this matter? In recent times, a number of local and national political candidates have fought similar sour grape legal actions, and either lost in court or when the election was re-run! Labour should take Professor Curtice's very sound advice and accept the result? Lachie Todd.

I have voted Labour all my life and did so this time too, but after this fiasco that is being called an election, I think it will be the last time. It�s sad to see the once great Scottish Labour Party degenerate into the shambles and embarrassment that it has now become and this utter nonsense of mounting a legal challenge by Alan Wilson has really put the icing on the cake for me. I canny see how a party that was once so committed to the rights of the people of Scotland has now turned to trickery and duplicity to try and �change� the result of a democratic election. And before everyone starts shouting and moaning about the election being democratic let me just say this: all the parties were under the exact same conditions, not just Labour!!! Alan Wilson if you decide to forge ahead with legal action using the Labour party�s backing, then not only will you be an absolute and utter disgrace to yourself, but you will disgrace a party that has worked hard for Scotland.

I have voted Labour all my life and did so this time too, but after this fiasco that is being called an election, I think it will be the last time. It�s sad to see the once great Scottish Labour Party degenerate into the shambles and embarrassment that it has now become and this utter nonsense of mounting a legal challenge by Alan Wilson has really put the icing on the cake for me. I canny see how a party that was once so committed to the rights of the people of Scotland has now turned to trickery and duplicity to try and �change� the result of a democratic election. And before everyone starts shouting and moaning about the election being democratic let me just say this: all the parties were under the exact same conditions, not just Labour!!!

Alan Wilson if you decide to forge ahead with legal action using the Labour party�s backing, then not only will you be an absolute and utter disgrace to yourself, but you will disgrace a party that has worked hard for Scotland.

Jock Tamson's Bairn @ 4:18am

My goodness, can't you sleep for crying over losing an election?

Let's clear things up: firstly I do not attack the dead. Secondly, when you rightly chastised me for making a personal comment about you I apologised right away without demur, in spite of your silly accompanying comment about my name. Thirdly, I have the courage and honesty not to hide behind a nom de plume. In the eyes of decent people that gives my comments a greater credence than yours.

Sorry I meant to add to my 9:23am posting -

Lastly, you do not know me and are in no position to make personal comments as you did. It is noticeable that too many postings here (and in The Scotsman) are peppered with high emotion and a standard unionist lexicon (see The Herald Forum topic on this for guidance).

Bad losers, toys out of the pram, spitting out the dummy ... oh dear!

I don't suppose I will get an apology for your bad attitude any more than the people of this country will get an apology from Tony Blair for his wear crimes. Oh to be a unionist ....

If the other three parties are so confident that the majority of Scottish voters do not want independance, why are they all so against a referendum.
Let's have one and allow the Scottish people to decide on a really major issue for once rather than being told by the politicians "we know what's best for you because you elected us".
Scotland has had it's fill of Jack dancing to Tony and Gordon's tune for long enough.
Let's at least give the SNP a chance, they can hardly do any worse than Labour has over the past number of years.

[quote][bold]Peter Cherbi[/bold] wrote: Is Mike Dailly in charge of the 'get Tommy Sheridan reelected campaign' ? or is this about the wider benefit of having a recount to satisfy human rights violations (such a questionable claim, coming from a scots lawyer these days whose motives may not be what they seem..)[/quote] Would it be a problem if Mike Dailly was in charge of a "get Tommy reelected campaign" if (and it is a big if) reelection was on the basis of properly reflecting the votes? I for one would be delighted if Tommy got back in as he was far more effective than all the other independent MSPs and the SSP, Greens etc.. 'Course the effect might be to knock one of the SNP list MSPs out which would please the Unionists.

Peter Cherbi wrote:
Is Mike Dailly in charge of the 'get Tommy Sheridan reelected campaign' ? or is this about the wider benefit of having a recount to satisfy human rights violations (such a questionable claim, coming from a scots lawyer these days whose motives may not be what they seem..)

