The Herald Election Site

Alex Salmond yesterday struck a deal with the two Green MSPs which will almost certainly result in him becoming the new First Minister.

It dealt a fatal blow to Labour leader Jack McConnell's hopes of remaining First Minister, as it makes it impossible for him to secure enough votes to beat the SNP chief next Wednesday, assuming that the Tories and LibDems abstain.

And last night Alex Fergusson, the Tory MSP for Galloway and Upper Nithsdale, emerged as the front runner to become Presiding Officer, replacing George Reid, after his party relented and allowed him to stand.

The only other candidate so far is Margo MacDonald, veteran nationalist turned Independent, who offered to serve for a year to break the current impasse.

As part of the co-operation agreement'' the remaining Green MSPs, Robin Harper from Lothian and Patrick Harvie representing Glasgow, will have the convenership of one of the major committees and a promise of early legislation to set targets limiting carbon emissions. They also agreed to oppose new nuclear power stations and to work towards independence.

Greens have won a promise to be consulted on the SNP's legislative programme and its budgets over the next four years but are not bound to support the SNP in any other vote.

The agreement still leaves the SNP 19 votes short of a working majority, so it is of limited benefit to either side.

No agreement was reached on any stronger alliance beyond next week due to differences over transport projects. The Greens wanted to block the Aberdeen ring road and M74 extension, while retaining Edinburgh's trams, but the SNP insists it wants to keep the road projects and scrap the tram scheme.

Labour claimed the deal fell short of SNP hopes and refused to concede Mr Salmond would be elected First Minister.

Labour refused to concede Mr Salmond would be elected First Minister.

Still in denial. Time to call in a therapist.

Alex Fergusson for Presiding Officer is probably a good thing. I must say that when I saw Margot at the signing in ceremony I worried that she was not physically up to the job. The job of presiding officer is very demanding and I for one am not convinced that she could adequately carry it off. No offence meant, Margot. But we need someone who will commit for the long term and not just for one year. The notion that the deal with the Greens dealt a blow to Jack McConnell's "hopes of remaining First Minister" is laughable. Douglas Fraser, get a grip. The pro-Labour media have been holding their thumbs in hope that something would deliver Jack back to office. It's time our media started dealing with the facts of government instead of self-indulgent wish fulfilment. Jack's been out of the frame since the election results revealed that he, with the help of the visiting Tony Blair and soon-to-be-crowned Gordon Brown, had led the Labour party to its first ever defeat in Scotland for fifty years. Wake up call, guys. Can't you hear the bells? They toll for you! If Labour vote against Alex Salmond for First Minister, it will make perfect sense. For it was Jack McConnell who said Alex Salmond was not fit to be First Minister. However, Labour also said that the SNP would be wreckers of the parliament, that they would be spoilers; I hope Labour, in opposition, are not going to adopt that role for themselves.

Alex Fergusson for Presiding Officer is probably a good thing. I must say that when I saw Margot at the signing in ceremony I worried that she was not physically up to the job. The job of presiding officer is very demanding and I for one am not convinced that she could adequately carry it off. No offence meant, Margot. But we need someone who will commit for the long term and not just for one year.

The notion that the deal with the Greens dealt a blow to Jack McConnell's "hopes of remaining First Minister" is laughable. Douglas Fraser, get a grip. The pro-Labour media have been holding their thumbs in hope that something would deliver Jack back to office. It's time our media started dealing with the facts of government instead of self-indulgent wish fulfilment. Jack's been out of the frame since the election results revealed that he, with the help of the visiting Tony Blair and soon-to-be-crowned Gordon Brown, had led the Labour party to its first ever defeat in Scotland for fifty years. Wake up call, guys. Can't you hear the bells? They toll for you!

If Labour vote against Alex Salmond for First Minister, it will make perfect sense. For it was Jack McConnell who said Alex Salmond was not fit to be First Minister. However, Labour also said that the SNP would be wreckers of the parliament, that they would be spoilers; I hope Labour, in opposition, are not going to adopt that role for themselves.

I'm startin to wonder if the Libs will actually do the dirty. The Herald are full of pro-Brown clap-trap as is to be expected but let's face it he is going to make the English vomit with his begging and his insincerity. He's history and there's nothing Alf Young and Mark McGhee can do about it...

The Labour party make me laugh, they really do. Being the sad man I am, I was watching the BBC Scotland election night program wot I downloaded off the internets. Right from the start, it was Labour heads in sand, from Alexander, through Cairns, to McConnell. And it continues, seven days after the final results.

They should maybe speak to some of their cooncillors to get an idea of what being out of office actually feels like.

The position of the Liberals is incomprehensible. Why couldn't they just say "we'll talk, but it won't result in us backing independence"? It's not like the Nats wouldn't have gone for it. The Libs have been the biggest disappointment of devolution.

Gregor said:

Labour said that the SNP would be wreckers of the parliament; I hope Labour are not going to adopt that role for themselves.

They have already. Let us teach them real statesmanship.

Well, lets see what all these democrats do next week then eh? Lets see who the real wreckers are.

Indeed the Lib/Dems are out of touch, they lack an understanding of the scale of what has happened in Scotland.

Put simply concensus is the only game in town those who seek to delay the right of passage of this administtration will suffer at the polls next time round. Even more so than to date.

Let�s wait and see what deal is to be brokered between Ming and GB. McConnel could still be FM if the LD�s do the dirty. This will prove the LD� are the whores of politics. , but then whores have no shame. Remember Ming is an old man in a hurry.

I�ll be sorry if AS is not the FM as he has worked hard for it. On the other hand any deal would surely lead to the total destruction of both the LD�s and Labour in Scotland. If England gets the smell of a deal it will end both parties south of the border. Let�s hope that GB is not a good as his predecessor in the �art o hiding�.

I also believe we are in for a shock from the Liberal-undemocrats on Wednesday.

Note that Salmond, McConnell and Stephen are all putting themselves forward in the vote for FM on Wednesday.

I firmly believe we'll see Nichol Stephen emerge as FM backed by Liberal-undemocrats and Nu-Labour (62 votes) with the Tories abstaining - SNP can get a maximum of 49 votes with Lib-undemocrats and Tories abstaining.

Totally undemocratic and wrong but believe me, we should NEVER underestimate the underhand strategies of the British Establishment.

Watch this space...

Murray said:

Totally undemocratic and wrong but believe me, we should NEVER underestimate the underhand strategies of the British Establishment.

Quite so. Decades of deceit. As for your prediction, I hope you are wrong. The consequences of that are unpleasant to consider.

How aboot David McLetchie for First Minister?

"Alex Fergusson for Presiding Officer is probably a good thing"? Mr Fergussion previous claim to Holyrood fame is that he moved the very first motion and debate in the Scottish Parliament back in May 1999 (seconded by Annabel Goldie), trying to inject a compulsory Westminster-style period of prayer at the start of each sitting. He said: "It seems entirely appropriate, therefore, that this Parliament ...ask for a little daily advice and guidance from the greatest expert of all. This is not a party political matter; it is a question of getting our priorities right. To my mind, a Parliament that meets without prayer is not respectful or complete.� Thankfully for the Parliament, when the 'Time for Reflection' proposal emerged to deal with his concerns, he supported it as a suitable expression of the new parliament's approach, so he will be able to introduce the Time for Reflection each week as PO with honesty.

"Alex Fergusson for Presiding Officer is probably a good thing"?

