Labour Stunned By Scotts Claim Parties Cannot Form Executive (from The Herald Election Site)

The Labour Party was left stunned yesterday by Tavish Scott's claim the parties could not form the next Scottish Executive.

Senior Labour sources last night insisted they could still lead the next administration and questioned whether Liberal Democrat Mr Scott, former Transport Minister, had even been speaking on behalf of his party.

But Nicola Sturgeon, the SNP's deputy leader, mocked Labour by accusing them of being "in denial" and called on them to accept they had lost the election.

Mr Scott's comments, made on a lunchtime TV programme, came as a complete shock to Labour.

The new LibDem parliamentary group met in Edinburgh on Saturday afternoon and had afterwards given no indication that they were ruling out a future deal with the Labour Party.

A Labour source said yesterday: "(Tavish Scott's comments) did come as a surprise, but it may have come as a surprise to some other LibDems as well.

"They cast some doubt on whether this was the decision taken at the LibDem meeting." The source said that while the SNP had won the election "by the narrowest of margins", they were entitled to make the first attempts at striking a partnership agreement with other parties.

But the source said it would not be possible for the Nationalists to run a minority administration and that Labour would be waiting in the wings if Alex Salmond and his negotiating team fail to get a deal.

"They've won the toss and get to move first," the source said. "It's going to be a very interesting game of chess over the next 28 days.

"If the SNP have the maturity and character to form a government, then they are best placed to do that.

"If they can't then other parties may wish to consider their options." Jack McConnell told BBC Radio Scotland's Sunday Live programme: "Alex Salmond has 47 out of 129 MSPs, I have 46. The other parties are part of the equation here.

"I don't want to presume anything at all, although I do want to recognise that (the SNP) are the largest party and they should make the first move. But if they are incapable of putting the interests of Scotland first in forming a government, then me and the Labour Party - we won't necessarily be able to do it, but we stand ready to make the right decisions in the interests of Scotland."

Nicola Sturgeon said: "The SNP are working hard to construct a progressive coalition, given that the people of Scotland voted for a new government last Thursday."

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.

Jack McConnell hovering like jackal!!!! Poor Scotland you deserve better than these rogues.

There's still a bit of cognitive dissonance going on in Labour's ranks. Clearly, they can't quite grasp the fact that they lost. It may only have been by one seat, as Cathy Jamieson seemed keen to point out, but nothing can turn that into a win. Alex Salmond will make an outstanding First Minister and Nicola Sturgeon will be an excellent Deputy. I look forward to seeing the SNP govern Scotland.

It seems to me the comments so far are not taking account of the fact that the distribution of seats in the new parliament, should they stand electoral and legal scrutiny, make the formation of a viable executive very difficult. No doubt there has been a big shift in seats to the SNP, and no doubt the moral authority to try to form a government is theirs. But most of these seats did not, it seems, come at the net expense of Labour. And since the number of Labour seats is only one less than the SNP's, their difficulties in forming a coalition would be only slightly greater than those the SNP presently face. Finally, should the results of the muddle of an election be successfully challenged, it seems likely that the task of forming a viable government will become even more difficult since it seems like such a successful challenge would result in a minor party candidate replacing an SNP or a Labour list candidate.

That's quite a quote Jack. "If the SNP are incapable of putting the interests of Scotland first". When are you going to start doing that? You might begin by showing Alex Salmond the courtesy of acknowledging in a telephone call that his Party beat you in the election!

JAke McDougall said "... then me and the Labour Party ..." Here was me thinking his matra was Education, Education, Education...he can't even grasp simple grammar... Jack, you lost. Get used to it. Pis off like the electorate desire, and let the real politicians move Scotland forward. You may have 46 MSPs, but most of them are backed by the numpties in West-central Scotland, not the majority of Scotland which is a diverse and well-balanced political map. Labour have no morals full-stop. let alone any moral right to rule Scotland for one day more... The people of Scotland need to rise up and pressure the LibDems. It is a democratic right for a country to determine its constitutional future. Yes, not all believe in independence, but many do...it is our right to have our say. If the libdems don't support the idea, they can vote against it, but they should not block the vote in the first place...what are they scared of? If, as they claim, most Scots oppose it, then they have nothing to worry about...or is it as we all knwo, many independence-mind people vote Labour and Libdem...so the vote may actually be closer than we are told?!!!

JAke McDougall said "... then me and the Labour Party ..." Here was me thinking his matra was Education, Education, Education...he can't even grasp simple grammar...

