Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Glenrothes by-election winner Lindsay Roy arrives in Westminster

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 12 November 2008
By John von Radowitz
LABOUR'S surprise victor in last week's Glenrothes by-election arrived in Westminster today to take his Commons seat.
In a stunning defiance of the odds and a sign of Gordon Brown's improving fortunes, Lindsay Roy increased the party's vote share and saw off the Scottish National Party by 6,737 votes.

It was seen as a major personal boost for the Prime Minister, who broke with tradition by joining the campaign on the ground in the seat, which neighbours his own.

Mr Roy, the 59-year-old headteacher of Mr Brown's former school, was welcomed by the Prime Minister at 10 Downing Street this morning.

He will swear an oath to the Queen under the eyes of his party leader shortly after Prime Minister's question time.

A married father of three, Mr Roy is a church elder and a keen mountain biker and footballer who once played in a Scottish Cup tie.

He takes the place of John MacDougall, who died in August after being diagnosed with the asbestos-related cancer mesothelioma.

His Commons introduction comes just over a month after that of the SNP's John Mason, who snatched the Glasgow East seat from Labour in July.

That contest featured a 22.53% swing from Labour to the SNP, compared with only 4.96% at Glenrothes.


The full article contains 225 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 12 November 2008 10:36 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Glenrothes by-election
 
1

Banana Heid,

Ayrshire 12/11/2008 10:41:27
Who Cares?
2

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 11:00:20
Did he take Emu with him ?
3

Finnzz,

12/11/2008 11:11:32
Lets see how far his lies get him in Westminster.
4

resident edinburgh,

12/11/2008 11:16:43
The 3 Nationalists comments say it all. Anyone who votes against them are wrong and only the Nationalists are always right.

Well done Lindsay. You trusted the electorate and they did not let you down.
5

T-bone,

12/11/2008 11:24:23
Well said #4!

Mind you #2 was funny.....couldn't help but laugh out loud when I looked back at Mr Roy's picture!!
6

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 12/11/2008 11:34:44
Looks like he has been emulating Broon's rictus.

Maybe he can't believe he's in John Lewis heaven just yet.
7

Alastair the First,

12/11/2008 11:40:28
I wonder if he would have got in had the unemployment figures been published a week ago. Or the latest HBOS stuff. Labour won by lying. That will catch up with them.
8

Shredder,

12/11/2008 11:46:19
I would like to extend my warmest congratulations to Lindsay: the last thing Scotland needed was representation from yet another individual with a closed, inward looking nationalist mindset which would have prevented him from truly seeking the best for his constituents and the wider nation.
9

The Strategist,

12/11/2008 11:46:46
If he was a man of honour, given todays news on unemployment, he would stand down and force another by-election.
10

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 11:47:19
Alastair the First - they didn't half lie, and yes indeed it will catch up with them.
11

Walter Ego,

Durness 12/11/2008 11:51:41
Given the latest revelation about Alex Salmond(conveniently ignored by the Scotsman), how long can he last? Who will replace him?
12

Dark Lochnagar,

12/11/2008 11:57:30
Let's hope his maiden speech is to welcome a new nuclear power plant in Glenrothes. I wonder how that would affect local issues?
13

Luke Skywalker,

United Kingdom 12/11/2008 12:09:28
11 - What is the latest revelation about Eck? Is he about to become interesting? Tell me more - I enjoy a laugh, but no libel please.
14

,

12/11/2008 12:11:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
15

,

12/11/2008 12:15:09
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
16

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 12:23:33
Fake Sam I think the new Herald site is rubbish, why do you think I am here. If you think it is excellent why don't you go and post there, after all you were the main person responsible for getting the Herald's old comments facility closed down.
17

Arfur,

12/11/2008 12:23:54
Oh so he down to get his orders from London then? Bend over Lindsay.
18

Billiam Wallace,

12/11/2008 12:26:22
I don't wish any harm to the man, but when he appeared on TV he seemed about as effective as a chocolate fireguard. The people of Glenrothes are likely to be let down by Mr. Roy, not necessarily because he is a bad person but simply because he will be out of his area of expertise and is likely to make errors of judgement and of procedure, (look at how badly Bendy Wendy fared and she was supposed to be a politician, Haha). Once the smoke has cleared and the mirrors have shattered, the people of Scotland will see New Liebour for what they really are, a shower of lying, cheating, stealing, backstabbing thieves who don't deserve our confidence or our votes. If they were on fire, I wouldn't P on them.
19

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 12/11/2008 12:27:15
#16 Observer.