Mr Fergussion previous claim to Holyrood fame is that he moved the very first motion and debate in the Scottish Parliament back in May 1999 (seconded by Annabel Goldie), trying to inject a compulsory Westminster-style period of prayer at the start of each sitting.

He said: "It seems entirely appropriate, therefore, that this Parliament ...ask for a little daily advice and guidance from the greatest expert of all. This is not a party political matter; it is a question of getting our priorities right. To my mind, a Parliament that meets without prayer is not respectful or complete.�

Thankfully for the Parliament, when the 'Time for Reflection' proposal emerged to deal with his concerns, he supported it as a suitable expression of the new parliament's approach, so he will be able to introduce the Time for Reflection each week as PO with honesty.

Fergusson is an old school Tory. Eton to be exact. He is, in fact that rare thing a politician who actually listens.

I worked with him years back on an anti-incinerator thing and apart from an element of NIMBYism he came across as knowledgable, interested and really helped in defeating a bunch of crooks who wanted to build an incinerator between school and a hospital.

The local Lib Dem councillor and recently deposed leader in D&G, Joan Mitchell, thought it was an excellent tourist attraction!

[bold]Presiding Officer Election[/bold] What a fix - and illegal too. The law - [italic]The Scotland Act[/italic] - required the election to be at the Parliament "first meeting", last wednesday. But that way Margo would have won - so they iegally dekayed and fixed yet anoher election. Who are "they"? - The establishement - corrupt public servants (watching their Holyrood building backs) and the "big four" party cabal. SNP hang you heads in shame. You prefer a tory unionist - the guy that just turned you over in Galloway - to Margo. An how iroinic to see Alastair Morgan ( list MSP , now SNP business manager) , the guy Alex Fergusson thumped in Galloway, moving the illegal motion of suspension at Holyrood last wednesday that enables Alex Fergusson to win on Monday. But legally? Watch this space. Jounos - waken up. Read the [italic]Scotland Act[/italic] and the Parly's Standing orders ( google search - its all onlne now - that's computers) The Act has been broken, clear and simple. And just because George Reid says it aint and all four big parties agree with him dont make it right. Just like that combined ballot paper - they all agred to it too. But this time you can stop the fix in advance of the vote, if you got up off your lazy backsides. Or is it only illegal wars in far away places that you can harmlesly report on via a Reuters wire that interests you? Our are our elected members, your drinking chumbs, (sometimes your wives and husbands), allowed to break the law? We're Scotland - aye, everything that wrong with it. [bold]And on a related matter, why aint you all parked outside Douglas Alexanders door demanding his resignation.[/bold] Or does he have to do something really serious to deserve such attention - like try and snog a couple of 18 year olds when he's half cut? But Douglas Alexander - Gordon Brown is planning to promote him. All part of his "bold and immaginative" plans to enhance parliamentary democracy. It's real democracy we want - a democracy that allows us to remove the likes of Dougie, a democracy that allows us all the right to vote, a democracy who parliamentarians uphold their own laws.

Presiding Officer Election
What a fix - and illegal too. The law - The Scotland Act - required the election to be at the Parliament "first meeting", last wednesday. But that way Margo would have won - so they iegally dekayed and fixed yet anoher election.

Who are "they"? - The establishement - corrupt public servants (watching their Holyrood building backs) and the "big four" party cabal.

SNP hang you heads in shame. You prefer a tory unionist - the guy that just turned you over in Galloway - to Margo.

An how iroinic to see Alastair Morgan ( list MSP , now SNP business manager) , the guy Alex Fergusson thumped in Galloway, moving the illegal motion of suspension at Holyrood last wednesday that enables Alex Fergusson to win on Monday. But legally? Watch this space.

Jounos - waken up. Read the Scotland Act and the Parly's Standing orders ( google search - its all onlne now - that's computers) The Act has been broken, clear and simple. And just because George Reid says it aint and all four big parties agree with him dont make it right. Just like that combined ballot paper - they all agred to it too.

But this time you can stop the fix in advance of the vote, if you got up off your lazy backsides. Or is it only illegal wars in far away places that you can harmlesly report on via a Reuters wire that interests you? Our are our elected members, your drinking chumbs, (sometimes your wives and husbands), allowed to break the law? We're Scotland - aye, everything that wrong with it.

And on a related matter, why aint you all parked outside Douglas Alexanders door demanding his resignation. Or does he have to do something really serious to deserve such attention - like try and snog a couple of 18 year olds when he's half cut?

But Douglas Alexander - Gordon Brown is planning to promote him. All part of his "bold and immaginative" plans to enhance parliamentary democracy. It's real democracy we want - a democracy that allows us to remove the likes of Dougie, a democracy that allows us all the right to vote, a democracy who parliamentarians uphold their own laws.

[bold]Of Politicians.[/bold] [italic]"Oh would or I had seen the day, that treason thus could sell us"[/italic] "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor---he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation---he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city---he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist."

Of Politicians.

"Oh would or I had seen the day, that treason thus could sell us"

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.

An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor---he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation---he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city---he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist."

Oscar, Dumfropolis on 8:00am today - thanks for this info

This now mean that all three of of Scotland Presiding Officers wil ahve been public schoolboys. A co-incidence? Could we not even have a public schoolgirl for divesity!.

Not seen recent figures , but I am sure well less than 5% go to private schools, but the Scottish parliament apparently needs to be permantly headed up by one. I wonder why?

No I dont

What a disaster for Scotland!! Wait until the numpties refuse to build new power stations and the army of windmills advances. We will be dependant on power generation south of the border to keeps our light on. Plus we will get draconian measures dreamt up by loony Harper to reduce our 'carbon footprint' which will cost us dear. Let's hope we never get the chance to become independant, we're not competant.

Along with others on this post, I find the Lib Dems position on a coalition deal with the SNP baffling. I do not wish to see Salmond and his mob in charge of this or any future Scottish Executive, but the Lib Dems are the ultimate political opportunists. I am a Conservative voter and have therefore not adopted this view in bitterness at Labour's defeat! Throughout the last Administration the Lib Dems were talking up their credentials as part of the Labour led Scottish Executive, claiming all credit and no blame for a whole series of measures. Into the campaign we had Nicol Stephen trumpeting how at Holyrood we were fortunate to have this and that, all due to consensus politics and the Lib Dems. The polls over the last few years have been quite favourable to the Lib Dems, particularly during Charlie K's time and the Dunfermline West by-election, thus fuelling this opportunism. Take a narrow SNP victory on the 3rd May and the Lib Dems reconsider their options. To my astonishment ,Nicol Stephen annouces that he is reconsidering coalition politics because his party took a hammering at the polls, reason being not because he cannot stomach a coalition with the SNP or because they were part of the mess over the past four years, but because the rosy picture the Lib Dems tried to paint during the campaign simply did not wash with a canny electorate. Annabel Goldie suggsted during the campaign that Lib Dems would do anything to keep the Ministeral Mondeos, that is unless of course the electorate has finally gotten wise to Lib Dem lack of principles. If I hear the phrase renewables revolution one more time......!

Along with others on this post, I find the Lib Dems position on a coalition deal with the SNP baffling. I do not wish to see Salmond and his mob in charge of this or any future Scottish Executive, but the Lib Dems are the ultimate political opportunists. I am a Conservative voter and have therefore not adopted this view in bitterness at Labour's defeat!

