| Archive for Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites. |
| SLG |
Cunninghame NorthApparently one of the papers is saying that Labour are still trying to get a recount here - I don't know if this would include loking through the spoilt ballots. The SNP majority was 48, with >1000 spoilt ballots.I very much doubt this will happen, but anyone heard anything? |
||||||||||
| George |
Re: Cunninghame North
I wouldn't put it past them, see my new topic regarding another 'Florida'. |
||||||||||
| Economist |
According to BBC News 24, Labour are "seriously considering" mounting a legal challenge over the result in this constituency.
If they were successful, it could open the whole election up to similar challenges. |
||||||||||
| macnumpty |
Well, if we don't have an FM by the end of the month, they might not need to mount that challenge... 
|
||||||||||
| Economist |
Very true, but I think we will, even if it is just someone neutral like Margo McDonald, in the interim (God forbid). Mind you Labour have been very, very quiet since the election (not including the rapturous speeches by Margaret Curran, Pauline McNeil et al, at the Glasgow counts) Maybe they are holding out and hoping for this very eventuality to happen. | ||||||||||
| SLG |
Come on McNumpty... give them a bit of time! The election was only won yesterday! Salmond is as astute a politician as they come. I'm sure he won't let it happen.
As far challenging results goes, we need a bit of help from the media here. The results have come in, and everyone should accept them. Not to would throw the whole process into disarray - that one vote could be crucial. |
||||||||||
| Economist |
Surely there was a manual recount here anyway, with such a close result? | ||||||||||
| George |
Not so sure, I recall Gordon Brewer asking David Cairns that very question on newsnight and being astonished that there would be no manual recounts. I think, although I could be wrong, that what was to happen was that each ballot paper is scanned when counted and that this image was used in a re-count and not the actual ballot paper. Like I say though I cannot be 100% sure. |
||||||||||
| Aventinian |
Is this still ongoing?
They should recount and get it over with. |
||||||||||
| Reluctant Hero |
The BBC have just said that a legal challenge is to be mounted. Although it is coming from the individual himself and not the Labour Party 
|
||||||||||
| SLG |
So their may have been a rerun of the computer count at the time, but not a manual one. I would have thought members of the Labour party present would have demanded a recount. At which point it comes down to the returning officer to make the judgement. He must have had confidence in the result to have allowed it to proceed.
Unless something new has come to light, I fail to see how a recount could be justified. |
||||||||||
| Economist |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6629093.stm | ||||||||||
| Reluctant Hero |
Surely the legal action will not be concluded before the timescales to have a FM appointed by?
So it is odds on that Salmond will be FM regardless. |
||||||||||
| William_Cleland |
Unless he can get an interim interdict? | ||||||||||
| Economist |
I think the more important thing is the precedent it could set if it was something that seriously took legs and ran. But it doesn't seem likely that it will.
Maybe the best thing might be to do the election all over again, using the old fashioned method. 
|
||||||||||
| Reluctant Hero |
Yeah, if this was to be successful, I think the proverbial can of worms would be opened. |
||||||||||
| Shadowman |
I can't see this getting off the ground. Parties that appear sore losers in demanding recounts are usually punished by the electorate (e.g. Winchester in 1997, a result that put Mr. Oaten into parliament).
The party in London knows better than to give Scottish Labour an even worse name than it's got already. Perhaps the defeated candidate could have a peerage as recompense? |
||||||||||
| Jimbo |
Has he got that kind of money? 
|
||||||||||
| Govanite |
Some libelskirting tosh in the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/m...?xml=/news/2007/05/06/nelec06.xml Kenny Gibson is a bit of a maddy, but stuffing ballot boxes in the Firth of Clyde?! Nae danger. |
||||||||||
| SLG |
They do appear sore losers, but while Salmond said that the result showed that Labour no longer had a 'divine right' to rule Scotland, it seems that Labour do not agree. Hopefully their challenge won't hold up to scrutiny. I'm sure if there had been any discrepancy in the votes from Arran, the returning officer would have reported on it. Also, I presume that there would have been a police presence accompanying the votes on their way from Arran.