Agree, the Herald beta site is useless.
20

,

12/11/2008 12:32:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
21

Alastair the First,

12/11/2008 12:38:06
Sam, you're from Greenock. Do you get to see St Mirren much?
22

,

12/11/2008 12:38:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
23

57vintage,

Bridge of Don 12/11/2008 12:48:10
#7

"Labour won by lying"

So we keep hearing.

The SNP made the mistake in the past month of taking the electorate for granted.

On Friday morning the number of wild-eyed Nationalists using comments such as "scum" about the people of Glenrothes was alarming.

Now it was all about the people being lied to and duped, obviously too stupid to make up their own minds without Labour or the imagined press propaganda.

My mind is still open on independence, but if this is an illustration of how unexpected setbacks are dealt with by Scotland's would-be saviours, I certainly won't be placing any bets on them to deliver independence, nor giving them my vote.

As I posted somewhere else, this type of attitude is prevalent throughout the Party. Instead of making their case to me in the past, at least 2 MSPs have belligerently insulted me for not seeing the world through their lens. Another, now a councillor in Aberdeen used to decry the opinions of others on football websites whenever they did not coincide with his.

Engaging with the electorate is necessary to gain their trust and their votes. Insulting them, their views and their ability to make up their minds is bound to be counter-productive. Last week was proof of that I think.
24

LVT,

12/11/2008 12:49:33
Well, now that Mr Roy is in Westminster it's surely only a matter of time before he cuts charges to the minority of older people affected by the recent changes.

What do you mean his election won't affect things one bit?

Somebody better tell the Labour candidate for Dunfermline. He is campaigning for the council to build a new primary school in Duloch which would have been built by now if the previous Labour council administration hadn't sold off the land. Oh, and he won't be able to do anything about it either!
25

TheDisplacedGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 12:55:17
#8 - "the last thing Scotland needed was representation from yet another individual with a closed, inward looking nationalist mindset which would have prevented him from truly seeking the best for his constituents and the wider nation"
That's what Lindsay Roy is - a british nationalist.
Liek all Scottish dependency party members and supporters, he is scared to look outward to the world. Scared to stand together with the other nations - preferring to stay in the shadows behind a neighbour ten times our size. He cannot make decisions for Scotland becaus anything that makes Scotland look better than England causes friction amongst the English. He is a puppet. His role now is to blindly accept everything coming out from Westminster and moan about everything the SNP suggests. No more. No less. He is just another inward looking dependency party politician lacking the conviction to drive Scotland forward.
26

TheDisplacedGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 13:00:49
#24. Dour. Disturbing. Uninspiring. Reading that left the same feeling as standing on dog keech.
27

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 13:01:07
57vintage you are as convincing as a three pound note. However, I agree with you calling people of Glenrothes scum is counter productive. Nonetheless there is no doubt that Labour (deliberately) created a very false impression during their campaign, which will rebound on both them and Mr Roy personally.
28

,

12/11/2008 13:20:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
29

Alastair the First,

12/11/2008 13:23:16
The SNP should turn this whole thing round and instead of just talking about independence should refer to unionism as "dependence", for that is what it is. The unonists can't complain beciause they've been misrepresenting independence as "separatism" for years.
30

Banana Heid,

Ayrshire 12/11/2008 13:31:41
#28 The good people of Glenrothes are not scum, they are daft for not voting SNP but that's not scummy it's just silly...I would be interested to see how many Glenrothes people are originally from England and what the Scottish-English ratio is for that area...
31

,

12/11/2008 13:36:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
32

TommyKaye,

UK 12/11/2008 14:25:12
He arrived just in time to see another baby murdered Victoria Climbie under Labour Baby P under Labour

TOUGH ON CRIME TOUGH ON THE CAUSES OF CRIME YA DA YA DA YA DA

LESSONS WILL BE LEARNED YA DA YA DA cr ap
33

Bejjy,

12/11/2008 14:32:36
#31 Banana Heid,

You are really plumbing new depths in trying to find "excuses" as to why the SNP did not win the Glenrothes seat in last Thursday's by-election. Is it just the English born people residing in the area who you see as the threat to the SNP or are you also concerned about any Asians, Afro-caribeans, Africans, Chinese, Eastern Europeans and any one else living there who is not Scots born and who also might not have voted SNP? You will be telling us next that its a conspiracy by the Westminster Government to "import" English born people into Scotland in order to derail the quest for independence or that its only Scots born people who should be able to vote in Scotland. Why can you not accept that there are Scots born people living in Glenrothes who had previously voted SNP but, as is their right, voted New Labour on this occasion
34

Not a socialist,

Glenrothes 12/11/2008 14:38:43
#24 Good Post!