Throughout the last Administration the Lib Dems were talking up their credentials as part of the Labour led Scottish Executive, claiming all credit and no blame for a whole series of measures. Into the campaign we had Nicol Stephen trumpeting how at Holyrood we were fortunate to have this and that, all due to consensus politics and the Lib Dems. The polls over the last few years have been quite favourable to the Lib Dems, particularly during Charlie K's time and the Dunfermline West by-election, thus fuelling this opportunism.

Take a narrow SNP victory on the 3rd May and the Lib Dems reconsider their options. To my astonishment ,Nicol Stephen annouces that he is reconsidering coalition politics because his party took a hammering at the polls, reason being not because he cannot stomach a coalition with the SNP or because they were part of the mess over the past four years, but because the rosy picture the Lib Dems tried to paint during the campaign simply did not wash with a canny electorate. Annabel Goldie suggsted during the campaign that Lib Dems would do anything to keep the Ministeral Mondeos, that is unless of course the electorate has finally gotten wise to Lib Dem lack of principles. If I hear the phrase renewables revolution one more time......!

I'm also baffled by the Lib Dems position. I'd (almost) be prepared to swallow the 'reconsidering coalition politics' line if I didn't, like others, suspect that they're up to something behind the scenes. The idea of Brown-Campbell scheming in London seems most plausible, but I must admit I'd never considered the notion that Stephen is still, incredibly, angling for the First Minister's job.

I would previously have said that no-one could be worse than McConnell, but I'm not so sure now. What a horrific advert for Scottish democracy this is.

This is all a bit depressing although entirely predictable. It seems McConnell's refusal to concede defeat is down to more than bad manners.

It has been suggested the Minging one has struck a deal with Gordon Brown . This may involve Ming joining the Labour cabinet as Foreign Secretary in a newly appointed Brown cabinet.

The deal involves the Lib Dems not touching the SNP with a bargepole and next week Stephen giving his MSP's a free vote. That way the *party* is not voting for McConnell but individual members may if they so choose.

Think they wouldn't do it?

Then you don't know what you're dealing with.

What's wrong with electing Nichol Stephen First Minister? If he gets more votes from MSPs then anyone else then he's democratically entitled to the job.

Whoever is FM isn't going to have much power (if any) and I think Stephen would present a much better face of modern Scotland internationally than either Salmond or Jack M.

For example, take a trip by the FM to the USA. The problem with Salmond in particular is that he would just get too much publicity for the minority seperatists, which for certain would damage inward investment prospects.

Julian stated:

I think Stephen would present a much better face of modern Scotland internationally than either Salmond or Jack M.

A dead halibut would present a better face than that feckless waster.

Wee Union Jack

This is the story of
Wee Union Jack
Who airbrushed his socialism
Who gave away his country�s oil
Who Seweled Holyrood�s powers
Who loved London rule

This is the story of
Wee Union Jack
And his Lapdog Party
That followed Big GB�s commandments
Who lied for London
Who telt us we wurnae any guid

This is the story of
Toom Tabard Jack
Who GB and TB mortified
Who London MPs slandered
Who lost them their Province
Who doesnae know the Party�s over

Les spoke like a true Scot with an inferiority complex:

Let's hope we never get the chance to become independant, we're not competant.

[quote][bold]Les[/bold] wrote: What a disaster for Scotland!! Wait until the numpties refuse to build new power stations and the army of windmills advances. We will be dependant on power generation south of the border to keeps our light on. Plus we will get draconian measures dreamt up by loony Harper to reduce our 'carbon footprint' which will cost us dear. Let's hope we never get the chance to become independant, we're not competant.[/quote] YOU might not be competent Mate...........but there's loads and loads of us who think we and the vast majority of the nation will do fine running the show. SO.....if ye don't like it.move over and let the rest of us get on wi' it !!! Whining negative mouths not required here, in our soon-to-be-free Scotland !!

Les wrote:
What a disaster for Scotland!! Wait until the numpties refuse to build new power stations and the army of windmills advances. We will be dependant on power generation south of the border to keeps our light on. Plus we will get draconian measures dreamt up by loony Harper to reduce our 'carbon footprint' which will cost us dear. Let's hope we never get the chance to become independant, we're not competant.

YOU might not be competent Mate...........but there's loads and loads of us who think we and the vast majority of the nation will do fine running the show. SO.....if ye don't like it.move over and let the rest of us get on wi' it !!!
Whining negative mouths not required here, in our soon-to-be-free Scotland !!

Ive said this on other threads but it seems N Stephen has been instructed to not go into coalition with A Salmond. Westminster based parties are London dominated and it is to these leaders that N Stephen,J Mconnel,A Goldie must pay homage . Gordon B will have done a deal with M Campbell with regard to Lib/Lab Uk coalition as long as the LibDems agree to not go into coalition with the SNP.

[bold]Of Joke McDonnell/Nicol Stephen[/bold] [quote]"Oh would or I had seen the day, that treason thus could sell us" "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor---he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation---he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city---he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist."[/quote]

Of Joke McDonnell/Nicol Stephen

"Oh would or I had seen the day, that treason thus could sell us"

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.

An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor---he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation---he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city---he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist."

Brian Blessed wrote:
The Labour party make me laugh, they really do. Being the sad man I am, I was watching the BBC Scotland election night program wot I downloaded off the internets. Right from the start, it was Labour heads in sand, from Alexander, through Cairns, to McConnell. And it continues, seven days after the final results. They should maybe speak to some of their cooncillors to get an idea of what being out of office actually feels like.

"Being the sad man I am"............You said it!

[quote][bold]JuliantheA[/bold] wrote: What's wrong with electing Nichol Stephen First Minister? If he gets more votes from MSPs then anyone else then he's democratically entitled to the job. Whoever is FM isn't going to have much power (if any) and I think Stephen would present a much better face of modern Scotland internationally than either Salmond or Jack M. For example, take a trip by the FM to the USA. The problem with Salmond in particular is that he would just get too much publicity for the minority seperatists, which for certain would damage inward investment prospects. [/quote] This will be why Shell announce �350Million investment in Alex Salmonds westminister constituancy recently, because they felt he was damaging. Aye right. You are getting yourself mixed up here a bit, when Scotland is represented by a party which ONLY has Scotland as a focus then ALL negotiations will be FOR Scotland only. Unlike any of the other 3 parties McConnel has to negotiate AS PART of the UK, Stephen and Goldie would have to do the same.

JuliantheA wrote:
What's wrong with electing Nichol Stephen First Minister? If he gets more votes from MSPs then anyone else then he's democratically entitled to the job. Whoever is FM isn't going to have much power (if any) and I think Stephen would present a much better face of modern Scotland internationally than either Salmond or Jack M. For example, take a trip by the FM to the USA. The problem with Salmond in particular is that he would just get too much publicity for the minority seperatists, which for certain would damage inward investment prospects.

This will be why Shell announce �350Million investment in Alex Salmonds westminister constituancy recently, because they felt he was damaging. Aye right.

You are getting yourself mixed up here a bit, when Scotland is represented by a party which ONLY has Scotland as a focus then ALL negotiations will be FOR Scotland only. Unlike any of the other 3 parties McConnel has to negotiate AS PART of the UK, Stephen and Goldie would have to do the same.

LA wrote:
Les spoke like a true Scot with an inferiority complex:
Let's hope we never get the chance to become independant, we're not competant.