Would it be a problem if Mike Dailly was in charge of a "get Tommy reelected campaign" if (and it is a big if) reelection was on the basis of properly reflecting the votes? I for one would be delighted if Tommy got back in as he was far more effective than all the other independent MSPs and the SSP, Greens etc..

'Course the effect might be to knock one of the SNP list MSPs out which would please the Unionists.

Of course the state can tell how you voted - how else would they have been able to identify those who voted for the CPGB in post-war Britain? You don't need to be a conspiracy nut to be a little concerned!

I have several concerns regarding the content of this article. 1. It is totally wrong of the Green Party to demand copies of ballot papers. What about the voter's rights. Should they not be contacted first to give their permission? People do not expect to vote and then have their decisions scrutinised. It makes no difference if the ballot paper was filled in correctly or not. 2. Any re-run of an election, whether partly or wholly, will be affected by the outcome of May 3. People will decide to vote, not on their initial feelings towards the parties, but on the events afterwards. 3. If they decide to re-run a particular area, then the electorate everywhere in Scotland should demand another vote based on what I have descibed above. 4. The lawyer planning to challenge the result claims he has been contacted by several people, out of a total of 9000. That is less than 0.1% which would mean that the remaining 99.9% hace accepted the result. That is what democracy is all about. Remember also that the overwhelming majority of voters managed to complete the forms correctly. 5. It is no surprise to read that Mr Sheridan is fully supporting Mr Dailly. The same Mr Sheridan who stood up for democracy is now opposing the democratic vote. Frankly, it sucks! It is time to accept the decision of the people and got on with the task which is to lead and serve this nation. [bold]AND I DID NOT VOTE SNP[/bold]

I have several concerns regarding the content of this article.

1. It is totally wrong of the Green Party to demand copies of ballot papers. What about the voter's rights. Should they not be contacted first to give their permission? People do not expect to vote and then have their decisions scrutinised. It makes no difference if the ballot paper was filled in correctly or not.

2. Any re-run of an election, whether partly or wholly, will be affected by the outcome of May 3. People will decide to vote, not on their initial feelings towards the parties, but on the events afterwards.

3. If they decide to re-run a particular area, then the electorate everywhere in Scotland should demand another vote based on what I have descibed above.

4. The lawyer planning to challenge the result claims he has been contacted by several people, out of a total of 9000. That is less than 0.1% which would mean that the remaining 99.9% hace accepted the result. That is what democracy is all about. Remember also that the overwhelming majority of voters managed to complete the forms correctly.

5. It is no surprise to read that Mr Sheridan is fully supporting Mr Dailly. The same Mr Sheridan who stood up for democracy is now opposing the democratic vote. Frankly, it sucks!

It is time to accept the decision of the people and got on with the task which is to lead and serve this nation.

AND I DID NOT VOTE SNP

Bold and upper case - shout loudly enough and people will respect you!

Human rights are not about the will of the majority - quite the opposite and quite rightly so.

Points 2 and 3 are well made but point 5 is strange.

Posted by: Brian on 9:54am today

'Human rights are not about the will of the majority - quite the opposite and quite rightly so.'

I could see the point of a court case if the 9000 people involved had been denied a vote. They were not, therefore I don't see how their human rights were denied.

[bold][italic]TheWiseOne[/italic][/bold] - I agree with much of what you say, but we can't just sweep this mess - I mean the worst bit of electoral malpracice in Western Europe for 50 years - under the carpet because the SNP won and you want them to get on with governing. Alan Wilson. Tommy even the Govan Law Centre might be chancers -indeed the first one defintely is - but voters have [italic]rights[/italic] and effectively 100,000 of them were denied a say in last week's vital a razor tight elections. Would the SNP have won anyway ( probably) would the Greens have got more seats/ ( near definitely) would the Labour establishment be crying foul anyway (definitely). But none of this negates that a serious injustice has been done here. That is why we need a full and independent international inqury, and after that a full revote if necessary. And I can't think of a better circumstance for the SNP to win decisely and new labour to be finally beaten into history - out of Glasgow as well where the proportion of spoilt papers was highest. But the main winers would be the people, not just he 100, 000 discouted cheatedt week but he rest of us too, I dont want a privileged vote, just because I understood he ballot paper., I want a fair and equal one . Sign this petition please and help spread the word [bold]http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ScottishVoteScandal2007/[/bold]

TheWiseOne - I agree with much of what you say, but we can't just sweep this mess - I mean the worst bit of electoral malpracice in Western Europe for 50 years - under the carpet because the SNP won and you want them to get on with governing.