#31 Actually a lot of people did vote SNP - are they to be considered silly? Also, the English population of Glenrothes is very low - the majority of the population are 2nd generation Glaswegians.

One of the key issues in the Glenrothes by election was care charges that had been introduced by the SNP - Lib Dem council as this upset a lot of people since previously care, such as shopping deliveries for the elderly, was free of charge.

The people of Glenrothes chose their MP based on the facts they had just as the people of Glasgow East did. That the two constituencies came to different conclusions doesn't make either silly or scummy.
35

,

12/11/2008 14:48:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
36

Not a socialist,

12/11/2008 14:57:31
#36
Hey I'm not a Labour or SNP fan but I do think it's a tad unfair to account for the Labour win purely by blaming propaganda. This is what Alex Salmond did which only served to prove that he is out of touch with many of the residents of Glenrothes as he chose blame over listening to residents about their concerns with care charges and, perhaps in some cases, issues with his financial arguement for an independent Scotland in the current economic climate.
37

Alan B,

12/11/2008 15:02:19
#Not a socialist

There is a big problem with politics when as poster #36 pointed out one party deliberately lies.

It is ridiculous that we have a situation where labour were claiming cuts in the education budget when it was an increase.

The new labour mp for the area said on tv it was a cut. But when confronted by the figures by the interviewer he admitted he did not know the figures.

That is lying pure and simple.

What got me more was even after winning and doing his victory speech he repeated the lie. So it was not a case of someone making a mistake and admitting that he erred in claiming a cut but someone who knowingly and deliberately lied to the public.

Forgetting all the other issues and what party anyone supports, it is cancerous for democracy if a candidate can openly lie and get away with it.

For I am just apalled that the media are not running front page headlines and the BBC leading scottish news headlines, about it when it was publicly available knowledge.

Allowing this type of thing is a cancer that undermines democracy.
38

57vintage,

Bridge of Don 12/11/2008 15:03:25
#36

"we say postal fraud..."

I trust you have alerted the authorities and made a statement and are not merely floating an allegation under an assumed name on a website?

#27 You're not convincing me to vote your way, you know. That's what I said in my previous post.

I assume you will be prepared to stand up and give evidence on oath in court of the PF decides that these allegations have enough legs to run?

I look forward to reading the court corrspondence and seeing the guilty punished after a public and open trial.

#28 I cannot see Roy being anything other than lobby fodder with Labour's majority, but since he won by 6500 votes it seems that he was a mite more popular than the SNP's flawed choice, although to be fair, from the way the campaign was conducted, the lay observer would have been tempted to imagine that the FM was the candidate.

It's not my job to convince you of anything. I'm neutral and had I been on the Electoral Register in Glenrothes would have either voted for a minority party or spoiled my paper. If you represent the independence movement and believe in it passionately, it's your job/duty/mission to convince me. So far, no good.
39

57vintage,

Bridge of Don 12/11/2008 15:06:22
Sorry, I mixed up the paragraphs...

Take 2.

#36

"we say postal fraud..."

I trust you have alerted the authorities and made a statement and are not merely floating an allegation under an assumed name on a website?

I assume you will be prepared to stand up and give evidence on oath in court of the PF decides that these allegations have enough legs to run?

I look forward to reading the court corrspondence and seeing the guilty punished after a public and open trial.

27 You're not convincing me to vote your way, you know. That's what I said in my previous post.

#28 I cannot see Roy being anything other than lobby fodder with Labour's majority, but since he won by 6500 votes it seems that he was a mite more popular than the SNP's flawed choice, although to be fair, from the way the campaign was conducted, the lay observer would have been tempted to imagine that the FM was the candidate.