So says the chap from LA who is so concerned about our country. Give us a break, you are running Alex from Madrid very close in the talking mince stakes.

I can only assume that shops in L&A and Madrid sell the same anoraks.

The Lib Dems said in the election that they would not support a referendum or go into coalition with the SNP.

They are now doing exactly what they promosed, yet people seem to think they should do the exact opposite. Wouldn't that be rather hypocritical?

[quote][bold]iang[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]JuliantheA[/bold] wrote: What's wrong with electing Nichol Stephen First Minister? If he gets more votes from MSPs then anyone else then he's democratically entitled to the job. Whoever is FM isn't going to have much power (if any) and I think Stephen would present a much better face of modern Scotland internationally than either Salmond or Jack M. For example, take a trip by the FM to the USA. The problem with Salmond in particular is that he would just get too much publicity for the minority seperatists, which for certain would damage inward investment prospects. [/quote] This will be why Shell announce �350Million investment in Alex Salmonds westminister constituancy recently, because they felt he was damaging. Aye right. You are getting yourself mixed up here a bit, when Scotland is represented by a party which ONLY has Scotland as a focus then ALL negotiations will be FOR Scotland only. Unlike any of the other 3 parties McConnel has to negotiate AS PART of the UK, Stephen and Goldie would have to do the same. [/quote] If the SNP do get Independance, will they then break up? Who will carry out the left, centre, right wing roles in politics if all the SNP want is indepedance? I have never understood where the SNP stand in politics if you take away the Scottish agenda. Must go now, I only popped in to read the paper!

iang wrote:

JuliantheA wrote: What's wrong with electing Nichol Stephen First Minister? If he gets more votes from MSPs then anyone else then he's democratically entitled to the job. Whoever is FM isn't going to have much power (if any) and I think Stephen would present a much better face of modern Scotland internationally than either Salmond or Jack M. For example, take a trip by the FM to the USA. The problem with Salmond in particular is that he would just get too much publicity for the minority seperatists, which for certain would damage inward investment prospects.
This will be why Shell announce �350Million investment in Alex Salmonds westminister constituancy recently, because they felt he was damaging. Aye right. You are getting yourself mixed up here a bit, when Scotland is represented by a party which ONLY has Scotland as a focus then ALL negotiations will be FOR Scotland only. Unlike any of the other 3 parties McConnel has to negotiate AS PART of the UK, Stephen and Goldie would have to do the same.

If the SNP do get Independance, will they then break up?

Who will carry out the left, centre, right wing roles in politics if all the SNP want is indepedance?

I have never understood where the SNP stand in politics if you take away the Scottish agenda.

Must go now, I only popped in to read the paper!

I'm another "baffled" one about what the Lib-Dems are doing. I've voted Lib-DEm in the past. I'd say their manifesto is most close to what I'd vote for. It's broadly similar to the SNPs in most respects though. So here, they have the best chance they'll ever have of pushing through almost everything in their manifesto, and yet it looks like they're going to chuck that up to prop up Labour and cut deals at Westminser? If they do that, they'll look like the biggest bunch of wasters that ever hit politics. Why on earth would anyone ever vote for them again? My only hope if there's a dirty deal is that the parliament [italic]doesn't[/italic] last and the people get a chance to give both Labour and the Lib Dems an even bigger kicking sometime sooner than four years away.

I'm another "baffled" one about what the Lib-Dems are doing. I've voted Lib-DEm in the past. I'd say their manifesto is most close to what I'd vote for. It's broadly similar to the SNPs in most respects though. So here, they have the best chance they'll ever have of pushing through almost everything in their manifesto, and yet it looks like they're going to chuck that up to prop up Labour and cut deals at Westminser?

If they do that, they'll look like the biggest bunch of wasters that ever hit politics. Why on earth would anyone ever vote for them again? My only hope if there's a dirty deal is that the parliament doesn't last and the people get a chance to give both Labour and the Lib Dems an even bigger kicking sometime sooner than four years away.

Ian of Falkirk rashly said;

So says the chap from LA who is so concerned about our country.

not understanding that to put his Edinburgh address LA might easily have internet weirdoes follow him home.

Cath said;

I'm another "baffled" one about what the Lib-Dems are doing.

As far as I can ascertain, Lib-Dem party members are wondering what their leader is doing and are unhappy with his stance. (Bow legged or weak-kneed - take your choice.)

Hey, I know everyone is talking about a new dawning in Scottish politics since the election results but maybe I missed the point. Now I'm not a Labour guy so don't slam me before you here me out according to the election I watched maybe the SNP won but by such a small margin that the election result was more a stalemate between the SNP and Labour then anything else. Now when you consider that Labour, the Conservative and the Liberal Democrats back the union, then well if us Scots have spoken then its for the union. Now doesn't matter how salmond bargains he is in a deadlock becuase nationalism is a divisive ideaology. Until nationalists fill the Scot parliament SNP, SSP, Greens or Sheridan's merry men then people have spoken in supprort of the union. Now if Salmond was to hold a referendum on independence he would not be happy with the result and just like all politicans he would hound the Scottish people until he got the result he was happy with. As someone else said earlier apart from separtion what do the SNP stand for???

Hey, I know everyone is talking about a new dawning in Scottish politics since the election results but maybe I missed the point. Now I'm not a Labour guy so don't slam me before you here me out according to the election I watched maybe the SNP won but by such a small margin that the election result was more a stalemate between the SNP and Labour then anything else. Now when you consider that Labour, the Conservative and the Liberal Democrats back the union, then well if us Scots have spoken then its for the union. Now doesn't matter how salmond bargains he is in a deadlock becuase nationalism is a divisive ideaology. Until nationalists fill the Scot parliament SNP, SSP, Greens or Sheridan's merry men then people have spoken in supprort of the union.

Now if Salmond was to hold a referendum on independence he would not be happy with the result and just like all politicans he would hound the Scottish people until he got the result he was happy with. As someone else said earlier apart from separtion what do the SNP stand for???

Alan Smart @ 9:36am

Sorry Alan, you're wrong about schooling. Public school is an English term for PRIVATE school. Independent school would be a better term. Fee-paying is not a real distinction as those who atend Scotland's PUBLIC schools have their fees paid by the taxpayers.

But of course, the unionists at Fettes etc are uncomfortable with the word "independent".

Karma asked; [quote]As someone else said earlier apart from separtion what do the SNP stand for???[/quote] [bold] Scotland first, second, and always.[/bold] Westminster and the needs of the south of England are not their priority. Second, decades of Labour stranglehold on Scottish politics was overturned in a single election. That cannot be dismissed. It means the people of Scotland have asked for a fresh vision. That is there will. And in giving the SNP the popular vote too they have shown they are [italic]not[/italic] afraid of a party with independence in its manifesto. Only the other parties are scared because it may well mean they no longer control all of Britain. The SNP have said they need time to prove an independent Scotland is a viable proposition in the 21st century - after four years it is their intention to present a referendum on that question. All the other parties deny the population that democratic expression. In the past SNP members said once independence is secure they will disband. I doubt it. Being a party made up of converts from other parties they could well return to their old habits ... if another party adopts nationhood as a settled question.On the other hand, the SNP may decide to drop the word "national" from their title, but knowing the forces of suppression will always be ready to take back what they consider theirs we need at least one party ready to defend the sovereigny of Scotland and so the SNP may well evolve and prosper. As for their other policies, consult their manifesto. There are folk on this thread pointing out how close SNP policies are to Lim-Dem policies - yet they don't think the Lib-Dems irrelevant. For years the SNP were portrayed an extremist party and ridiculed, yet both the Labour Party and the Liberal Party began life in Scotland with Home Rule as a major component of their own before abandoning it for pastures south, hence the SNP was created by those who knew Scotland would always be treated as a second-class province of England. I hope that helps. LA

Karma asked;

As someone else said earlier apart from separtion what do the SNP stand for???