Alan Wilson. Tommy even the Govan Law Centre might be chancers -indeed the first one defintely is - but voters have rights and effectively 100,000 of them were denied a say in last week's vital a razor tight elections. Would the SNP have won anyway ( probably) would the Greens have got more seats/ ( near definitely) would the Labour establishment be crying foul anyway (definitely). But none of this negates that a serious injustice has been done here.

That is why we need a full and independent international inqury, and after that a full revote if necessary. And I can't think of a better circumstance for the SNP to win decisely and new labour to be finally beaten into history - out of Glasgow as well where the proportion of spoilt papers was highest.

But the main winers would be the people, not just he 100, 000 discouted cheatedt week but he rest of us too, I dont want a privileged vote, just because I understood he ballot paper., I want a fair and equal one .

Sign this petition please and help spread the word

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ScottishVoteScandal2007/

[quote][bold]Lynne[/bold] wrote: The nationalists are clearly quite happy for this election to count even although the views of over 80,000 voters have not been taken into account. The Labour Party only lost 4 seats, so it is clear that the SNP gained their seats from those that were lost by the small parties. This is a total travesty, and the Labour Party are quite right to challenge the decision in Cunninghame North. For many years, recounts were the order of the date in the constituency of Ayr, hotly contested between the Labour and Conservative Parties, where the majority very often ranged between 60 and 80. Neither of these parties would ever have questioned the other's right to ask for a recount, yet the SNP now accuses anyone questioning anything of 'sour grapes'. Is this the kind of banana republic or brave new world that we now live in, under Alex Salmond? [/quote] LYNNE You are right when you say that the labour party are able challenge the Cunningham Nth. decision....of that there is no doubt. You then reduce your position to a hot-headed rant at the SNP for claiming that labour were bad losers........well Lynne, tempers are running high on bothsides and people are saying things that they'll soon regret.. I hope you do too. Fact is that all the signs are that labour LOST..and wouldn't YOU be writing a post here if the SNP were making claims for re-counts and re-runs if the roles were reversed Firstly, it's VITAL that we establish what went wrong and who is to blame for this embarrassing fiasco. Heads should (rhetorically) roll for this. However, oyou may need reminding that the man with whom "the buck stops here" is one Douglas Alexander and the party he represents is the labour party. It'd seem to me that a quiet period of introspection is called for by labour party members, who need to come to terms with the fact that it was THEIR respobsibility to ensure that there was NO mal-administration of the new system. All the signs are that Douglas A. chose to ignore some pretty dire warnings of impending disaster, and that he refused to sanction the implementation of back-up safeguards (The Sunday Times covered this really well yesterday) in favour of his own leanings. This smacks of incompetence rather than deliberate deceit, but you should understand that in the immediate aftermath of the debacle, and bearing in mind the narrowness of the result, the preservation of our democratic processes is even MORE important than ever. Thus stamping your feet and attempting to blame Alex Salmond is a bit puerile. Cooler heads are called for I know........but aren't you amazed both that Jack McConnell hasn't (as in the normal order of things) seen fit to congratulate AlexSalmond??Who is the bad loser there?, Nor incidentally has Douglas Alexander seen fit to stick his head above the trench, in his role as the man to whom the public are entitled to seek answers to some VERY searching questions !!!.

Lynne wrote:
The nationalists are clearly quite happy for this election to count even although the views of over 80,000 voters have not been taken into account. The Labour Party only lost 4 seats, so it is clear that the SNP gained their seats from those that were lost by the small parties. This is a total travesty, and the Labour Party are quite right to challenge the decision in Cunninghame North. For many years, recounts were the order of the date in the constituency of Ayr, hotly contested between the Labour and Conservative Parties, where the majority very often ranged between 60 and 80. Neither of these parties would ever have questioned the other's right to ask for a recount, yet the SNP now accuses anyone questioning anything of 'sour grapes'. Is this the kind of banana republic or brave new world that we now live in, under Alex Salmond?

