Scotland could look to New Zealand as a model Government in Scotland is about to get much more complicated. Where the past two administrations have seen straightforward coalition between two parties, it is unlikely the next four years will see anything so simple.
Labour and the LibDems negotiated binding partnership agreements, with hundreds of policies that they promised to support over the four-year term of each parliament.
Now, other possibilities are opening up with a partnership of at least three parties now required to reach a majority.
Greens are keen on a "confidence-and-supply" model of government, in which the smaller party backs the larger one if the leader is challenged to a no confidence' vote, and also agrees to vote through the budget on agreed conditions. All other votes are up for discussion.
One place that has lots to teach the new Scottish political system is New Zealand, even if it was also the country that set the calamitous example of the ballot form that more than 100,000 people failed to understand when they voted last Thursday.
The present coalition in the Wellington legislature has Prime Minister Helen Clark leading a minority government coalition with her own Labour Party in agreement with the Progressive Party. To make up numbers and secure a majority, there is confidence-and-supply support from two small parties.
The leader of one of them, New Zealand First, is the country's Foreign Minister, while the leader of United Future is the Minister of Revenue. Yet neither man sits in the cabinet.
Further support comes from the NZ Green Party, which has no ministerial post but used its leverage to secure policy concessions from Labour on energy and transport.
A Scottish expert on this is Margaret Curran, who went to New Zealand to find out more. But it looks increasingly unlikely that the Scottish Labour Parliament Minister will have a chance to put the lessons into effect.
12:30am Monday 7th May 2007  Print  Email this  CommentPosted by: Lachie Mor MacDougall, Fort William on 2:19pm Mon 7 May 07 So New Zealand has a coalition that works. So why can't Scotland ?
Labour are sore after there defeat after their 50 year stranglehold of Scottish politics. They will try every insidious trick they can to spoil Alex Salmonds party. The Tories won't work with anyone so what's the point of them. Likewise the Lib-Dems.. they worked with Labour for the last 8 years and look where that got us. Ross Finnie the big haddie effectively screwed our shipping and fishing industry. Now the Lib-Dems, a wee party with not much point to them,won't work with the SNP because they don't want a referendum on Independance. What are they frightened of ? The rest of the world must look on us as a bunch of squabbling bairns throwing the dummies out of our prams. So New Zealand has a coalition that works. So why can't Scotland ?
Labour are sore after there defeat after their 50 year stranglehold of Scottish politics. They will try every insidious trick they can to spoil Alex Salmonds party. The Tories won't work with anyone so what's the point of them. Likewise the Lib-Dems.. they worked with Labour for the last 8 years and look where that got us. Ross Finnie the big haddie effectively screwed our shipping and fishing industry. Now the Lib-Dems, a wee party with not much point to them,won't work with the SNP because they don't want a referendum on Independance. What are they frightened of ? The rest of the world must look on us as a bunch of squabbling bairns throwing the dummies out of our prams. Posted by: Sense and worth o\'er the Earh, Scotland on 5:11pm Mon 7 May 07 This was always on the cards.
Whereas the Lib-Dems have folded like a cheap suit in the past nursing the chance of power - giving up key pledges to sleep with Labour (students/education etc) there has very obviously been some general unionist bartering here.
Knocking back labour is a smokescreen to appear reasonable.
Not wanting to deal with the Nats is the most damaging thing *all* the unionist parties could have wished for. I suspect this was the outcome they had settled on very early on.
It now means that the SNP cannot govern in a progressive manner - in a manner that would benefit Scotland.
It now leaves the inevitable prospect of Labour mocking SNP *failures* as their tabloids will doubtless support it. Everytime the SNP get knocked back, it will be a *win* for Scottish democracy etc.
It's a sham - and the Lib-Dems, rather than grasping on to history, putting themselves in a position for real change, have proved they are again the most spineless bunch of politicians at Holyrood.
Having sold their principles down the river before, several times, they reject a party that has a great deal in common with them - and even *offers* the choice of 'more parliamentary powers' the Libs have been banging on about for moons.
To not be fooled. See it for what it is Scotland. Unionist bully-boy tactics.
Let's ask the question:
Why are the Lib-Dems, having campaigned on 'empowering the parliament', having seen that the SNP are willing to put the third option on the referendum paper - *not* willing to do negotiate on any terms?
If the Union - as Labour would have us believe - is as safe as houses - *what* have they got to be scared of?
ASK the question BBC!
ASK the question Scotsman!
ASK the question Herald!
ASK the question people of Scotland!
Why? Because the Unionist parties are scared of SNP progress at Holyrood. Actual progress. They are scared of any 'democracy' that occurs after such progress.