Jack, you lost. Get used to it. Pis off like the electorate desire, and let the real politicians move Scotland forward. You may have 46 MSPs, but most of them are backed by the numpties in West-central Scotland, not the majority of Scotland which is a diverse and well-balanced political map.

Labour have no morals full-stop. let alone any moral right to rule Scotland for one day more...

The people of Scotland need to rise up and pressure the LibDems. It is a democratic right for a country to determine its constitutional future. Yes, not all believe in independence, but many do...it is our right to have our say. If the libdems don't support the idea, they can vote against it, but they should not block the vote in the first place...what are they scared of? If, as they claim, most Scots oppose it, then they have nothing to worry about...or is it as we all knwo, many independence-mind people vote Labour and Libdem...so the vote may actually be closer than we are told?!!!

So, it would seem you do not get the politicians you deserve. The SNP won but cannot form a govt. The Labour Party lost but hope to be the govt. The Lib Dems come fourth but arrogantly decide that they have the right to determine the future governance of Scotland. Hold on, what am I thinking, of course you get the politicians you deserve. They perfectly reflect the moral and social malaise from which they've emerged. This lot will go on to lecture us lot about respect for civic society, about the moral order and the need for honesty and fair play, about the great prize of democracy and condemn the abuse or rejection of 'democracy' abroad. Perhaps there is some honesty in the Lib Dems acceptance of their position as the fourth party and rightly realise they have no mandate to form part of a govt. The test of their integrity will come when the minority Scottish govt. under Alex Salmond tries to push through legislation upon which there is common ground, do they oppose for the sake of it or do they support it? I have no doubt that Labour with it's intensely myopic self-interest will automatically seek to undermine the govt. at every turn as the 'best interests of Scotland' are subsumed into the 'best interests of the Labour Party.' The future is uncertain but I hope this is a spur to people to see how their supposed democracy is being manipulated and traduced by powers that have nothing to do with it namely; Campbell and Brown.

So, it would seem you do not get the politicians you deserve. The SNP won but cannot form a govt. The Labour Party lost but hope to be the govt. The Lib Dems come fourth but arrogantly decide that they have the right to determine the future governance of Scotland.

Hold on, what am I thinking, of course you get the politicians you deserve. They perfectly reflect the moral and social malaise from which they've emerged. This lot will go on to lecture us lot about respect for civic society, about the moral order and the need for honesty and fair play, about the great prize of democracy and condemn the abuse or rejection of 'democracy' abroad.

Perhaps there is some honesty in the Lib Dems acceptance of their position as the fourth party and rightly realise they have no mandate to form part of a govt. The test of their integrity will come when the minority Scottish govt. under Alex Salmond tries to push through legislation upon which there is common ground, do they oppose for the sake of it or do they support it? I have no doubt that Labour with it's intensely myopic self-interest will automatically seek to undermine the govt. at every turn as the 'best interests of Scotland' are subsumed into the 'best interests of the Labour Party.'

The future is uncertain but I hope this is a spur to people to see how their supposed democracy is being manipulated and traduced by powers that have nothing to do with it namely; Campbell and Brown.

We've had the election now the horse-trading starts.. The Lib-Dems should think long and hard about where the Scottish people want to go. There was a vote for change on Thursday. Labour's fifty-year stranglehold on Scotland has ended. It's time to move on. If the Lib-Dems get it wrong we could see the end of them in four years time. The People won't forget. They will punish any cynical manipulation by a small party. Anyway what about the farce of May the 3rd. Where is the Scottish Secretary Douglas Alexander hiding ? Maybe the Scottish tabloid press should maybe have informed their readers more in how to vote than being so anti-SNP. Have any lessons been learnt ?

We've had the election now the horse-trading starts.. The Lib-Dems should think long and hard about where the Scottish people want to go. There was a vote for change on Thursday. Labour's fifty-year stranglehold on Scotland has ended. It's time to move on. If the Lib-Dems get it wrong we could see the end of them in four years time. The People won't forget. They will punish any cynical manipulation by a small party.

Anyway what about the farce of May the 3rd. Where is the Scottish Secretary Douglas Alexander hiding ? Maybe the Scottish tabloid press should maybe have informed their readers more in how to vote than being so anti-SNP. Have any lessons been learnt ?

If the semantics of this vote are going to pored over endlessly, can I ask......did anyone else notice that in the VAST majority of seats (even those they did not win) that the swing was hugely towards the SNP.