Scotland first, second, and always.

Westminster and the needs of the south of England are not their priority.

Second, decades of Labour stranglehold on Scottish politics was overturned in a single election. That cannot be dismissed. It means the people of Scotland have asked for a fresh vision. That is there will. And in giving the SNP the popular vote too they have shown they are not afraid of a party with independence in its manifesto. Only the other parties are scared because it may well mean they no longer control all of Britain.

The SNP have said they need time to prove an independent Scotland is a viable proposition in the 21st century - after four years it is their intention to present a referendum on that question. All the other parties deny the population that democratic expression.

In the past SNP members said once independence is secure they will disband. I doubt it. Being a party made up of converts from other parties they could well return to their old habits ... if another party adopts nationhood as a settled question.On the other hand, the SNP may decide to drop the word "national" from their title, but knowing the forces of suppression will always be ready to take back what they consider theirs we need at least one party ready to defend the sovereigny of Scotland and so the SNP may well evolve and prosper.

As for their other policies, consult their manifesto.

There are folk on this thread pointing out how close SNP policies are to Lim-Dem policies - yet they don't think the Lib-Dems irrelevant.

For years the SNP were portrayed an extremist party and ridiculed, yet both the Labour Party and the Liberal Party began life in Scotland with Home Rule as a major component of their own before abandoning it for pastures south, hence the SNP was created by those who knew Scotland would always be treated as a second-class province of England.

I hope that helps.

LA

LA wrote:
Ian of Falkirk rashly said;
So says the chap from LA who is so concerned about our country.
not understanding that to put his Edinburgh address LA might easily have internet weirdoes follow him home.

Please accept my apologies, I should have known that since you said you were from Los Angeles, I should have known you were in fact from Edinburgh. Do you always tell fibs?

Is this typical of a SNP supporter, I wouldn't think so, although your fellow anorak from Madrid makes me wonder?

LA, LA Still posting here I see. Why don't you help your own countries economy and work for a change. Don't tell me you do as your always posting here. I'm sure you you may have a slight fondness for the SNP. Am I right. Well live in Scotland now and experience the joy of a SNP government. Or are you as I suspect ,only interested in Scotland becoming independent. Whereas the rest of us have to live here and are more concerned with issues like education , income tax, crime, renewable energy,the economy. As you mentioned the Scottish Liberal Democrats Manifesto is very similar to the SNP Manifesto with the exception of Independence. So if Nicol Stephen is a numpty the Alex Salmond must be a numpty too . So how can you

LA, LA

Still posting here I see. Why don't you help your own countries economy and work for a change. Don't tell me you do as your always posting here.

I'm sure you you may have a slight fondness for the SNP. Am I right. Well live in Scotland now and experience the joy of a SNP government. Or are you as I suspect ,only interested in Scotland becoming independent. Whereas the rest of us have to live here and are more concerned with issues like education , income tax, crime, renewable energy,the economy.
As you mentioned the Scottish Liberal Democrats Manifesto is very similar to the SNP Manifesto with the exception of Independence.
So if Nicol Stephen is a numpty the Alex Salmond must be a numpty too .
So how can you

Ian asked his only question: [quote]Do you always tell fibs?[/quote] thus compounding his mistake, and miserably failing to show he was contrite over his erroneous assumption that a fellow Scot was American, or even that an American might care about Scotland and be lauded for it, or that in scoffing at anyone writing from abroad it might be they were actually writing from abroad. It had not occured to him though none had said Falkirk sucked in reposte, an attitude that might denote an affecton for Scotland if not an actual affiliation. It had not crossed his mind because he was capable only of hostility, a quality that came easily to him but was a completely wasted emotion with no practical application whatsoever, and that moved the discussion on not one inch.

Ian asked his only question:

Do you always tell fibs?

thus compounding his mistake, and miserably failing to show he was contrite over his erroneous assumption that a fellow Scot was American, or even that an American might care about Scotland and be lauded for it, or that in scoffing at anyone writing from abroad it might be they were actually writing from abroad.

It had not occured to him though none had said Falkirk sucked in reposte, an attitude that might denote an affecton for Scotland if not an actual affiliation.

It had not crossed his mind because he was capable only of hostility, a quality that came easily to him but was a completely wasted emotion with no practical application whatsoever, and that moved the discussion on not one inch.

Helen attempted censorship saying:

Still posting here I see. Why don't you help your own countries economy and work for a change.

But answer came there none for LA was laughing too much to care over impudence masquerading as sacrifice for her country, a sacrifice that did not include voting for the one party who would protect it.

Just to set any ambiguity straight, since there seems to be some antipathy in these boards for those of us Scots who now live 'furth" and retain an interest in Scotland. I am Scottish and lived in Scotland until 2001 and I always voted SNP. When I left Scotland I did not attempt to vote by post for the simple reason that I felt I had no right to vote since I no longer lived there. I am still acutely interested though. *looks around for discontents*... so like it or lump it that's where I'm at (man). There is no doubt in my mind that everything will be done to stop Salmond and the SNP. The Scottish Labour and LibDems of COURSE take instruction from Westminster, because they are parts of their respective UK parties - so those of you who are hand wringing, just stop. Enough already. The whole Scottish Assembly was never about Scotland, it was ALWAYS about Westminster and about thwarting the upsurge in Nationalism. Dewar was a good and sincere man who believed that devolution was right (and far enough) for Scotland. I don't think this can be said of McConnell, Stevens, Campbell or Brown, whose interests are more UK-centric. Let's all just hope and pray that foul mouthed idiots like Pauline McNeil only get let out of their cages to vote on the party line and are never given positions with any sort of authority. So, don't be surprised to see Mr McConnell or Mr Nicol as FM whenever it happens, because it's gonna. And the people will be happy because as everyehere, mostly the people think politicians are a bunch of inconsequential burps and gurgles whom it's better and easier to complain about than to think about. People don't want democracy or even accountability I think, they just want to get on with their individual lives as best they can on a daily basis, hoping that they do not run foul of "The System" (huge numbers don't vote). So is this the zenith for the SNP? the so near and yet so far? Perhaps. In 100 yrs will the Scottish people look back and say that it was a narrow escape or a lost opportunity? Who knows. One thing I do believe though is this; sad but true, while individuals in Scotland have brilliance and vision and see how Scotland could well be a force in her own right as per Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Iceland, New Zealand, Estonia etc, there are others who do not and who place their own desires to rule on a larger stage above the interests of their country of birth. This is their choice, but Scotland remains riven by the two and as 300 yrs ago the people largely seem not to care (huge numbers don't vote) or have been neutered, while a small bunch or individuals line their pockets and careers in London. These people know that , just as with the poll tax, it wil take the English to move for something to be done about the Union before anything happens. So forget about the arguements, the benefits, the potential disruptions, the difficulties. Forget about the rational arguements and justifications for one side or the other. It is all about Westminster and the status quo and it always has been. Suck it up, as they say over here, and get back to the football. Oh and whatver you do, don't read the McCrone report, because that might make you vaguely uneasy and we can't have that, can we? Grant

Just to set any ambiguity straight, since there seems to be some antipathy in these boards for those of us Scots who now live 'furth" and retain an interest in Scotland. I am Scottish and lived in Scotland until 2001 and I always voted SNP. When I left Scotland I did not attempt to vote by post for the simple reason that I felt I had no right to vote since I no longer lived there. I am still acutely interested though. *looks around for discontents*... so like it or lump it that's where I'm at (man).