The SNP are willing to go for it - put it to the *people* - see if this unionist support comes through.
*Why* not the Labour and Liberal parties?
I'll tell you why! The prospect of SNP success and people voting on it.
They're scared that Scotland will see beyond toilet roll like the Daily Record and The Sun and start to build their self-confidence - heaven forbid - as the SNP have their chance at Holyrood.
Let's out their cowardly, undemocratic, selfish, anti-progressive, anti-people poliicies and expose these cretins for the imbeciles they are.
This was always on the cards.
Whereas the Lib-Dems have folded like a cheap suit in the past nursing the chance of power - giving up key pledges to sleep with Labour (students/education etc) there has very obviously been some general unionist bartering here.
Knocking back labour is a smokescreen to appear reasonable.
Not wanting to deal with the Nats is the most damaging thing *all* the unionist parties could have wished for. I suspect this was the outcome they had settled on very early on.
It now means that the SNP cannot govern in a progressive manner - in a manner that would benefit Scotland.
It now leaves the inevitable prospect of Labour mocking SNP *failures* as their tabloids will doubtless support it. Everytime the SNP get knocked back, it will be a *win* for Scottish democracy etc.
It's a sham - and the Lib-Dems, rather than grasping on to history, putting themselves in a position for real change, have proved they are again the most spineless bunch of politicians at Holyrood.
Having sold their principles down the river before, several times, they reject a party that has a great deal in common with them - and even *offers* the choice of 'more parliamentary powers' the Libs have been banging on about for moons.
To not be fooled. See it for what it is Scotland. Unionist bully-boy tactics.
Let's ask the question:
Why are the Lib-Dems, having campaigned on 'empowering the parliament', having seen that the SNP are willing to put the third option on the referendum paper - *not* willing to do negotiate on any terms?
If the Union - as Labour would have us believe - is as safe as houses - *what* have they got to be scared of?
ASK the question BBC!
ASK the question Scotsman!
ASK the question Herald!
ASK the question people of Scotland!
Why? Because the Unionist parties are scared of SNP progress at Holyrood. Actual progress. They are scared of any 'democracy' that occurs after such progress.
The SNP are willing to go for it - put it to the *people* - see if this unionist support comes through.
*Why* not the Labour and Liberal parties?
I'll tell you why! The prospect of SNP success and people voting on it.
They're scared that Scotland will see beyond toilet roll like the Daily Record and The Sun and start to build their self-confidence - heaven forbid - as the SNP have their chance at Holyrood.
Let's out their cowardly, undemocratic, selfish, anti-progressive, anti-people poliicies and expose these cretins for the imbeciles they are.
Posted by: Tommy, Glasgow on 8:55pm Mon 7 May 07 [bold]AMEN[/bold] Posted by: Ian, NZ on 10:30pm Mon 7 May 07 Dear God no...
This article suggests all is sweetness and light in the NZ government. Anything but I'm afraid. In every election since this ludicrous system was introduced, the horse-trading following the count has been ever more cynical and unseemly. Dear God no...
This article suggests all is sweetness and light in the NZ government. Anything but I'm afraid. In every election since this ludicrous system was introduced, the horse-trading following the count has been ever more cynical and unseemly. Posted by: Bruce on 8:36am Tue 8 May 07 Sense and worth
I think you've nailed it on the head.
Labour party taken by surprise by Tavish? Doubt it very much. As you say, they are letting Mr Salmond hing. They will all (LibDems and Labour) get their act together to: query the counts, the processes, the results. They will foment disquiet. They will ensure at every turn to look as though they are the hurt and guiltless ones as they seek quietly to undermine every action of Salmond and his team.
Burns was right then, he'd be even more right now. Sense and worth
I think you've nailed it on the head.
Labour party taken by surprise by Tavish? Doubt it very much. As you say, they are letting Mr Salmond hing. They will all (LibDems and Labour) get their act together to: query the counts, the processes, the results. They will foment disquiet. They will ensure at every turn to look as though they are the hurt and guiltless ones as they seek quietly to undermine every action of Salmond and his team.
Burns was right then, he'd be even more right now. Posted by: Angus McIonnach, Embra on 1:45pm Tue 8 May 07 Re: NZ minority governments. It'll all end in tears. Expect NZ to negotiate for Union with the UK in a few months. Re: NZ minority governments. It'll all end in tears. Expect NZ to negotiate for Union with the UK in a few months. Posted by: First Past The Post, scotland on 8:32pm Wed 9 May 07 This is what you get with coaltion politics a bloody mess . This is what you get with coaltion politics a bloody mess . Posted by: rob4i, Selkirkshire on 11:36am Thu 10 May 07 The problem with using the NZ model is the same problem using other European minority governments as an example, is that, they are all independent countries and so it can work between opposing parties as they are governing in the interest of their own nation without any OTHER agendas as is the case with our set up.