Can I make a pathetic whiny plea for the 'spirit of the electorate' to be heard?
No.....well it seems to be the basis of the Labour argument at the moment.
Get over it Jack and move on, frankly you and your former ministers are beginning to look absurd.

Alec Salmond claimed that Labour has no moral authrity to govern. What makes him think he has with the support of only 1/3 of voters?

And why should the Lib Dems support the SNP? This would be contrary to the position they put to the electorate. An about face for the sake of a few ministerial positions would be an affront to democracy.

[quote][bold]Gordon_J[/bold] wrote: Alec Salmond claimed that Labour has no moral authrity to govern. What makes him think he has with the support of only 1/3 of voters? And why should the Lib Dems support the SNP? This would be contrary to the position they put to the electorate. An about face for the sake of a few ministerial positions would be an affront to democracy.[/quote] Are we now to endlessly treated to a bleating noise and a cry of ' they only got ........% of the vote mum and they won't let me play '. Name me a government in any part of these islands which has taken power with the MAJORITY of the popular vote. Our system is fairer than the one which elects a national government and no-one seems to bleat from the NuLabour benches that they 'only' got 30%+ of the population to back them. This one won't fly Gordon so stop trying to beat it into the air at every turn.

Gordon_J wrote:
Alec Salmond claimed that Labour has no moral authrity to govern. What makes him think he has with the support of only 1/3 of voters?

And why should the Lib Dems support the SNP? This would be contrary to the position they put to the electorate. An about face for the sake of a few ministerial positions would be an affront to democracy.

Are we now to endlessly treated to a bleating noise and a cry of ' they only got ........% of the vote mum and they won't let me play '.

Name me a government in any part of these islands which has taken power with the MAJORITY of the popular vote.
Our system is fairer than the one which elects a national government and no-one seems to bleat from the NuLabour benches that they 'only' got 30%+ of the population to back them.

This one won't fly Gordon so stop trying to beat it into the air at every turn.

Gordon_J wrote:
Alec Salmond claimed that Labour has no moral authrity to govern. What makes him think he has with the support of only 1/3 of voters?

And why should the Lib Dems support the SNP? This would be contrary to the position they put to the electorate. An about face for the sake of a few ministerial positions would be an affront to democracy.

Rab,

I'm talking about this election and this election alone.

But to answer your question: for the last eight years Scotland has been governed by a coalition representing the majority of voters.

The SNPis unable to form a coalition for one simple reason: the majority of voters did not support its key policy.

To say we shouldn't talk about the number of votes each party got is somewhat perverse - is that not what democracy is all about?

Gordon_J wrote:
Alec Salmond claimed that Labour has no moral authrity to govern. What makes him think he has with the support of only 1/3 of voters? And why should the Lib Dems support the SNP? This would be contrary to the position they put to the electorate. An about face for the sake of a few ministerial positions would be an affront to democracy.

The same moral authority that let Tony Blair think he could govern at Westminster with a minority vote.....3 times in a row !!

Lachie: "We've had the election now the horse-trading starts.. The Lib-Dems should think long and hard about where the Scottish people want to go. There was a vote for change on Thursday. Labour's fifty-year stranglehold on Scotland has ended. It's time to move on. If the Lib-Dems get it wrong we could see the end of them in four years time. The People won't forget. They will punish any cynical manipulation by a small party." I've heard predictions of Lib Dem wipeout by disgruntled SNP voters at just about every election over the past decade. It hasn't happened in the past, it didn't happen on Thursday, and it's highly unlikely to happen in the future. The chances are that the vast majority of those who are most put out by the Lib Dem stance this time didn't vote Lib Dem, nor would be thinking of doing so. So I wouldn't get your hopes up. Vesper: "So, it would seem you do not get the politicians you deserve. The SNP won but cannot form a govt. The Labour Party lost but hope to be the govt. The Lib Dems come fourth but arrogantly decide that they have the right to determine the future governance of Scotland." By 'arrogantly decide' you presumably mean 'stick to what was in the manifesto for which their supporters voted'. And why pick on the Lib Dems specifically? Both Labour and the Tories opposed a referendum, and the three parties between them obtained a majority of both votes and seats. Just because most SNP posters to this site have long decided that the Lib Dems are political prostitutes who would concede every last bit of party policy in pursuit of power (not perhaps the best way to win over undecideds, incidentally) doesn't mean that this is actually the case. The SNP may have 'won' the election, but they don't have a majority of seats or anything like and with nothing like a majority of the vote nor should they have. If they're serious about becoming government they are going to have to learn how to make tough decisions - and these include learning how to compromise.