LYNNE
You are right when you say that the labour party are able challenge the Cunningham Nth. decision....of that there is no doubt.
You then reduce your position to a hot-headed rant at the SNP for claiming that labour were bad losers........well Lynne, tempers are running high on bothsides and people are saying things that they'll soon regret.. I hope you do too.
Fact is that all the signs are that labour LOST..and wouldn't YOU be writing a post here if the SNP were making claims for re-counts and re-runs if the roles were reversed
Firstly, it's VITAL that we establish what went wrong and who is to blame for this embarrassing fiasco. Heads should (rhetorically) roll for this. However, oyou may need reminding that the man with whom "the buck stops here" is one Douglas Alexander and the party he represents is the labour party. It'd seem to me that a quiet period of introspection is called for by labour party members, who need to come to terms with the fact that it was THEIR respobsibility to ensure that there was NO mal-administration of the new system. All the signs are that Douglas A. chose to ignore some pretty dire warnings of impending disaster, and that he refused to sanction the implementation of back-up safeguards (The Sunday Times covered this really well yesterday) in favour of his own leanings. This smacks of incompetence rather than deliberate deceit, but you should understand that in the immediate aftermath of the debacle, and bearing in mind the narrowness of the result, the preservation of our democratic processes is even MORE important than ever. Thus stamping your feet and attempting to blame Alex Salmond is a bit puerile. Cooler heads are called for I know........but aren't you amazed both that Jack McConnell hasn't (as in the normal order of things) seen fit to congratulate AlexSalmond??Who is the bad loser there?, Nor incidentally has Douglas Alexander seen fit to stick his head above the trench, in his role as the man to whom the public are entitled to seek answers to some VERY searching questions !!!.

[quote][bold]Alastair[/bold] wrote: This numpty, Allan Wilson (what a shambles of a speaker he is - Enterprise Minister? FFS someone has a sense of humour!) is only trying to subvert a democratic result, no doubt with the acquiescence of the Labour party. The case is basically "we lost, and that's not meant to happen, ergo there must be something wrong and it needs to be re-run until we win. Can I now request a re-run of last season's 2nd division playoffs because Morton lost 1-0 to a disputed penalty, so obviously it was really a draw as near as makes no difference so... you get my point? Wilson, you lost. Accept it and feck off![/quote] Yes,point made superbly!!

Alastair wrote:
This numpty, Allan Wilson (what a shambles of a speaker he is - Enterprise Minister? FFS someone has a sense of humour!) is only trying to subvert a democratic result, no doubt with the acquiescence of the Labour party. The case is basically "we lost, and that's not meant to happen, ergo there must be something wrong and it needs to be re-run until we win. Can I now request a re-run of last season's 2nd division playoffs because Morton lost 1-0 to a disputed penalty, so obviously it was really a draw as near as makes no difference so... you get my point? Wilson, you lost. Accept it and feck off!

Yes,point made superbly!!

[quote][bold]TheWiseOne[/bold] wrote: [bold]Posted by: Brian on 9:54am today 'Human rights are not about the will of the majority - quite the opposite and quite rightly so.'[/bold] I could see the point of a court case if the 9000 people involved had been denied a vote. They were not, therefore I don't see how their human rights were denied. [/quote] I agree you make a strong point. Perhaps the big worry is inconsistency - is it the case that some Returning Officers counted votes where the mark was ambiguous where others would not? For example if on the Holyrood sheets someone put the figure "1" instead of a cross but no other mark is that to be counted? I would say not as you failed to follow the instruction ("put a X") but others I speak to say it should be counted as the intention is clear. Either all ambiguous marks should be rejected or else the election result is down to the whim of one man or woman.

TheWiseOne wrote:
Posted by: Brian on 9:54am today 'Human rights are not about the will of the majority - quite the opposite and quite rightly so.' I could see the point of a court case if the 9000 people involved had been denied a vote. They were not, therefore I don't see how their human rights were denied.