On the other hand, I think much of this will be about trying to disrupt coalition talks between the SNP and Lib Dems. |
||||||||||
| William_Cleland |
Seems to me a discrepancy of 100 is highly likely to be an error in addition and that somebody stuffing boxes would not necessarily choose a round number like that. Presumably the boxes get a police escort? | ||||||||||
| wisnaeme |
.
I hear Labour are standing off and letting Eck and the FibDem fella start the proceedings of coalition. That's Sh*te. Labour will be trying to put the boot in at any opportunity. Labour naw gonna talk to folk that can do damage to Eck? Aye right. Does anyone honestly think Charlie was giving the boot for a drink problem that has been known about for years? Mingin will be using his influence from a UK perspective, favours done will be expected to be returned. They didn't put Sir on his label for nought and yon FibDem "ah'm gonna be First Minister" Chappie likes verra much the prospect of having his highers and betters paying some attention to himself. Not something Charlie would aprove of, ah'm sure. |
||||||||||
| Aventinian |
"Does anyone honestly think it had anything to do with Scottish affairs?" is the question? Obviously you do, but then again you're this site's resident tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist on all subjects. It was neither - it was the disgrace to the party connect with his drinking becoming a significant electoral matter and a very public thing.
You'd think so, but in this day and age I wouldn't be surprised at all if it was otherwise. |
||||||||||
| SLG |
They had polis looking after the papers when the counts were shut down overnight. I'd be very surprised if the number of votes coming from Arran did not have a police presence.
Now they're saying there could be a challenge in Glasgow as well. Seems to be linked with Solidary. |
||||||||||
| October1974 |
Which party was in charge of North Ayrshire council and administered the election there? Labour. Huffing and puffing for nothing. If you add up to the SNP and Campbell Martin's vote then Labour are far behind. If there is a forced by-election then shades of Winchester when the Tories challanged a 2 vote victory by the Libs, it turned into a 20,000 majorty when it was re-rerun. | ||||||||||
| Aventinian |
It wouldn't matter if it was the council or labour government at fault. They're acting in their public duty, and a local constituency party or individual candidate would be perfectly entitled to bring legal action against them. This, of course, assumes that any branch of government is actually at fault. |
||||||||||
| Karenisabitch |
Well if Labour make a legal challenge in Cunninhma then the SNP should do the same in Airdrie and Shotts as the number of spoilt papers was more than the majority PLUS the list vote for us soared through the roof in that constituency.
What this means is that many of the spoilt papers were almost certainly intended for us.... |
||||||||||
| wisnaeme |
As a matter of fact I do know that it had something to do with Scottish affairs but from a UK perspective. Correct me if Ah'm wrong but is Charlie not a well known and respected figure on Skye? I believe himself represents Skye folk and others bordering that Island somewhere else. Folk tend to know one another or know of one another up there, difficult to keep a secret there, so Charlie liking a drink or two was very,very public,indeed. I've had a dram or two with him, myself. Charlie has something "Mingin" hasn't, a warmth,where as the "Mingin" one is perceived as very cold and calculating creature by many folk, rather like the Brown Jobbie.
How kind of you to say so. A little bit of truth construed and elaborated on to form a theory based on ignorance from yerself then "Aventinian"? how ill-mannered and quaint.You'd be appreciated in the ministry of spin and go far. Statistics isn't it? 
A) Check the dictionary for the defination of resident it appears that it is unknown to yerself. B) Check the history of my posting on this site. Would that indicate residency? Indeed, it would not.Which of the two of us judging by amount of postings would have have more claim to residency on this site? C) All subjects! Surely just some. Exaggeration as befitting yerself then "Aventinian"? Surely Ah would be right in thinking that exaggeration is considered a conspiracy theorist trait, indeed it would appear so.But then so would exaggerating disparagingly with arrogant contempt into insignificance what many knowledgeable and learned folk know to be so from irrefutable sources, many of them official.Indeed much of it apparently harmful and unfit for for public consumption.According to some anyways.