Lachie: "We've had the election now the horse-trading starts.. The Lib-Dems should think long and hard about where the Scottish people want to go. There was a vote for change on Thursday. Labour's fifty-year stranglehold on Scotland has ended. It's time to move on. If the Lib-Dems get it wrong we could see the end of them in four years time. The People won't forget. They will punish any cynical manipulation by a small party."

I've heard predictions of Lib Dem wipeout by disgruntled SNP voters at just about every election over the past decade. It hasn't happened in the past, it didn't happen on Thursday, and it's highly unlikely to happen in the future. The chances are that the vast majority of those who are most put out by the Lib Dem stance this time didn't vote Lib Dem, nor would be thinking of doing so. So I wouldn't get your hopes up.

Vesper: "So, it would seem you do not get the politicians you deserve. The SNP won but cannot form a govt. The Labour Party lost but hope to be the govt. The Lib Dems come fourth but arrogantly decide that they have the right to determine the future governance of Scotland."

By 'arrogantly decide' you presumably mean 'stick to what was in the manifesto for which their supporters voted'. And why pick on the Lib Dems specifically? Both Labour and the Tories opposed a referendum, and the three parties between them obtained a majority of both votes and seats. Just because most SNP posters to this site have long decided that the Lib Dems are political prostitutes who would concede every last bit of party policy in pursuit of power (not perhaps the best way to win over undecideds, incidentally) doesn't mean that this is actually the case.

The SNP may have 'won' the election, but they don't have a majority of seats or anything like and with nothing like a majority of the vote nor should they have. If they're serious about becoming government they are going to have to learn how to make tough decisions - and these include learning how to compromise.

[quote][bold]Gordon_J[/bold] wrote: Rab, I'm talking about this election and this election alone. But to answer your question: for the last eight years Scotland has been governed by a coalition representing the majority of voters. The SNPis unable to form a coalition for one simple reason: the majority of voters did not support its key policy. To say we shouldn't talk about the number of votes each party got is somewhat perverse - is that not what democracy is all about?[/quote] Feel free. The SNP got 50,000+ more than Labour. In what way would you like to look at it that will show that NuLabour won? Oh and BTW.....in 2003 Lab and the Lib dims between them got 49% of the constituency vote and 41% of the votes on the regional list. Now if we are going to get all pedantic about 'slimmest of majorities' then they ruled for 8 years without one....as I think I said.

Gordon_J wrote:
Rab,

I'm talking about this election and this election alone.

But to answer your question: for the last eight years Scotland has been governed by a coalition representing the majority of voters.

The SNPis unable to form a coalition for one simple reason: the majority of voters did not support its key policy.

To say we shouldn't talk about the number of votes each party got is somewhat perverse - is that not what democracy is all about?

Feel free.

The SNP got 50,000+ more than Labour.

In what way would you like to look at it that will show that NuLabour won?

Oh and BTW.....in 2003 Lab and the Lib dims between them got 49% of the constituency vote and 41% of the votes on the regional list.

Now if we are going to get all pedantic about 'slimmest of majorities' then they ruled for 8 years without one....as I think I said.

Rab, I don't recall anywhere saying that Labour won the election, so please don't put words into my mouth.

In 2003, Labour and the Lib Dems received 957,932 of the 1, 877,985 votes or 51% of the vote (figures for the Scottish Parliament web site).

A slim majority, but a majority nevertheless.

Nicol Stephen won't enter a coalition with the SNP because he "doesn't know of any government that ever held a coalition it didn't believe in".
Can anyone explain the logic or relevance of this?
Isn't he the leader of a party claiming to be Democratic?

Oh dear the Lib-dems managed to make a decission without consulting Labour first - just imagine big Gordie - "how dare they - don't they know who i am" - "isn't Mini Ming meant to act I do with Tony and Tony does with George" - well to take inspiration from the great Gazza and words from my favourite song rebelious Scots to crush".

Iain Morrison @ 2:01 pm

I know someone who sat in front of Jack McConnell in the Sunday Mail offices the week before polling day, along with other members of the public. Mr McConnell answered a man's question on coalition options quite emphatically. He said Labour would not enter a coalition with the Lib Dems.

So why are Labour stunned at being rejected by political prostitutes whose "madame" is cosying up to Gordon Brown?