That, is what is wrong with the UNION set up in our politics, it is invariably counter productive in a devolved parliament situation, which brings us back to independence is best, for ANY country, let alone such an educated and potentially progressive country as Scotland and all it has given to the world over the centuries.
Minority Government could work in Scotland, but while we find ourselves in a position of the 3 main pro-union UK parties operating now, in a Scottish devolved parliament, trying to destabilize Scotland politically by refusing to co-operate with the incoming pro-independence party, is counter productive and trying their best to prove to the Scottish electorate that pro-independence parties cannot and will not survive in Scottish politics, which is obviously a totally UNDEMOCRATIC position and therefor BAD for Scotland.
They have, since the elections especially, shown our country, that it is the pro-union viewpoint that will destroy Scotland and independence as the only successful way forward, and if this does not happen then we truly are just "North Britain". The problem with using the NZ model is the same problem using other European minority governments as an example, is that, they are all independent countries and so it can work between opposing parties as they are governing in the interest of their own nation without any OTHER agendas as is the case with our set up.
That, is what is wrong with the UNION set up in our politics, it is invariably counter productive in a devolved parliament situation, which brings us back to independence is best, for ANY country, let alone such an educated and potentially progressive country as Scotland and all it has given to the world over the centuries.
Minority Government could work in Scotland, but while we find ourselves in a position of the 3 main pro-union UK parties operating now, in a Scottish devolved parliament, trying to destabilize Scotland politically by refusing to co-operate with the incoming pro-independence party, is counter productive and trying their best to prove to the Scottish electorate that pro-independence parties cannot and will not survive in Scottish politics, which is obviously a totally UNDEMOCRATIC position and therefor BAD for Scotland.
They have, since the elections especially, shown our country, that it is the pro-union viewpoint that will destroy Scotland and independence as the only successful way forward, and if this does not happen then we truly are just "North Britain". Posted by: Fiona Sinclair, Ayrshire on 9:36pm Thu 10 May 07 [quote][bold]Sense and worth o'er the Earh[/bold] wrote:
This was always on the cards.
Whereas the Lib-Dems have folded like a cheap suit in the past nursing the chance of power - giving up key pledges to sleep with Labour (students/education etc) there has very obviously been some general unionist bartering here.
Knocking back labour is a smokescreen to appear reasonable.
Not wanting to deal with the Nats is the most damaging thing *all* the unionist parties could have wished for. I suspect this was the outcome they had settled on very early on.
It now means that the SNP cannot govern in a progressive manner - in a manner that would benefit Scotland.
It now leaves the inevitable prospect of Labour mocking SNP *failures* as their tabloids will doubtless support it. Everytime the SNP get knocked back, it will be a *win* for Scottish democracy etc.
It's a sham - and the Lib-Dems, rather than grasping on to history, putting themselves in a position for real change, have proved they are again the most spineless bunch of politicians at Holyrood.
Having sold their principles down the river before, several times, they reject a party that has a great deal in common with them - and even *offers* the choice of 'more parliamentary powers' the Libs have been banging on about for moons.
To not be fooled. See it for what it is Scotland. Unionist bully-boy tactics.
Let's ask the question:
Why are the Lib-Dems, having campaigned on 'empowering the parliament', having seen that the SNP are willing to put the third option on the referendum paper - *not* willing to do negotiate on any terms?
If the Union - as Labour would have us believe - is as safe as houses - *what* have they got to be scared of?
ASK the question BBC!
ASK the question Scotsman!
ASK the question Herald!
ASK the question people of Scotland!
Why? Because the Unionist parties are scared of SNP progress at Holyrood. Actual progress. They are scared of any 'democracy' that occurs after such progress.
The SNP are willing to go for it - put it to the *people* - see if this unionist support comes through.
*Why* not the Labour and Liberal parties?
I'll tell you why! The prospect of SNP success and people voting on it.
They're scared that Scotland will see beyond toilet roll like the Daily Record and The Sun and start to build their self-confidence - heaven forbid - as the SNP have their chance at Holyrood.
Let's out their cowardly, undemocratic, selfish, anti-progressive, anti-people poliicies and expose these cretins for the imbeciles they are.
[/quote] Absolutely excellent analysis, Sense and worth o'er the Earth.