I don't have the arrogant conceit to presume that I know B*gger all as one wit was presumed to have said while thinking otherwise. Would that be yerself then ,"Aventinian"? But though I don't have the gift of a font of all knowledge, I know folk who working together have created a semblance of that source of wisdom and knowledge over many years. Perhaps more than just some of that wisdom and information gathered has been put to very good use indeed.
Really, is that a fact. A very public thing! Weel ah've already thrown that argument onto the midden. Significant electorial matter! Bullsh*te. Churchill and many other distinquished leader personages liked a dram or two. Was it the public knowledge of a drink problem then that forced himself into those wilderness years? Aye right so. Or was it that the political sept of the establishment that he belonged to did not consider him reliable enough to conform to what was required of him? Did that erm drinking barr himself from high public office? Yer talking sh*te,"Aventinian".
Aye,right enough a pluralisation of negativity. A creative specialty of unionist though processes. Ah've heard there is bad news north of the border. There's a terrible wiff of fear about the place. All those unionist placemen, Labour included may be due for an eviction shortly. Dundee Uni, for example. Terrible that. Aye, Shame about some folk fearing change. Fear no longer, for it's apon them.Scotland has changed in the last few years right enough and there's going to be a reckoning by the new order. That is what The unionist are rightly afraid off. That's what Labour placemen are afraid off. There is more at stake than just who's bum sits in the Parliament. All those cosy quangos, all those jobs for the boys and girls. Aye it's their times up soon enough. The new order cometh, I do hope they find alternative means of substinance. If not in the very near immediate future then soon enough for it's coming for all that. |
||||||||||
| wisnaeme |
Correct Karen. Did you also know that folk weren't taken in by yon NHS something or other. The word had been put out. Aspiring politicians deceiving folk, who would have thought it.  Posture and scream if that is their inclination but ah dare the rogues to open that can of worms,one never knows where it might end.
Though I have to say that in this case if those spoilt ballot papers were of the same percentage for whoever as the counted votes then it will be difficult to proove any erm abnormalities.Which polling stations had an adnormal amount of spoilt ballot papers and in which area's of the constituency. Voting patterns even in the same constituency can differ,especially if it covers a large area as does Airdrie and Shotts. I think suspicion if any must fall on the voting procedure and those responsible for its implimentation. The Scottish office and Alexander spring to mind. Those are the people who organised the way in which it would be carried out. A full judicial enquiry and a public account of this must be held. Not an in-house sham adding insult to injury from this shambles. The contract for the equipement must also come under public scrutiny, commercial confidentiality laws not withstanding. There must be public accountability and not just hearsay from some interested parties that its OK we've looked into the matter. .. . |
||||||||||
| Aventinian |
This is what is called havering...
Churchill lived in an age where it was quite tolerable to be a bit pissed at work. This is no longer true.
Err... what? |
||||||||||
| Jimbo |
There are wasted votes in every election, unfortunately more so in this one. These people were not disenfranchised, they had the same opportunity as everyone else to vote properly. They either did not take the time to do so or did not have the mental furniture to take it in.