What is going on?

what a fuss, who says we (snp) cant form a government ,? dont get carried away, we will form the best,honest, and most informed, gov. even if its just us, labour get lost !!! your redundant, dispite all the farce in the ellections,AND WE STILL BEET YOU, TAKE A HIKE.

mairi macleod wrote:
what a fuss, who says we (snp) cant form a government ,? dont get carried away, we will form the best,honest, and most informed, gov. even if its just us, labour get lost !!! your redundant, dispite all the farce in the ellections,AND WE STILL BEET YOU, TAKE A HIKE.

Thanks for that ill informed and near illeterate comment that brings the debate no further forward.

The SNP put forawrd a policy of a referendum and it was supported by only 1/3 of voters. Any bill to hold a referendum will rightly fail in the Parliament. Perhaps you should take that hike, mairi!

Is it just me or has nobody noticed that we live in a state where nobody has ruled after winning a majority of the popular vote for two generations. Thatcher anybody? So why this sudden conversion to the need for 51% of the vote to implement any policy? Can we have this applied at Westminster. No war, no pensions nonsense, actually no anything. So, can we cut the guff about no mandates. remeber this is the first election where labour has not been scotland's biggest party for 50 years. it will take them time to get used to, but from what i see around me they better get used to it.

Is it just me or has nobody noticed that we live in a state where nobody has ruled after winning a majority of the popular vote for two generations. Thatcher anybody? So why this sudden conversion to the need for 51% of the vote to implement any policy? Can we have this applied at Westminster. No war, no pensions nonsense, actually no anything.
So, can we cut the guff about no mandates. remeber this is the first election where labour has not been scotland's biggest party for 50 years. it will take them time to get used to, but from what i see around me they better get used to it.

Nice one Gordon_J. Have a snipe at mairi mcleod for being "illeterate!" Oh, and check your spelling of "forawrd" too.
Even if Mairi was illiterate, are you suggesting that people with less educational acumen than you should be denied a voice? Maybe we could just cut to the chase and just shut up everyone who doesn't agree with you.

When are we going to grow up as a nation? Throughout history we Scots have stabbed each other in the back, argued amongst ourselves and put our own individual interests before the good of the nation. Mr Stephen's refusal (so far) to negotiate with the SNP and Mr McConnell's refusal to acknowledge the huge swing to SNP away from his politics is simply an attempt to further their own rather negative ends at all costs. Let's not kid ourselves it's got anything to do with the good of Scotland. The "Democratic" mr Stephen wants to stop a referendum on independence. What is he afraid of? Allowing the Scottish population a direct voice?

[quote][bold]Gordon_J[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]mairi macleod[/bold] wrote: what a fuss, who says we (snp) cant form a government ,? dont get carried away, we will form the best,honest, and most informed, gov. even if its just us, labour get lost !!! your redundant, dispite all the farce in the ellections,AND WE STILL BEET YOU, TAKE A HIKE. [/quote] Thanks for that ill informed and near illeterate comment that brings the debate no further forward. The SNP put forawrd a policy of a referendum and it was supported by only 1/3 of voters. Any bill to hold a referendum will rightly fail in the Parliament. Perhaps you should take that hike, mairi![/quote] You are in danger of sounding like some well scratched vinyl now Gordon. Give it a rest.

Gordon_J wrote:

mairi macleod wrote:
what a fuss, who says we (snp) cant form a government ,? dont get carried away, we will form the best,honest, and most informed, gov. even if its just us, labour get lost !!! your redundant, dispite all the farce in the ellections,AND WE STILL BEET YOU, TAKE A HIKE.
Thanks for that ill informed and near illeterate comment that brings the debate no further forward.

The SNP put forawrd a policy of a referendum and it was supported by only 1/3 of voters. Any bill to hold a referendum will rightly fail in the Parliament. Perhaps you should take that hike, mairi!

You are in danger of sounding like some well scratched vinyl now Gordon.

Give it a rest.

[quote][bold]JH[/bold] wrote: Is it just me or has nobody noticed that we live in a state where nobody has ruled after winning a majority of the popular vote for two generations. Thatcher anybody? So why this sudden conversion to the need for 51% of the vote to implement any policy? Can we have this applied at Westminster. No war, no pensions nonsense, actually no anything. So, can we cut the guff about no mandates. remeber this is the first election where labour has not been scotland's biggest party for 50 years. it will take them time to get used to, but from what i see around me they better get used to it.[/quote] I have been making this point to Gordon off and all day. He seems obsessed with majority mandates and 1 or 2% here or there. I have never heard a NuLabour politician or supporter ever whine before about overall votes or popular mandates. Winning seemed to be enough. They accepted the system that they had a hand in perpetrating, whilst they were winning......they lose just once in 50 odd years and it is all grossly unfair all of a sudden, and that the SNP has no mandate with only blah% of the blah vote Sad.

