| 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. |
| VLK |
Was the result a stalemate?Unless there is some change in the counting of the votes, SNP won 47 seats, Labour 46, LibDems 17, Tories 16, Greens 2 and one seat for an independent.SNP have won the election by becoming the largest party but when you start adding those numbers, you will soon realise that there is no real natural majority for any coalition. The very fact that SNP are the largest means that it won`t be the first option for anti-independence parties to unite against SNP. The likely outcome will be a coalition of SNPand LibDems with the Greens promising not to vote them out if there is a vote of confidence. However, LibDems may sell their skin at a dear price which could include a demand that there will be no independence referendum during this term. What are your views of the result and the likeliest consequences? |
||||||||
| Aventinian |
Re: Was the result a stalemate?
I think the most likely consequence is Big Eck as First Minister with a confidence and supply arrangement with the Greens and Liberals. I think the Greens might make their skin more pricey than is suspected too... |
||||||||
| Anthropos |
Yes I think youse are both probably right.
BTW you have mixed up the Lib Dem and Tory figures VLK, the Tories got 17 and the Lib Dems got 16. |
||||||||
| Maol.Chaluim |
Maybe the Greens will formally join an SNP/Lib Dem coalition... The SNP have almost doubled their seats, while the Lib Dems have lost one. Could it be argued that their refusal to hold a referendum on independence cost them votes? Are they still going to refuse now? |
||||||||
| Anthropos |
I don't think it likely, but they may work with them on certain issues.
I doubt it, the results show the SNP took 14 of their 20 gains from the Independents and smaller parties. |
||||||||
| SLG |
Who for presiding officer then? | ||||||||
| Economist |
Trish Godman, although I can't see Labour letting go of her. Robin Harper was another name mentioned, but that would leave the Greens one down and puts the kaibosh on any putative SNP/Lib/Green coalition.
So a Tory maybe? Who? |
||||||||
| macnumpty |
No Tory name springs to mind... but what about Margo? She'd put the fear of God into the rest of them, that's for sure! 
|
||||||||
| Aventinian |
Murray Tosh is a Tory and already deputy presiding officer. I think he's most likely myself. |
||||||||
| SLG |
Tbh, I'm not sure Margo would do a good job, nor want the job. | ||||||||
| macnumpty |
One slight problem. He's no longer an MSP. |
||||||||
| SLG |
Haha - aye, a slight problem there 
|
||||||||
| Economist |
I wouldn't want to see Margo as PO either. She's better at carping from the backbenches, IMO. | ||||||||
| VLK |
This discussion has slightly strayed from the original question. Who do you think will form the next government or will there be any sustainable alternative? | ||||||||
| SLG |
The way I see it, there are three outcomes.
A Labour/Lib Dem minority exec supported by the Tories. An SNP/Lib Dem minority exec supported by the others. An SNP/Lib Dem/SGP majority exec. I think option 2 or 3 at this stage are the most likely. Salmond will drop the referendum in order to make this possible. |
||||||||
| VLK |
Exactly my conclusions as well. So, bye-bye independent Scotland for at least four years. By the way, as there was some trouble with the election-machines leaving 10% of the votes invalid, could there not be a real argument to question the validity of the election? I know, a loser whinging but nevertheless! |
||||||||
| Aventinian |
Ah, definitely a hiccup in an otherwise damn fine plan. |
||||||||
| Aventinian |
You definitely see the Lib Dems going into coalition with the SNP? |
||||||||
| SLG |
Well, if we stay in opposition, we'll not get a referendum either, so it's no loss really IMO. I think there is a possibility in the sense that Salmond might get the Lid Dems to agree to referendum bill with a free vote in which the Lib Dems can vote against it. This would open up the possibility of having a free vote at a time when the Tories have gained power in Westminster. There might be quite a lot of pressure on some Lib Dems and Labour members to actually back the referendum.