I would be more concerned about the thousands who applied for a postal vote and did not receive one or it arrived too late for it to be returned on time. The reason given by the Labour party for this is that they did not expect such a high demand. The Daily Record can run off 100,000 copies of a 32 page issue in one night but the Scotland Office couldn't run off 100,000 voting papers in four weeks. That I don't believe. |
||||||||||
| SLG |
Absolutely. And this has been ignored since with all the talk of spoilt ballots and legal challenges. Salmond (and others) mentioned it on the night during their speeches at the counts. So hopefully if Salmond is FM, this will be investigated. |
||||||||||
| wisnaeme |
Have you been taking an interest in the outpourings of the media recently, then "Aventinian" Havering was I? It's just the start of the great clearout. Now that there are folk who are willing to hear what we have to say,who are receptive to the amassed files and and impeccibly sourced information in our data banks, something might just be achieved in the unmasking of cronyism, malfeasance whilest in public office and other alleged wrong doing. Many of yer heid unionism supporters are about to be disgraced. Many establishment manderins are going to have their @rse's skelpt by what will be shortly revealed. Revenge is a dish best served cold "Aventinian"and the reputation of the union establishment is about to go to hell in a handcart. Have a nice day. . |
||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Can someone translate this into English for me? |
||||||||||
| Rinty |
Its not just a matter of people not voting properly. In the Central Region ballot paper, at the count I attended, it became apparent that there was a very real problem with the actual paper.
Across the top of the paper were the words "you have two votes", below this was an arrow that pointed down to the regional list of candidates. Another extended line with another arrow went along to the right before dipping down the constituency ballot with the words "place only one vote here". People were clearly reading this as either having two votes on the list or two votes anywhere in the two columns. By the time the read over to the next column it would be too late when they see the words "plave one vote here using an x" Having both elections on the same paper (regional and constituency) meant that the shorter constituency list flowed and appeared like a continuation of the left hand column (the regional). The shere volume of papers that had two croses on the regional list and none on the constituency votes means that it hard for me to believe that thiswasnt a significant influence on the election. It is very difficult to accurately estimate just what effect that would have had other than guesses based on anecdotal evidence so far. If we counted these papers and even gave the two recipients 1/2 a vote each it could have a dramatic effect on the list results but even then we would not see what the voters would have done with their constituency vote. For that reason (and others) I think any legal challenge based on looking again at the ballot papers, would be unable to establish what the exact difference the wringly filled in papers would have had and therefore be unable to rule aginst the existibng result. But, if Mike Dailly from Govan Law Centre has his way, he believes he has a very strong case of having the whole result ruled illegal which would mean, not a recount, but a complete re-run of the whole election. To me, this would make it unlikely that any political party would encourage any intense scrutiny of the results and try to block any legal challenge. Labour will oppose it as the result could have been a lot worse than it was, the SNP wont support as, although it could have beena better resuklt for them, they wouldnt want to risk the position that it has taken them so long to achieve. |
||||||||||
| Anthropos |
Reading wisnaeme’s posting made me recall something an acquaintance of mine told me about ten years ago. It was during a discussion about how the Labour Party had hammered the Tories over the issue of sleaze (cash for questions etc) in the run up to the 1997 election. The said acquaintance, who had some knowledge of the Scottish sottogoverno, told me that as the Scottish Establishment was a Labour establishment, the Scottish media had complicity suppressed the large volume of Labour sleaze (cronyism, patronage, back-handers, exchanging favours etc) because they were mainly anti-Tory and pro-devolution, and if true not very ethical either it would seem. However, he said that when the Scottish media wanted rid of Labour they would open the sleaze floodgates. Now I don’t know if this is what the post refers to, but the use of the phrases “the great clearout” and “the amassed files and and impeccibly sourced information in our data banks” does remind me of that ten year old conversation which I had forgotten until reading the above. Of course I don’t know if that is what wisnaeme is referring to, and I could be way off beam. |
||||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Intriguing stuff. I await further details with interest. Though I'd find it easier to follow if wisnaeme could avoid sounding so apocalyptic. | ||||||||||
| SLG |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6692595.stm
No challenge will come from Labour. That Glasgow lawyer still trying to mount a challenge? |
||||||||||
| Reluctant Hero |
Common sense prevails - can't see how they could possibly have had a case. | ||||||||||
| SLG |
It was just part of the overall sense of denial that we have seen from a number of Labour members. Many of them still haven't come to terms with it. | ||||||||||