JH wrote:
Is it just me or has nobody noticed that we live in a state where nobody has ruled after winning a majority of the popular vote for two generations. Thatcher anybody? So why this sudden conversion to the need for 51% of the vote to implement any policy? Can we have this applied at Westminster. No war, no pensions nonsense, actually no anything.
So, can we cut the guff about no mandates. remeber this is the first election where labour has not been scotland's biggest party for 50 years. it will take them time to get used to, but from what i see around me they better get used to it.

I have been making this point to Gordon off and all day.

He seems obsessed with majority mandates and 1 or 2% here or there.
I have never heard a NuLabour politician or supporter ever whine before about overall votes or popular mandates.
Winning seemed to be enough.

They accepted the system that they had a hand in perpetrating, whilst they were winning......they lose just once in 50 odd years and it is all grossly unfair all of a sudden, and that the SNP has no mandate with only blah% of the blah vote

Sad.

I was very encouraged tonight to hear David Steele say that it was absolute nonsense to suggest that a minority administration could not work. He said that it was perfectly possible for it to work and also that Alex Salmond was a very able politician who would know how to get agreement on policies.....! So maybe Douglas Fraser and all the rest of us should stop obsessing about arithmetic and coalitions and let them all work it out issue by issue. It would seem the Lib Dem intentions may be quite positive in that direction. I've always thought the 8 year coalition and permanent majority was contrary to what we were promised about the Scottish parliament anyway.

I was very encouraged tonight to hear David Steele say that it was absolute nonsense to suggest that a minority administration could not work.

He said that it was perfectly possible for it to work and also that Alex Salmond was a very able politician who would know how to get agreement on policies.....!

So maybe Douglas Fraser and all the rest of us should stop obsessing about arithmetic and coalitions and let them all work it out issue by issue. It would seem the Lib Dem intentions may be quite positive in that direction.

I've always thought the 8 year coalition and permanent majority was contrary to what we were promised about the Scottish parliament anyway.

Jack, oh Jack. Did you really say that if "SNP....are incapable of putting the interests of Scotland first in forming a government" then you were ready to "make the right decision in the interests of Scotland???" Jack, we both know that you never did anything for Scotland that wasn't directed by Tony Blair...remember those you fired, who "cared too much about Scotland" in your words....Remember all the sellouts and all the deals? I was there. Let's hope that the Freedom of Information Act reeqests don't uncover all your betrayals of the Scottish people over the last few years.

Jack, oh Jack. Did you really say that if "SNP....are incapable of putting the interests of Scotland first in forming a government" then you were ready to "make the right decision in the interests of Scotland???"
Jack, we both know that you never did anything for Scotland that wasn't directed by Tony Blair...remember those you fired, who "cared too much about Scotland" in your words....Remember all the sellouts and all the deals? I was there.
Let's hope that the Freedom of Information Act reeqests don't uncover all your betrayals of the Scottish people over the last few years.

Quote: "But if they are incapable of putting the interests of Scotland first in forming a government, then me and the Labour Party..."

Unbelievable! If anyone puts the interests of Scotland first, it's the SNP. Even now, London Labour are trying to interfere in the person of Gordon Brown, along with Ming the perpetual failure.

Hit the road, Jack....

In response to Gordon_J's view that only one thirdof the electorate in the elections for the Scottish Parliament supported a referendum,I disagree with his assumption.Firstly,voting is influenced by tactical voting,single issues,party loyalty ,local issues,the popularity of invimbents etc.We cannot assume that people who do not vote SNP ,do not favour a referendum,no more than we can assume that people who vote Liberal,are Liberals.My experienence on the doorstep is that many people who favour the SNp,do not always vote SNP.Therefore a general election cannot be assummed to be a reliable comment on peoples attitudes towards holding a referendum .In fact,the surveys that have been conducted on that single issue reveal that a majority are in favour of a referndum,including a majority of those who vote Liberal. The issues here relate to two things: 1) It is incomprehensible why the Liberal party would deny the Scottish Electorate an opportunity to express their opinion about . independence,or greater powers for the Scottish Parliament. 2) It is a pity that the Liberals will not assist the SNP to offer stable government.The SNP manifesto was based on extensive consultation with the electorate and contains what the majority want.Much of that manifesto also matches closely what the Liberals are proposing.Thus it is a great pity that the Liberals are not reaching out to Alec Salmond who has offered many different compramises.I have not seen any compramise offered by the Liberals.That is rather sad. What I do see is that Alec Salmond is showing great leadership skills and statesmanlike qualities that have not been observed in Scottish politics for a long time.The Liberals are not making it easy for him ,but he is demonstrating that he is the person for this moment in our history.I hope that the Liberals will change their mind but I am confident that Alec Salmond will rise in stature,irrespective of what happens. It would be in the Liberals interests to become part of a Scottish government led by Alec Salmond.I believe that they could deliver good legislation that will fit with the priorities of the electorate.An association with good government could do do the Liberals some electoral good.The Liberals should also refelect on the fact that many of their voters switched to SNP recently.Interesting for their leader to observe that SNP reduced his previous majority by 5,000 votes.The next election could be interesting.However,the priority just now is for the electorate to get the policies that the majoity are in favour of.I hope that the Liberals will assist the SNP to deliver.