There is no doubt in my mind that everything will be done to stop Salmond and the SNP. The Scottish Labour and LibDems of COURSE take instruction from Westminster, because they are parts of their respective UK parties - so those of you who are hand wringing, just stop. Enough already.

The whole Scottish Assembly was never about Scotland, it was ALWAYS about Westminster and about thwarting the upsurge in Nationalism. Dewar was a good and sincere man who believed that devolution was right (and far enough) for Scotland. I don't think this can be said of McConnell, Stevens, Campbell or Brown, whose interests are more UK-centric. Let's all just hope and pray that foul mouthed idiots like Pauline McNeil only get let out of their cages to vote on the party line and are never given positions with any sort of authority.

So, don't be surprised to see Mr McConnell or Mr Nicol as FM whenever it happens, because it's gonna. And the people will be happy because as everyehere, mostly the people think politicians are a bunch of inconsequential burps and gurgles whom it's better and easier to complain about than to think about. People don't want democracy or even accountability I think, they just want to get on with their individual lives as best they can on a daily basis, hoping that they do not run foul of "The System" (huge numbers don't vote).

So is this the zenith for the SNP? the so near and yet so far? Perhaps. In 100 yrs will the Scottish people look back and say that it was a narrow escape or a lost opportunity? Who knows. One thing I do believe though is this; sad but true, while individuals in Scotland have brilliance and vision and see how Scotland could well be a force in her own right as per Denmark, Ireland, Norway, Iceland, New Zealand, Estonia etc, there are others who do not and who place their own desires to rule on a larger stage above the interests of their country of birth. This is their choice, but Scotland remains riven by the two and as 300 yrs ago the people largely seem not to care (huge numbers don't vote) or have been neutered, while a small bunch or individuals line their pockets and careers in London. These people know that , just as with the poll tax, it wil take the English to move for something to be done about the Union before anything happens.

So forget about the arguements, the benefits, the potential disruptions, the difficulties. Forget about the rational arguements and justifications for one side or the other. It is all about Westminster and the status quo and it always has been. Suck it up, as they say over here, and get back to the football. Oh and whatver you do, don't read the McCrone report, because that might make you vaguely uneasy and we can't have that, can we?

Grant

What this article makes abundantly clear is the fact that the SNP's hopes of holding a referendum on independence, in this Parliament at least, are fast dissappearing; first we were going to have an SNP-Lib Dem coalition, then an SNP / LD/ Green coalition, and now the best that Salmond can manage is a sort of mutual non-agression pact with the Green Party.

I suspect the anger, bile, bitterness and down right weirdness on most of these posts reflects the fact that the SNP supporters are realising this too....

You are wasting your time calling for the Lib Dems to at least discuss things aronud a table like civilised individuals. Ming has already instructed them that there will be NO deal with the SNP. The SNP know this. Even if the SNP went all the way and dropped the referendum altogether it would make no difference. Ming has already instructed the Scottish Lib Dems that there will be no deal with the SNP under any circumstances... full stop. That is the deal for Ming Campbell and the UK Lib Dems backing Brown in the next UK election. Westminster politics will always overide Scottish interests, that is the nature of the current settlement. Wake up people.

You are wasting your time calling for the Lib Dems to at least discuss things aronud a table like civilised individuals.

Ming has already instructed them that there will be NO deal with the SNP.

The SNP know this. Even if the SNP went all the way and dropped the referendum altogether it would make no difference. Ming has already instructed the Scottish Lib Dems that there will be no deal with the SNP under any circumstances... full stop.

That is the deal for Ming Campbell and the UK Lib Dems backing Brown in the next UK election.

Westminster politics will always overide Scottish interests, that is the nature of the current settlement.
Wake up people.

Delighted to see the Liberals showing their colours over what would be a power sharing deal. They do NOT HAVE THE INTERESTS OF SCOTLAND AT HEART.

Hope to see them lose their petty little Brits in the coming elections.

May EVERY SCOT see what they are.

The fear of political death is staring out of their tiny anglo heads

This nonsense from the Liberal Democrats suggests that Scotland can only have coalition government if the people vote according to the demands of the political elites. There are some who defend the Lib Dems, and of course there is no objective reason as to why they must enter into coalition, but that avoids the issue that they refuse to even sit around a negotiating table. To sit around a table is the least, remember, they could do for the people of Scotland. Surely their duty is to the Scottish people and not to the Unionists within their party nor their party leader in London. I do suspect a deal has been struck by Brown and Campbell with an awareness of a possible hung parliament in the future or even that Campbell may find a place in a Brown Cabinet in the Foreign Office. It may just be this is what Brown means when he says a 'Cabinet of all the talents' and there is no real reason why this could not occur. The Scottish people, I believe, will remember the Liberals and their intransigence and if Labour start a dirty tricks campaign they may well awaken the electorate to the realisation that these parties are but attempting to intimaidate the electorate into the will of the political masters. The SNP have been somewhat marginilised but Labour, surprisingly, may not recall the notion of the 'attractiveness of the outsider' and SNP can demonstrate they truly are the only party in that Parliament who have the Scottish interests as their raison d'etre.

This nonsense from the Liberal Democrats suggests that Scotland can only have coalition government if the people vote according to the demands of the political elites. There are some who defend the Lib Dems, and of course there is no objective reason as to why they must enter into coalition, but that avoids the issue that they refuse to even sit around a negotiating table. To sit around a table is the least, remember, they could do for the people of Scotland. Surely their duty is to the Scottish people and not to the Unionists within their party nor their party leader in London.
I do suspect a deal has been struck by Brown and Campbell with an awareness of a possible hung parliament in the future or even that Campbell may find a place in a Brown Cabinet in the Foreign Office. It may just be this is what Brown means when he says a 'Cabinet of all the talents' and there is no real reason why this could not occur.
The Scottish people, I believe, will remember the Liberals and their intransigence and if Labour start a dirty tricks campaign they may well awaken the electorate to the realisation that these parties are but attempting to intimaidate the electorate into the will of the political masters.
The SNP have been somewhat marginilised but Labour, surprisingly, may not recall the notion of the 'attractiveness of the outsider' and SNP can demonstrate they truly are the only party in that Parliament who have the Scottish interests as their raison d'etre.