I agree you make a strong point. Perhaps the big worry is inconsistency - is it the case that some Returning Officers counted votes where the mark was ambiguous where others would not? For example if on the Holyrood sheets someone put the figure "1" instead of a cross but no other mark is that to be counted? I would say not as you failed to follow the instruction ("put a X") but others I speak to say it should be counted as the intention is clear. Either all ambiguous marks should be rejected or else the election result is down to the whim of one man or woman.

Alan Smart

I am certainly behind an enquiry into the whole fiasco, but this does not take away from the fact that the election has been held, the results are known and to suggest a re-run would not be in the best interests of anyone.

Hold an enquiry, learn from the mistakes and ensure it does not happen again. This is the normal method when new processess/initiatives are introduced and things do not go to plan.

The fiasco over postal votes is certainly a scandal and should be investigated. The other aspect of this scandal, however, is that so many people were unable to understand how to complete their ballot papers. These people were not denied a vote - unless returning officers have ignored papers where the voter's intention was clear. I agree the Council elections should not have taken place on the same day but to argue that the election should be rerun because 100,000 people did not fill in their ballot forms correctly is nonsense. It is a tragedy that these votes could not be counted. The greater tragedy is that such a huge proportion of the electorate didn't vote at all. With turnout in some places at less than 50 per cent, none of the new MSPs should be feeling smug about their majorities.

I have only skimmed this article at this point admittedly, but is the basis of the legal challenge of the 'several voters' that they were too stupid to look at and read a ballot paper?

I think I may change my mind and congratulate the inept executive for accidentally inserting a basic intelligence test into the polling booth.

Mr Dailly said contacting each of the voters would be possible because the number of the ballot paper is written beside their name when they turn up to vote.

So much for the Secret Ballot.

What is Mike Dailly saying - it appears to be that a large number of the spoilt papers are from potential Solidarity or Green supporters. So supporters of all other parties were able to understand the papers and vote correctly but not those of the two other parties? If that's the case hell mend them!

When are we going to have a statement from Neil Kinnock?

For a Labour grandee - one who was known to be opposed to devolution, let alone independence - to be on the board of DRS (the company providing the electoral accounting equipment) is a somewhat embarassing situation.

Anyone reading the recent DRS (www.drs.co.uk) accounts will be clear that this was a very big job for them. I'm sure that Neil Kinnock 's Labour Connections didn't help them get the job, but surely it would be wise for him to clarify the situation. Otherwise it doesn't look good.

Lets get this straight - SNP leader calls for a recount in Aberdeen when his candidate loses by a few hundred votes (with a higher number of spoint papers) and thats alright. Labour call for a recount when they lose by 48 votes with a greater amount of spoilt papers as well as evidence suggesting foul play thats just childish? The SNP are showing their commitment to democracy by trying to grip on to a parliamentary seat that they may not be entitled to. If Labour are just being childish, surely the SNP have got nothing to worry about? Also, I really do hope that the Govan legal challage is taken up. The SNP made most of their gains from the deline of 'other parties'. If the Govan Law Society is anything to go by, the SNP were not entitled to all those list seats they gained from Glasgow. Looks like these National 'Socialists' have managed to gain power only by replicating the same commitment to democracy as another nationalist socialist party from Germany in 1933...

Lets get this straight - SNP leader calls for a recount in Aberdeen when his candidate loses by a few hundred votes (with a higher number of spoint papers) and thats alright.
Labour call for a recount when they lose by 48 votes with a greater amount of spoilt papers as well as evidence suggesting foul play thats just childish?

The SNP are showing their commitment to democracy by trying to grip on to a parliamentary seat that they may not be entitled to. If Labour are just being childish, surely the SNP have got nothing to worry about?

Also, I really do hope that the Govan legal challage is taken up. The SNP made most of their gains from the deline of 'other parties'. If the Govan Law Society is anything to go by, the SNP were not entitled to all those list seats they gained from Glasgow.

Looks like these National 'Socialists' have managed to gain power only by replicating the same commitment to democracy as another nationalist socialist party from Germany in 1933...