I don't think there's any danger regarding the validity of the result. Just lessons that need to be learned. |
||||||||
| VLK |
But let`s not forget that unlike the Tories or Labour in England, who are vehemently against the idea of the break-up of the union, an average Joe on the street in England is actually very much in favour of Scotland becoming independent. There are the ideological reasons that England wants to be England, not Britain, but far more importantly, many English-people are led to believe that Scotland only survives through London-subsidies.
There have been more and more calls for an English Parliament in England. many of the advocates have said that if setting up an English Parliament means the end of the UK, so be it. |
||||||||
| VLK |
Besides, I think it would be only fair to have a referendum on the issue, if for no other reason then at least to stop this bullshitting. However, the danger with that would be that the result of such a referendum would be like the one in the Canadian province of Quebec where it was a 50-50 result but only a handful of votes separated independence from remaining as a part of Canada.
But whichever way a referendum goes, the the will of the people prevails and, very importantly, the losing side admits defeat. |
||||||||
| Aventinian |
I was actually meaning a minority government rather than remaining in opposition. I imagine it's reasonably certain that Alex Salmond will be first minister. |
||||||||
| SLG |
I think Salmond has made it clear that he doesn't want to lead a minority government. I'm sure he will make a great deal of effort fo actually bring in the Lib Dems. I should have included the possibility of an SNP minority, but I'd be very surprised if that happens. | ||||||||
| Reluctant Hero |
If he was to go for a minority government, do you think he would secure enough votes to be First Minister.
That is the one thing that is still concerning me. The SNP have the most seats, but a Lib Lab coalition could still get in. |
||||||||
| Aventinian |
Ah, I was assuming Lib Dem and Green confidence and supply.
Has he? I didn't notice. |
||||||||
| mairead |
We should also bear in mind that, leaving seats aside, the SNP had the highest number of the popular vote, which is to my mind, more indicative of the wishes of the Scottish people | ||||||||
| BonnieBlueFlag |
God it sounds like Italy, trying to throw together any odd coalition to form a government. | ||||||||
| SLG |
I really wasn't expecting this. I was pretty sure that Lib Dems would make at least some gains and it the two party combination would be on offer. Makes things a wee bit more complicated. | ||||||||
| Aventinian |
Do you have figures on that, by the way, I couldn't seem to find them? |
||||||||
| SLG |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vo...rliment/html/scoreboard_99999.stm |
||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Evidently not, given that the LD vote share increased marginally.
Very possibly. Only a third of the electorate voted for the parties in favour of a referendum. |
||||||||
| VLK |
Can that be correct? I noticed from your link that in the constituency-vote the SNP got about 20,000 votes more than Labour but yet were defeated 21-37 in terms of seats. There must be something seriously wrong in the way how the country has been divided into constituencies. Of course the FPTP-electoral system is very dysfunctional and can produce very bizarre results but that disparity betwen votes and seats is so great that not even the FPTP-explanation applies here. |
||||||||
| agentmancuso |
The SNP vote is spread fairly evenly, whereas the Labour vote is heavily concentrated. There is nothing 'wrong' with the way the country has been divided. Geographical variation is just a fact of life. |
||||||||
| William_Cleland |
What the election showed is that under the d'Hondt system the SNP can win without a major breakthrough in west central Scotland. Runs counter to SNP thinking from about 1985 to 2000 but is probably the shape of things to come. | ||||||||
| SLG |
I think the SNP has made a breakthrough in west central Scotland. They have won fptp seats and the top up seats does reflect the SNP vote. Many of the other seats are now in play for the future as well.
The SNP have won fptp in every region apart from the South now. |
||||||||
| William_Cleland |
I wrote "major breakthrough" for a reason as clearly there were successes.  Labour will be very difficult to dislodge in seats like Glasgow Shettleston and Coatbridge & Chryston and are likely to remain the major party there FPTP for the forseeable future. A few more seats like Glasgow Kelvin and East Kilbride are clearly doable now though.
|
||||||||
| mairead |
Thanks for these figure VLK.