Please join www.youscotland.com - if you haven't already. We need to investigate thoroughly all that happened with the election, in order to try to prevent the scenario you describe - which is exactly as I see it, too. Incompetence is just the cover for a deliberate, planned fiasco - it's NuLabour's style. That way, they knew they would be in a win-win situation, with a close win still a win, but a close win for the SNP could be characterised as a defeat, because of the PR system's guarantee of no overall majority and the majority being unionist seats. They knew the SNP wasn't going to manage an overall majority in just one election.
As for the technology - the actual software that did the count has not so far received much attention -
Eternal Vigilance-Clint Curtis Tom Feeney ELECTION FRAUD - software can be written to enable vote-rigging -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9BiVJucsM4
Advice from the Electoral Commission on how to judge what constitutes a vote and what doesn't-
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/files/dms/Doubtful-Scot-Parl-Final_25173-18666__S__.pdf
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION CALLING FOR A FULL INDEPENDENT ENQUIRY (NOT A SHAM PIECE OF PAPER-SHIFTING BY THE ORGANISATION THAT IS PARTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CREATING THIS MESS:-
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ScottishVoteScandal2007/?e
www.youscotland.com - the New Enlightenment begins online
Sense and worth o'er the Earh wrote:
This was always on the cards.
Whereas the Lib-Dems have folded like a cheap suit in the past nursing the chance of power - giving up key pledges to sleep with Labour (students/education etc) there has very obviously been some general unionist bartering here.
Knocking back labour is a smokescreen to appear reasonable.
Not wanting to deal with the Nats is the most damaging thing *all* the unionist parties could have wished for. I suspect this was the outcome they had settled on very early on.
It now means that the SNP cannot govern in a progressive manner - in a manner that would benefit Scotland.
It now leaves the inevitable prospect of Labour mocking SNP *failures* as their tabloids will doubtless support it. Everytime the SNP get knocked back, it will be a *win* for Scottish democracy etc.
It's a sham - and the Lib-Dems, rather than grasping on to history, putting themselves in a position for real change, have proved they are again the most spineless bunch of politicians at Holyrood.
Having sold their principles down the river before, several times, they reject a party that has a great deal in common with them - and even *offers* the choice of 'more parliamentary powers' the Libs have been banging on about for moons.
To not be fooled. See it for what it is Scotland. Unionist bully-boy tactics.
Let's ask the question:
Why are the Lib-Dems, having campaigned on 'empowering the parliament', having seen that the SNP are willing to put the third option on the referendum paper - *not* willing to do negotiate on any terms?
If the Union - as Labour would have us believe - is as safe as houses - *what* have they got to be scared of?
ASK the question BBC!
ASK the question Scotsman!
ASK the question Herald!
ASK the question people of Scotland!
Why? Because the Unionist parties are scared of SNP progress at Holyrood. Actual progress. They are scared of any 'democracy' that occurs after such progress.
The SNP are willing to go for it - put it to the *people* - see if this unionist support comes through.
*Why* not the Labour and Liberal parties?
I'll tell you why! The prospect of SNP success and people voting on it.
They're scared that Scotland will see beyond toilet roll like the Daily Record and The Sun and start to build their self-confidence - heaven forbid - as the SNP have their chance at Holyrood.
Let's out their cowardly, undemocratic, selfish, anti-progressive, anti-people poliicies and expose these cretins for the imbeciles they are.
Absolutely excellent analysis, Sense and worth o'er the Earth.
Please join www.youscotland.com - if you haven't already. We need to investigate thoroughly all that happened with the election, in order to try to prevent the scenario you describe - which is exactly as I see it, too. Incompetence is just the cover for a deliberate, planned fiasco - it's NuLabour's style. That way, they knew they would be in a win-win situation, with a close win still a win, but a close win for the SNP could be characterised as a defeat, because of the PR system's guarantee of no overall majority and the majority being unionist seats. They knew the SNP wasn't going to manage an overall majority in just one election.
As for the technology - the actual software that did the count has not so far received much attention -
Eternal Vigilance-Clint Curtis Tom Feeney ELECTION FRAUD - software can be written to enable vote-rigging -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9BiVJucsM4
Advice from the Electoral Commission on how to judge what constitutes a vote and what doesn't-
http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/files/dms/Doubtful-Scot-Parl-Final_25173-18666__S__.pdf
PLEASE SIGN THE PETITION CALLING FOR A FULL INDEPENDENT ENQUIRY (NOT A SHAM PIECE OF PAPER-SHIFTING BY THE ORGANISATION THAT IS PARTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR CREATING THIS MESS:-
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/ScottishVoteScandal2007/?e
www.youscotland.com - the New Enlightenment begins online
| 