Perhaps with all this hot headed SNP v Labour rot, lets sit down and see who the real losers are; the people. We are supposed to live in a democracy, but Scotland has shown the world we are anything but. We have an overlord in Westminster which bends over backwards to make sure that our Parliament in Edinburgh is ridiculed at every opportunity. The way in which this Parliament has been elected has been rigged as an affront to democracy by both Westminster and their lackeys here in Scotland. Short of calling for a complete re-run of the whole parliamentary election I do believe that in constituencies where the majority is less than that of the number of spoilt ballot papers, then there should be a by-election there. Allan Wilson lost by only 48 votes and I can understand his feelings of frustration. I am and always have been a supporter of the SNP, but first and foremost I am a democrat, and democracy must take first place before petty party politics. As for those who insult the intelligence of the electorate in saying that they are incapable of reading the ballot papers. I say to you, have you never been confused? Have you never made a mistake? Have you never been led up the garden path? Were the pathes to the ballot boxes not strewn with deliberate traps in the first place, our country would not be seen today as a basket case in the eyes of the democratic world.

Perhaps with all this hot headed SNP v Labour rot, lets sit down and see who the real losers are; the people. We are supposed to live in a democracy, but Scotland has shown the world we are anything but. We have an overlord in Westminster which bends over backwards to make sure that our Parliament in Edinburgh is ridiculed at every opportunity. The way in which this Parliament has been elected has been rigged as an affront to democracy by both Westminster and their lackeys here in Scotland.
Short of calling for a complete re-run of the whole parliamentary election I do believe that in constituencies where the majority is less than that of the number of spoilt ballot papers, then there should be a by-election there. Allan Wilson lost by only 48 votes and I can understand his feelings of frustration. I am and always have been a supporter of the SNP, but first and foremost I am a democrat, and democracy must take first place before petty party politics.
As for those who insult the intelligence of the electorate in saying that they are incapable of reading the ballot papers. I say to you, have you never been confused? Have you never made a mistake? Have you never been led up the garden path? Were the pathes to the ballot boxes not strewn with deliberate traps in the first place, our country would not be seen today as a basket case in the eyes of the democratic world.

[quote][bold]Michael Strachan[/bold] wrote: Lets get this straight - SNP leader calls for a recount in Aberdeen when his candidate loses by a few hundred votes (with a higher number of spoint papers) and thats alright. Labour call for a recount when they lose by 48 votes with a greater amount of spoilt papers as well as evidence suggesting foul play thats just childish? The SNP are showing their commitment to democracy by trying to grip on to a parliamentary seat that they may not be entitled to. If Labour are just being childish, surely the SNP have got nothing to worry about? Also, I really do hope that the Govan legal challage is taken up. The SNP made most of their gains from the deline of 'other parties'. If the Govan Law Society is anything to go by, the SNP were not entitled to all those list seats they gained from Glasgow. Looks like these National 'Socialists' have managed to gain power only by replicating the same commitment to democracy as another nationalist socialist party from Germany in 1933... [/quote] Listen. I say as an SNP supporter.....RE-RUN the whole election! Now that the fear has been broken and NuLabour have been shown up as the petty 'stairheed hairies' they actually are, I am confident that the SNP would romp it. Bring it on, never mind the silly legal challenges which only serve to make NuLabour look the sore losers we know them to be.

Michael Strachan wrote:
Lets get this straight - SNP leader calls for a recount in Aberdeen when his candidate loses by a few hundred votes (with a higher number of spoint papers) and thats alright.
Labour call for a recount when they lose by 48 votes with a greater amount of spoilt papers as well as evidence suggesting foul play thats just childish?

The SNP are showing their commitment to democracy by trying to grip on to a parliamentary seat that they may not be entitled to. If Labour are just being childish, surely the SNP have got nothing to worry about?

Also, I really do hope that the Govan legal challage is taken up. The SNP made most of their gains from the deline of 'other parties'. If the Govan Law Society is anything to go by, the SNP were not entitled to all those list seats they gained from Glasgow.