In response to Gordon_J's view that only one thirdof the electorate in the elections for the Scottish Parliament supported a referendum,I disagree with his assumption.Firstly,voting is influenced by tactical voting,single issues,party loyalty ,local issues,the popularity of invimbents etc.We cannot assume that people who do not vote SNP ,do not favour a referendum,no more than we can assume that people who vote Liberal,are Liberals.My experienence on the doorstep is that many people who favour the SNp,do not always vote SNP.Therefore a general election cannot be assummed to be a reliable comment on peoples attitudes towards holding a referendum .In fact,the surveys that have been conducted on that single issue reveal that a majority are in favour of a referndum,including a majority of those who vote Liberal.

The issues here relate to two things:

1) It is incomprehensible why the Liberal party would deny the Scottish Electorate an opportunity to express their opinion about .
independence,or greater powers for the Scottish Parliament.

2) It is a pity that the Liberals will not assist the SNP to offer stable government.The SNP manifesto was based on extensive consultation with the electorate and contains what the majority want.Much of that manifesto also matches closely what the Liberals are proposing.Thus it is a great pity that the Liberals are not reaching out to Alec Salmond who has offered many different compramises.I have not seen any compramise offered by the Liberals.That is rather sad.

What I do see is that Alec Salmond is showing great leadership skills and statesmanlike qualities that have not been observed in Scottish politics for a long time.The Liberals are not making it easy for him ,but he is demonstrating that he is the person for this moment in our history.I hope that the Liberals will change their mind but I am confident that Alec Salmond will rise in stature,irrespective of what happens.

It would be in the Liberals interests to become part of a Scottish government led by Alec Salmond.I believe that they could deliver good legislation that will fit with the priorities of the electorate.An association with good government could do do the Liberals some electoral good.The Liberals should also refelect on the fact that many of their voters switched to SNP recently.Interesting for their leader to observe that SNP reduced his previous majority by 5,000 votes.The next election could be interesting.However,the priority just now is for the electorate to get the policies that the majoity are in favour of.I hope that the Liberals will assist the SNP to deliver.

[quote][bold]Jo[/bold] wrote: That's quite a quote Jack. "If the SNP are incapable of putting the interests of Scotland first". When are you going to start doing that? You might begin by showing Alex Salmond the courtesy of acknowledging in a telephone call that his Party beat you in the election! [/quote] JO Quite right Jo. Even through his ill-disguised anger Jack McCON has failed to deliver the congratulations phone call that is a necessary part of the "niceties" of being the former First Minister.....(but doesn't that "former" bit sound good !!!)

Jo wrote:
That's quite a quote Jack. "If the SNP are incapable of putting the interests of Scotland first". When are you going to start doing that? You might begin by showing Alex Salmond the courtesy of acknowledging in a telephone call that his Party beat you in the election!

JO

Quite right Jo.
Even through his ill-disguised anger Jack McCON has failed to deliver the congratulations phone call that is a necessary part of the "niceties" of being the former First Minister.....(but doesn't that "former" bit sound good !!!)

Anybody been to Wishaw lately? What is it with the run-down streets, graffiti, vandalism,wooden boarded shops, wee traders struggling to supply simple fruit, veg etc., others eeking out a living selling cheap housware products etc..............What happened to the vibrant town of yesteryear??.....never the prettiest place, but always mobbed with saturday shoppers from half-way round Lanarkshire...where did it go?? Oh.......I SEE...........voted labour a' these years did it??......Oh, and did so again Eh?? Physician, Heal Thyself ,Folks !!