"When I left Scotland I did not attempt to vote by post for the simple reason that I felt I had no right to vote since I no longer lived there. " For the information of ex-pats. Scots who are resident overseas are not allowed to vote in the Scottish Parliamentary elections. Check this at the votescotland website, where you will find instructions on obtaining a postal vote: "As an overseas voter, you are eligible to vote in elections for the UK Parliament and the European Parliament. You cannot vote in UK local or mayoral elections, or elections to the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly for Wales or the London Assembly." http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/documents/Combined-Overseas-Registration-Postal-And-Proxy-Forms-SC.pdf

"When I left Scotland I did not attempt to vote by post for the simple reason that I felt I had no right to vote since I no longer lived there. "

For the information of ex-pats. Scots who are resident overseas are not allowed to vote in the Scottish Parliamentary elections. Check this at the votescotland website, where you will find instructions on obtaining a postal vote:

"As an overseas voter, you are eligible to vote in
elections for the UK Parliament and the European
Parliament. You cannot vote in UK local or mayoral
elections, or elections to the Scottish Parliament, the
National Assembly for Wales or the London Assembly."

http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/documents/Combined-Overseas-Registration-Postal-And-Proxy-Forms-SC.pdf

The above post in response to Ex-pat-Prof.

I wish the Herald would number these threads. I'm awa back tae the Hootsmaun!

hmm... interesting. I wonder why that is?? However, it doesn't change my belief that I shouldn't vote.

Grant

Ex-pat-Prof,

I don't know the reason; it should be no more difficult that handling postal votes for....Oh, OK forget it!

Jimmy

ELECTION LOSS DENIAL For Labour and especially for Ian of Falkirk. SYMPTOMS OF ELECTION LOSS DENIAL 1) SHOCK The first reaction on hearing the bad news is one of classic shock. This initially may appear as if there is no reaction at all to the news. The person may nod and accept the news without appearing to be troubled by it. Inside, they have frozen out the news that has not really taken hold yet. To get the news through, they may need to be told several times. This is followed by a more external shock, where there may be physical reactions such as paling of the skin, shortness of breath and physical freezing. THERAPY When shock occurs, they may need to be sat down (to stop them falling) and given a drink of some sort (mostly as something to hold onto). Show them sympathy and acceptance. If the shock is not a short-lived one, help them get to a place where they can sit safely and let the news sink in. 2) ELECTION LOSS DENIAL After the initial shock has worn off, the next stage is usually one of classic denial, where they pretend that the news has not been given. They effectively close their eyes to any evidence and pretend that nothing has happened. Typically, they will continue their life as if nothing has happened. In the workplace, they will carry on doing their job even if that job is no longer required. ELECTION DENIAL GROUP THERAPY You can move a person out of denial by deliberately provoking them to anger. Hold up the future (sympathetically) so they cannot avoid or deny it. Tell them that it is not fair. Show anger yourself (thus legitimizing that they get angry). 3) ELECTION LOSS DENIAL ANGER PHASE The next step after denial is a sudden swing into anger, which often occurs in an explosion of emotion, where the bottled-up feelings of the previous stages are expulsed in a huge outpouring of grief. Whoever is in the way is likely to be blamed. THERAPY When they are angry, the best thing you can do is give them space, allowing them to rail and bellow. The more the storm blows, the sooner it will blow itself out. Beware, when faced with anger, of it becoming an argument where you may push them back into denial or cause later problems. Support their anger. Accept it. Let them be angry at you. Pre-disposition to ELECTION LOSS ANGER Common factors that can predispose one to EL anger include fatigue, hunger, pain, sexual frustration, recovery from an illness, or the use of certain drugs; hormonal changes associated with PMS, birth, and/or menopause.

ELECTION LOSS DENIAL
For Labour and especially for Ian of Falkirk.

SYMPTOMS OF ELECTION LOSS DENIAL
1) SHOCK
The first reaction on hearing the bad news is one of classic shock. This initially may appear as if there is no reaction at all to the news. The person may nod and accept the news without appearing to be troubled by it. Inside, they have frozen out the news that has not really taken hold yet. To get the news through, they may need to be told several times.

This is followed by a more external shock, where there may be physical reactions such as paling of the skin, shortness of breath and physical freezing.

THERAPY
When shock occurs, they may need to be sat down (to stop them falling) and given a drink of some sort (mostly as something to hold onto). Show them sympathy and acceptance. If the shock is not a short-lived one, help them get to a place where they can sit safely and let the news sink in.

2) ELECTION LOSS DENIAL
After the initial shock has worn off, the next stage is usually one of classic denial, where they pretend that the news has not been given. They effectively close their eyes to any evidence and pretend that nothing has happened.

Typically, they will continue their life as if nothing has happened. In the workplace, they will carry on doing their job even if that job is no longer required.

ELECTION DENIAL GROUP THERAPY

You can move a person out of denial by deliberately provoking them to anger. Hold up the future (sympathetically) so they cannot avoid or deny it. Tell them that it is not fair. Show anger yourself (thus legitimizing that they get angry).

3) ELECTION LOSS DENIAL ANGER PHASE
The next step after denial is a sudden swing into anger, which often occurs in an explosion of emotion, where the bottled-up feelings of the previous stages are expulsed in a huge outpouring of grief. Whoever is in the way is likely to be blamed.

THERAPY
When they are angry, the best thing you can do is give them space, allowing them to rail and bellow. The more the storm blows, the sooner it will blow itself out.
Beware, when faced with anger, of it becoming an argument where you may push them back into denial or cause later problems. Support their anger. Accept it. Let them be angry at you.

Pre-disposition to ELECTION LOSS ANGER
Common factors that can predispose one to EL anger include fatigue, hunger, pain, sexual frustration, recovery from an illness, or the use of certain drugs; hormonal changes associated with PMS, birth, and/or menopause.

[quote][bold]LA[/bold] wrote: Ian asked his only question: [quote]Do you always tell fibs?[/quote] thus compounding his mistake, and miserably failing to show he was contrite over his erroneous assumption that a fellow Scot was American, or even that an American might care about Scotland and be lauded for it, or that in scoffing at anyone writing from abroad it might be they were actually writing from abroad. It had not occured to him though none had said Falkirk sucked in reposte, an attitude that might denote an affecton for Scotland if not an actual affiliation. It had not crossed his mind because he was capable only of hostility, a quality that came easily to him but was a completely wasted emotion with no practical application whatsoever, and that moved the discussion on not one inch.[/quote] Please answer the question LA, are you from Los Angeles as per your posts, or from Edinburgh as you stated in one of your responses? Take your pick, you can't have it both ways.

LA wrote:
Ian asked his only question:
Do you always tell fibs?
thus compounding his mistake, and miserably failing to show he was contrite over his erroneous assumption that a fellow Scot was American, or even that an American might care about Scotland and be lauded for it, or that in scoffing at anyone writing from abroad it might be they were actually writing from abroad. It had not occured to him though none had said Falkirk sucked in reposte, an attitude that might denote an affecton for Scotland if not an actual affiliation. It had not crossed his mind because he was capable only of hostility, a quality that came easily to him but was a completely wasted emotion with no practical application whatsoever, and that moved the discussion on not one inch.

Please answer the question LA, are you from Los Angeles as per your posts, or from Edinburgh as you stated in one of your responses? Take your pick, you can't have it both ways.