Looks like these National 'Socialists' have managed to gain power only by replicating the same commitment to democracy as another nationalist socialist party from Germany in 1933...

Listen.

I say as an SNP supporter.....RE-RUN the whole election!

Now that the fear has been broken and NuLabour have been shown up as the petty 'stairheed hairies' they actually are, I am confident that the SNP would romp it.

Bring it on, never mind the silly legal challenges which only serve to make NuLabour look the sore losers we know them to be.

Michael from Fraserburgh, your comments are an insult to the millions who voted for the SNP. To even try to associate the SNP with the NSPD (The Nazi Party) is the lowest I have seen an anti-SNP bigot slither. Remember it is the Labour Party in Westminster who decided how Scotland's Parliament should be elected. Don't blame the SNP when things go breasts-skywards!

[quote][bold]Michael Strachan[/bold] wrote: Lets get this straight - SNP leader calls for a recount in Aberdeen when his candidate loses by a few hundred votes (with a higher number of spoint papers) and thats alright. Labour call for a recount when they lose by 48 votes with a greater amount of spoilt papers as well as evidence suggesting foul play thats just childish? The SNP are showing their commitment to democracy by trying to grip on to a parliamentary seat that they may not be entitled to. If Labour are just being childish, surely the SNP have got nothing to worry about? Also, I really do hope that the Govan legal challage is taken up. The SNP made most of their gains from the deline of 'other parties'. If the Govan Law Society is anything to go by, the SNP were not entitled to all those list seats they gained from Glasgow. Looks like these National 'Socialists' have managed to gain power only by replicating the same commitment to democracy as another nationalist socialist party from Germany in 1933... [/quote] [bold]Looks like these National 'Socialists' have managed to gain power only by replicating the same commitment to democracy as another nationalist socialist party from Germany in 1933... [/bold] Is anyone else heart sick of this particularly sick innuendo and smear? My father and Grandfather fought fascism in WW11 and were supporters of the SNP, they were no more fascist than I am. Time to lose this scandalous slur, probably the nastiest one that NuLabour and it's supporters throw around. There is a deal of difference between some gentle name calling and the inference that nationalists are fascists. Stop it now.

Michael Strachan wrote:
Lets get this straight - SNP leader calls for a recount in Aberdeen when his candidate loses by a few hundred votes (with a higher number of spoint papers) and thats alright.
Labour call for a recount when they lose by 48 votes with a greater amount of spoilt papers as well as evidence suggesting foul play thats just childish?

The SNP are showing their commitment to democracy by trying to grip on to a parliamentary seat that they may not be entitled to. If Labour are just being childish, surely the SNP have got nothing to worry about?

Also, I really do hope that the Govan legal challage is taken up. The SNP made most of their gains from the deline of 'other parties'. If the Govan Law Society is anything to go by, the SNP were not entitled to all those list seats they gained from Glasgow.

Looks like these National 'Socialists' have managed to gain power only by replicating the same commitment to democracy as another nationalist socialist party from Germany in 1933...

Looks like these National 'Socialists' have managed to gain power only by replicating the same commitment to democracy as another nationalist socialist party from Germany in 1933...

Is anyone else heart sick of this particularly sick innuendo and smear?

My father and Grandfather fought fascism in WW11 and were supporters of the SNP, they were no more fascist than I am.
Time to lose this scandalous slur, probably the nastiest one that NuLabour and it's supporters throw around.

There is a deal of difference between some gentle name calling and the inference that nationalists are fascists.

Stop it now.

I've never been a conspiracy theorist in my life.
Not JFK
Not Moon Landing
Not Roswell
Not Shergar
Not.....................(well, make up your own list)
HOWEVER, the more I see of this, the more I smell a rat.............labour under pressure...........Neil Kinnock and DRS......postal voters left out.........Refused safeguards in system.....etc, etc.................................it's clear that SOMEONE didn't do their job.....with Douglas Alexander (hasn't HE gone quiet for once)...seemingly the main man.
WE NEED A FULL JUDICIAL ENQUIRY.........NOW