So all in then there was 15, 853 more votes for the SNP |
||||||||
| Maol.Chaluim |
I hadn't seen the numbers of votes cast, and just assumed the numbers of seats would reflect that, more or less.
As far as I'm aware, the Liberal Democrats were the only party to explicitly reject the idea of a referendum, something which they were vociferous about throughout the campain. Less than a sixth voted for anti-referendum parties. In any case, 80% of Lib Dem voters favour a referendum, and about 40% would vote in favour of independence given a straight choice. |
||||||||
| Hendry |
Re: Was the result a stalemate?
The Tories have ruled out a coalition with anyone, although I'm sure Union Jack would consider it. Therefore Neue Liebour cannot form a governing coalition unless they have the support of the Liberals, the Greens (a PI party) and Margot (also PI) so that does not seem at all possible. I don't think the SNP and Libdems will do a deal because if the SNP dropped the independence referendum they would immediately face mass resignations, if the Libdems accepted it the N Stephens would have to go (Ming the Merciless). So the most likely outcome for me is a minority SNP government, perhaps in coalition qith the Greens and Margot. This can work because a lot of the domestic legislation that the SNP would put forward, the Liberal rank and file agree with. They COULD keep voting it down under a leadership whip, but if they did so I think there would eventually be a rebellion in the LibDem ranks. Frankly I think there may well be a rebellion in LibDem ranks anyway as some are both liberal and democratic in nature anyway. |
||||||||
| SLG |
The Tories could still vote for a Labour minority government though. I'm would think Labour would be just as disinclined as the SNP to try and run the Executive with just their own seats.
Yes, the SGP and Margo should be much more favourable towards the SNP, but I don't think either would want to form part of a coalition. Margo is still very antagonistic towards some SNP members and also prides herself on (and got elected on the back of) her independence and lack of party affiliation. As metioned elsewhere, the Greens would probably have demands that would not fit with SNP transport policy. I don't think either Labour or the SNP want to try and form an exec with 46 or 47 seats. It would be a very precarious situation. I don't think the Parliament is mature enough not to abuse the oppertunity that would offer to give the Exec a kicking. I think the SNP will fudge the referendum issue to allow coaltion with the Lib Dems. |
||||||||
| Aventinian |
I'd rather like an impotent government in power. They tend not to be quite as annoying. | ||||||||
| William_Cleland |
One factor in all of this is who gets to be the presiding officer? Prime candidate would be Margo Macdonald as none of the parties will want give up a vote in the current situation. | ||||||||
| Maol.Chaluim |
Well, it doesn't look like it was a vote-winner, either... |
||||||||
| SLG |
Margo has just been on the radio said that she won't join any coalition. She also said that she doesn't support a referendum, but will back the party she feels can 'take Scotland forward'. She said there were two aspects to this, firstly, the best government for Scotland and secondly, she will support whoever she thinks will work actively to gain those powers that Holyrood needs (but not by referendum).
Basically she is calling for the SNP to drop the referendum pledge and to work with her, the Lib Dems, the SGP and anyone else who wants to be involved to secure more powers. On balance, I would say that this has strengthened the chances of the SNP being able to form an Executive. |
||||||||
| agentmancuso |
I think it was in some places. Look at Tweeddale. We held off a strong challenge from the SNP without any trouble, because former Conservative and Labour voters switched to us, presumably for Unionist reasons. In Galloway, the SNP's number one target seat, the SNP vote was down, despite the massive national swing in their favour. In more northerly former Tory seats, like Perth & Tayside, the SNP moved further into the lead. In Gordon, to my astonishment, the Tory vote shifted straight to the SNP! Attitudes to the Union appear to be splitting on a north/south basis. All 4 Conservative constituency seats are south of the Antonine wall, including the one they took from us. It looks as though voters in the South voted to preserve the Union, but traditionally Unionist voters north of the Antonine wall were more concerned to kick the executive, than worried about the Union. Is the physical proximity of the border with England having an effect on how concerned people are by the threat of the UK breaking up? I think it must be. I'm sure Dumfries & Galloway was the only area that voted against Tax-raising powers in the devolution refernedum in 1997. |
||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Only because the media were obsessed with asking us about it. Owing to the immaturity rife in Scottish politics, the only coalitions generally conceivable are Liberal-Labour or Liberal-SNP. No-one asked Labour or the Tories about the referendum, because SNP-Labour and SNP-Conservative coalitions are ruled out for tribal reasons.