[quote][bold]Alex Porter[/bold] wrote: ELECTION LOSS DENIAL For Labour and especially for Ian of Falkirk. SYMPTOMS OF ELECTION LOSS DENIAL 1) SHOCK The first reaction on hearing the bad news is one of classic shock. This initially may appear as if there is no reaction at all to the news. The person may nod and accept the news without appearing to be troubled by it. Inside, they have frozen out the news that has not really taken hold yet. To get the news through, they may need to be told several times. This is followed by a more external shock, where there may be physical reactions such as paling of the skin, shortness of breath and physical freezing. THERAPY When shock occurs, they may need to be sat down (to stop them falling) and given a drink of some sort (mostly as something to hold onto). Show them sympathy and acceptance. If the shock is not a short-lived one, help them get to a place where they can sit safely and let the news sink in. 2) ELECTION LOSS DENIAL After the initial shock has worn off, the next stage is usually one of classic denial, where they pretend that the news has not been given. They effectively close their eyes to any evidence and pretend that nothing has happened. Typically, they will continue their life as if nothing has happened. In the workplace, they will carry on doing their job even if that job is no longer required. ELECTION DENIAL GROUP THERAPY You can move a person out of denial by deliberately provoking them to anger. Hold up the future (sympathetically) so they cannot avoid or deny it. Tell them that it is not fair. Show anger yourself (thus legitimizing that they get angry). 3) ELECTION LOSS DENIAL ANGER PHASE The next step after denial is a sudden swing into anger, which often occurs in an explosion of emotion, where the bottled-up feelings of the previous stages are expulsed in a huge outpouring of grief. Whoever is in the way is likely to be blamed. THERAPY When they are angry, the best thing you can do is give them space, allowing them to rail and bellow. The more the storm blows, the sooner it will blow itself out. Beware, when faced with anger, of it becoming an argument where you may push them back into denial or cause later problems. Support their anger. Accept it. Let them be angry at you. Pre-disposition to ELECTION LOSS ANGER Common factors that can predispose one to EL anger include fatigue, hunger, pain, sexual frustration, recovery from an illness, or the use of certain drugs; hormonal changes associated with PMS, birth, and/or menopause. [/quote] Thank you Alex, hope you enjoyed your afternoon siesta. You know neither who I vote for nor anything abot me as I don't gibber mince. I have merely asked questions of those who post comments, and ask them agian to those who particularly keep posting comments without backing them up. I found your comments amusing, I just wonder where you copy/pasted them......again. Never mind though, you ar eback off slagging the press.

Alex Porter wrote:
ELECTION LOSS DENIAL For Labour and especially for Ian of Falkirk. SYMPTOMS OF ELECTION LOSS DENIAL 1) SHOCK The first reaction on hearing the bad news is one of classic shock. This initially may appear as if there is no reaction at all to the news. The person may nod and accept the news without appearing to be troubled by it. Inside, they have frozen out the news that has not really taken hold yet. To get the news through, they may need to be told several times. This is followed by a more external shock, where there may be physical reactions such as paling of the skin, shortness of breath and physical freezing. THERAPY When shock occurs, they may need to be sat down (to stop them falling) and given a drink of some sort (mostly as something to hold onto). Show them sympathy and acceptance. If the shock is not a short-lived one, help them get to a place where they can sit safely and let the news sink in. 2) ELECTION LOSS DENIAL After the initial shock has worn off, the next stage is usually one of classic denial, where they pretend that the news has not been given. They effectively close their eyes to any evidence and pretend that nothing has happened. Typically, they will continue their life as if nothing has happened. In the workplace, they will carry on doing their job even if that job is no longer required. ELECTION DENIAL GROUP THERAPY You can move a person out of denial by deliberately provoking them to anger. Hold up the future (sympathetically) so they cannot avoid or deny it. Tell them that it is not fair. Show anger yourself (thus legitimizing that they get angry). 3) ELECTION LOSS DENIAL ANGER PHASE The next step after denial is a sudden swing into anger, which often occurs in an explosion of emotion, where the bottled-up feelings of the previous stages are expulsed in a huge outpouring of grief. Whoever is in the way is likely to be blamed. THERAPY When they are angry, the best thing you can do is give them space, allowing them to rail and bellow. The more the storm blows, the sooner it will blow itself out. Beware, when faced with anger, of it becoming an argument where you may push them back into denial or cause later problems. Support their anger. Accept it. Let them be angry at you. Pre-disposition to ELECTION LOSS ANGER Common factors that can predispose one to EL anger include fatigue, hunger, pain, sexual frustration, recovery from an illness, or the use of certain drugs; hormonal changes associated with PMS, birth, and/or menopause.

Thank you Alex, hope you enjoyed your afternoon siesta.

You know neither who I vote for nor anything abot me as I don't gibber mince.

I have merely asked questions of those who post comments, and ask them agian to those who particularly keep posting comments without backing them up.

I found your comments amusing, I just wonder where you copy/pasted them......again.

Never mind though, you ar eback off slagging the press.

Ian 4:46 it's noe of your frigging business where LA lives.

Ian fae Falkirk,

Ve vil ask ze qvestions!

Echt Waar wrote:
Ian fae Falkirk,

Ve vil ask ze qvestions!

Vorsprung durch Slapstick

What this article makes abundantly clear is the fact that the SNP's hopes of holding a referendum on independence, in this Parliament at least, are fast dissappearing; Eric, quite a lot of people predicted this even before the votes were counted. Salmond is never going to get this through, he will never be given the chance. |The other party's will pay lip service to him, play with him like a cat does with a mouse, then pounce the minute the Polls go in their favour with a Vote of "No Confidence" I give "Wee Echie" twa years, then Scotland will be facing another election. Why do you think they will not form a coalition with him? Not because they want a rest or spend more time with their families I am sure. More because they realise he is aw blaw!!

What this article makes abundantly clear is the fact that the SNP's hopes of holding a referendum on independence, in this Parliament at least, are fast dissappearing;

Eric, quite a lot of people predicted this even before the votes were counted.
Salmond is never going to get this through, he will never be given the chance. |The other party's will pay lip service to him, play with him like a cat does with a mouse, then pounce the minute the Polls go in their favour with a Vote of "No Confidence" I give "Wee Echie" twa years, then Scotland will be facing another election.
Why do you think they will not form a coalition with him?
Not because they want a rest or spend more time with their families I am sure. More because they realise he is aw blaw!!

People who state the election was "close" forget the fact that the SNP have surged from a long way behind Labour in a relative short time to overtake them despite the best intentions of a blanket media that was either against them the whole time or (like the Sunday herald) changed in the final week. For a country like Scotland to change so radically sends a very clear signal that there is no wish for a Labour or LIbDem First Minister - it would be a scandal if there was. Lots of talk of deals at Westminster does not surprise me - it is only natural for people to look after their own most important Parliament. Here is the message for the people of Scotland - for the SNP and The Greens , the most important Parliament is at Holyrood -wake up those who continue to stick with people who have delivered a smoking ban ( despite Jack McConnel being against a complete public ban) and very little else. The dawn raids on "illegal" immigrant families continues to be a shameful practice that Westminster and the Uniosts continue to support.

People who state the election was "close" forget the fact that the SNP have surged from a long way behind Labour in a relative short time to overtake them despite the best intentions of a blanket media that was either against them the whole time or (like the Sunday herald) changed in the final week.

For a country like Scotland to change so radically sends a very clear signal that there is no wish for a Labour or LIbDem First Minister - it would be a scandal if there was.

Lots of talk of deals at Westminster does not surprise me - it is only natural for people to look after their own most important Parliament.

Here is the message for the people of Scotland - for the SNP and The Greens , the most important Parliament is at Holyrood -wake up those who continue to stick with people who have delivered a smoking ban ( despite Jack McConnel being against a complete public ban) and very little else.

The dawn raids on "illegal" immigrant families continues to be a shameful practice that Westminster and the Uniosts continue to support.