Lynne, Glasgow. I was at the count for the two Paisley seats and West Renfrewshire, where there were approximately 2,700 rejected votes in total. Labour and SNP noticed, in fact pointed out to each other, what was happening with the Parliamentary ballot paper. Lots and lots of folk were voting twice on the the Regional list and not on the Constituency paper. All parties were affected by this, but mainly the SNP and Labour parties. The ballot paper could have been confusing if it wasn't read properly. At the very top it said "You have [bold]two[/bold] votes only" and then above the column on on each paper where the cross was to be put, it said, "Vote only once". Clear enough if you take your time. It is the voter's responsibility to ensure they understand the paper before voting and if they had any doubts they could have asked the staff. Once they had put their 2 crosses on the Regional list ballot paper, they had invalidated their paper. As I said the SNP and Labour were the main, but not exclusive, losers in this. Do you really want to re-run Cunninghame North and run the risk of increasing the SNP majority. Funny that the SNP aren't challenging the Kelvin result, where the ballots rejected and the Labour majority were almost the same. Additionally, the system chosen to run this election is automated, so any recount should use the same system as the original count i.e. run all the ballot papers through the scanners again and follow the same process as the original count. If a manual recount is ordered by the courts, then we can look forward to all the automated counts being challenged and if successful, then being recounted by hand. I the meantime, who is running the country?

Lynne, Glasgow.

I was at the count for the two Paisley seats and West Renfrewshire, where there were approximately 2,700 rejected votes in total. Labour and SNP noticed, in fact pointed out to each other, what was happening with the Parliamentary ballot paper. Lots and lots of folk were voting twice on the the Regional list and not on the Constituency paper. All parties were affected by this, but mainly the SNP and Labour parties. The ballot paper could have been confusing if it wasn't read properly. At the very top it said "You have two votes only" and then above the column on on each paper where the cross was to be put, it said, "Vote only once". Clear enough if you take your time. It is the voter's responsibility to ensure they understand the paper before voting and if they had any doubts they could have asked the staff. Once they had put their 2 crosses on the Regional list ballot paper, they had invalidated their paper.

As I said the SNP and Labour were the main, but not exclusive, losers in this. Do you really want to re-run Cunninghame North and run the risk of increasing the SNP majority. Funny that the SNP aren't challenging the Kelvin result, where the ballots rejected and the Labour majority were almost the same.

Additionally, the system chosen to run this election is automated, so any recount should use the same system as the original count i.e. run all the ballot papers through the scanners again and follow the same process as the original count. If a manual recount is ordered by the courts, then we can look forward to all the automated counts being challenged and if successful, then being recounted by hand.

I the meantime, who is running the country?

Craig wrote:
Since when was it possible for the goverment able to tell who people voted for? Is there nobody else concerned about this?

Bar codes against voting papers etc? You bet I'm concerned. If spoiled ballot papers are going to be checked, I would like a check on all non-spoiled papers, or rather those DEEMED to be non-spoiled and allowed. A total farce. Let's have another election.

[quote][bold]Bob Linklater[/bold] wrote: The SNP administration is knacked before it\'s even begun. Let\'s see the dopey squad run by that smug p r i c k Salmond dodge along for the next 18 months and then have to apologose to Scotland for the baws he\'s made of things. Scotland has spoken and they don\'t want independence - otherwise the SNP would have a lot more seats and Labour ould have lost more than 4.[/quote] Smug? Isn't that why the Scottish people rejected the 5 decade hegemony of the unbeatable Neo Con Labour party? My definition of a **** is a sharp device to burst over-inflated balloons - you could be right there Bob!

Bob Linklater wrote:
The SNP administration is knacked before it\'s even begun.

Let\'s see the dopey squad run by that smug p r i c k Salmond dodge along for the next 18 months and then have to apologose to Scotland for the baws he\'s made of things.

Scotland has spoken and they don\'t want independence - otherwise the SNP would have a lot more seats and Labour ould have lost more than 4.

Smug? Isn't that why the Scottish people rejected the 5 decade hegemony of the unbeatable Neo Con Labour party? My definition of a **** is a sharp device to burst over-inflated balloons - you could be right there Bob!