Not sure what you mean by that. By a ratio of 2-1, The overwhelming majority of voters chose a party opposed to independence. Again. |
||||||||
| SLG |
Some of them did, some didn't. Yes a comfortable win for Purvis, but the SNP still saw their vote go up by 3,400.
A bad result for the SNP, but it looks to me like SNP voters switching to the Tories rather than any Unionist tactical voting.
Coming from an former SNP/Tory marginal seat, it doesn't surprise me. Those parts are full of non-Unionist Tories.
If we look at the South of Scotland regional result, we actually see the SNP vote rise by almost 30,000 - equivalent of the entire SSP and SGP vote last time. This is more than the Tories got and almost the same as Labour. Hence the 5 list MSPs that were elected. Equalling Labour, more than the Tories on 4 and well ahead of the Lib Dems on 2. This is a gain of 2 seats for the SNP, albeit gained from the SGP and SSP. The situation in the south re independence seems to be broadly similar to last time. |
||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Why in Galloway and nowhere else?
Why those parts and not other parts i.e. the south?
In terms of the percentage of voters in favour of the SNP, yes, but that's not the point. What's interesting about the south is that voters traditionally Unionist have been prepared to vote tactically pro-union, whereas voters in the north have voted SNP to kick the executive. |
||||||||
| mal |
Think the Libs better watch their backs if any London deals have been done,old shiny chops majority is only 2000 odd now,and SNP came from 4th to second in Abdn Sth.
Look forward to the next one when the job will be completed. |
||||||||
| SLG |
I'm not so familiar with that area - you could argue that in SNP seats like Perth and North Tayside north had sitting SNP members, and their vote strengthened. In Galloway, there was a sitting Tory member, and the anti-Labour vote went to him. The voting system has a large role to play in this IMO. In the Galloway, perhaps many traditional SNP voters were persuaded to vote Tory fptp, then SNP on the list. A few people I know in Perthshire split their vote the other way SNP fptp then Tory on the list.
Again, you could argue that a vote for either Tory, SNP or Lib Dem - whoever is best placed - is a vote to give Labour a kicking. Lets look at the seats that Labour held... Carrick Cumn & Doon 2nd place SNP +13.8% .................................................Labour -5.5% Clydesdale 2nd place SNP +7.7% ................................Labour -4.1% Cunninghame South 2nd place SNP +12.3% .............................................Labour -5.2% Dumfries 3rd place SNP +6.7% ..............2nd place Tory -4.1% ............................Labour +1% East Lothian 2nd place SNP +12.8% .................................Labour -11.8% So in each of them, the SNP closed the gap and the Labour (sitting Unionist party) vote fell. There is only one exception - as you say - Dumfries. So clearly, this appears not to be a 'South of the Antonine Wall' issue, it appears to be a Dumfries issue. And even in Dumfries, you see Labour - even with a bit of fellow Unionist help gain only 1%. It looks to me like the voters of the other Unionist parties are more likely to shift to the SNP than the Labour. |
||||||||
| agentmancuso |
Yes, I think you're right, on the whole. All the more reason for Labour to abandon their current ultra-unionist stance; not only does it reflect poorly the opinion of their own supporters, but it fails to attract unionist voters from other parties. |
||||||||