Anybody been to Wishaw lately?
What is it with the run-down streets, graffiti, vandalism,wooden boarded shops, wee traders struggling to supply simple fruit, veg etc., others eeking out a living selling cheap housware products etc..............What happened to the vibrant town of yesteryear??.....never the prettiest place, but always mobbed with saturday shoppers from half-way round Lanarkshire...where did it go??
Oh.......I SEE...........voted labour a' these years did it??......Oh, and did so again Eh??
Physician, Heal Thyself ,Folks !!

I must reluctantly agree with Vesper Ping. Perhaps we do get the politicians we deserve. 40% of us are too lazy to vote, and 7% (or is it more?) of those who do vote are too dumb to fill in a simple form correctly. Wha's like us indeed?

Dear Scotland, Please repatriate all the Scottish politicians you exported to Westminster to your fine and proud nation. We've had more than enough of them here! Maybe you can re-educate them, though they are gross recidivists. Good luck to Alex and the SNP, they deserve as much chance of government as the rest, and hey, they won. Best SNP strategy? Run a careful minority government for a while, propose a referendum for the date of the next general Election (on separate ballot papers!), and even if it's rejected by the Scottish Parliament, you'll get a referendum anyway, through the General Election ballot box!! Put enopugh SNP candidates in Westminster, and then negotiate a deal with Cameron.

Dear Scotland,
Please repatriate all the Scottish politicians you exported to Westminster to your fine and proud nation. We've had more than enough of them here! Maybe you can re-educate them, though they are gross recidivists. Good luck to Alex and the SNP, they deserve as much chance of government as the rest, and hey, they won. Best SNP strategy? Run a careful minority government for a while, propose a referendum for the date of the next general Election (on separate ballot papers!), and even if it's rejected by the Scottish Parliament, you'll get a referendum anyway, through the General Election ballot box!! Put enopugh SNP candidates in Westminster, and then negotiate a deal with Cameron.

Its time that Labour were gracious in defeat, as they indeed did not win the election. The honours do indeed go to the SNP
Give it up Jack, your an embaressment, not only to Scotland, but in front of the rest of the watching world, your becoming a joke

The Scottish Labour Party was totally complacent about last Thursday's Scottish Parliament and local council elections and is now paying the political price by being totally humiliated by its former coalition partners! How has this been allowed to happen? It is now time for both incompetent Jack McConnell and too-smart-by half Douglas Alexander to tender their resignations? However, all the Unionist parties are still in denial about this sea change in Scottish politics and have never taken the Nationalist threat seriously, and have now paid the price! What happens, IF, the Nationalists form the next Scottish Executive and somehow manage to deliver good government to Scotland in the next 4 years? Resurgent Scottish Nationalism has already destroyed the indigenous Conservative Party and, IF the indigenous Labour Party is next then the game is up for all Unionists? Lachie Todd

[quote][bold]mairi macleod[/bold] wrote: what a fuss, who says we (snp) cant form a government ,? dont get carried away, we will form the best,honest, and most informed, gov. even if its just us, labour get lost !!! your redundant, dispite all the farce in the ellections,AND WE STILL BEET YOU, TAKE A HIKE. [/quote] Er..."illeterate", Gordon? "forawrd"? I think there's a saying about glass houses or something. The fact is that people typing on this kind of forum tend to type fast because their blood is boiling. Little mistakes are inevitable. It's a bit like when the Scotland Office sets up an election that will involve three different votes on two different ballot papers, using two different ways of voting but for three different kinds of election all on the same day...err... I'm glad they weren't trying to confuse people. Wonder if they'd have done it the same way if Labour had been ahead in the polls.

mairi macleod wrote:
what a fuss, who says we (snp) cant form a government ,? dont get carried away, we will form the best,honest, and most informed, gov. even if its just us, labour get lost !!! your redundant, dispite all the farce in the ellections,AND WE STILL BEET YOU, TAKE A HIKE.

Er..."illeterate", Gordon? "forawrd"?

I think there's a saying about glass houses or something.

The fact is that people typing on this kind of forum tend to type fast because their blood is boiling. Little mistakes are inevitable. It's a bit like when the Scotland Office sets up an election that will involve three different votes on two different ballot papers, using two different ways of voting but for three different kinds of election all on the same day...err... I'm glad they weren't trying to confuse people. Wonder if they'd have done it the same way if Labour had been ahead in the polls.

Herald & Times Group
Terms & Conditions Privacy Policy © Copyright 2001-2008 A Gannett Company