It's not my job to convince you of anything. I'm neutral and had I been on the Electoral Register in Glenrothes would have either voted for a minority party or spoiled my paper. If you represent the independence movement and believe in it passionately, it's your job/duty/mission to convince me. So far, no good. Report Unsuitable
40

Alan B,

12/11/2008 15:06:41
#37 Not a socialist

You are confusing party propoganda and subjective opinion with deliberately lying about the facts.

Labour were correct to highlight care charges. And it was up to the snp to show that labour councils were also increasing care charges. It is up to the snp to show that even with the increases in care charges other labour councils have higher charges.

That is politics. But deliberately and knowing putting out false information is a completely different ball game.
41

Banana Heid,

Ayrshire 12/11/2008 15:11:50
#34 You will be telling us next that its a conspiracy by the Westminster Government to "import" English born people into Scotland in order to derail the quest for independence

I wouldn't put it past them they tried to breed us out using prima nuptia didn't they all those hundreds of years ago...anyway I was just asking the question which has been adequately answered so I am now happy that the eejits who voted labour are possibly being brainwashed in some way, probably by drinking the tap water. Now I'm not saying that all tap water drinkers are labour voters but I wonder what the ratio is especially around the glenrothes area.

As for other nations well I'm not racist in any way manner or form I have many English friends and loads of different nationality all around the world all of whom are pro independance for Scotland.

Thanks for your reply anyway, Im still not convinced that glenrothes is not bursting at the seems with silly people...
42

Not a socialist,

12/11/2008 15:16:00
#38
I quite agree that lies have no place in any campaign but assuming that every other person in Glenrothes had access to the media and the evidence that lies were told and repeated just as you and I have been, my point is that the Labour win cannot fully be attributed to voters soaking up lie like a sponge. Instead we need to recognise that another party didn't win because of failures in their campaigns.

I would have liked to see Lib Dems win Glenrothes, I think they have a lot to offer. But the fact is that their campaign just didn't engage with voters concerns enough.

I do agree though (I assume this is what you are suggesting) that a biased media only serves to undermine democracy. And on that note, isn't it time that all parties were given equal share of media coverage during elections?
43

57vintage,

12/11/2008 15:18:12
#32

"Oh and the swing to the SNP was actually 13.1% not the paltry 4.96% von Radowitz mentions"

Nope. The swing from Labour to the SNP is calculated by dividing by two the %age difference between their respective vote proportions. Around 5%, you'll find ie

(13-3)/2 = 5 (rounded up)

The SNP increased its share of the vote by 13%, Labour by 3%. Those includes votes taken from ALL other parties (Libs and Tories together totalled 13% losses as I remember).
44

57vintage,

12/11/2008 15:20:11
#43 "eejits who voted labour are possibly being brainwashed in some way"

You're not learning, are you?

If these are target SNP voters, shouldn't you rather be trying to convince them rather than insulting them?
45

Warden An' All, Reborn,

12/11/2008 15:28:53
Arise the conquering hero.The journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step, and the stumbling steps of the loser ends in a single step too.
46

Banana Heid,

Ayrshire 12/11/2008 15:31:36
#45 Not really! Who said I was trying to learn anything, I'm having a bit of a laugh at their expense, so what!!! Anyone with a bit of sense will see i'm being a bit of a wind up merchant here, I suppose that rules out all the glenrothes Labour voters...
47

,

12/11/2008 15:40:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
48

,

12/11/2008 15:41:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
49

yockel,

12/11/2008 16:10:14
Voting irregularities are always a possibility but the fact is that the voters of Glenrothes who were labour anyway preferred Mr Roy as a candidate and that was understandable. You can not stick a yellow rosette on a monkey and expect the people to vote for it, that is the lesson for the SNP.
50

57vintage,

Bridge of Don 12/11/2008 16:10:28
#48/49

I'll take your word that it's exciting. Anything that can be done to make the democratic process fairer is to be applauded. Life's too short to read it though but if you want to give me an executive briefing.....

I vaguely remember the Brum scam and hope that things are tightened up.

More interesting, however, are the allegations that the process was somehow less than squeaky clean in Glenrothes last week.

Was there an issue over postal votes as seems to be being alleged? Nothing in the press about this and none of the parties involved in the election seems to have commented.

51

Hamish Scott,

12/11/2008 16:21:57
"Glenrothes by-election winner Lindsay Roy arrives in Westminster"

And what's the betting that's the last you'll hear of him?
52

Alan B,

12/11/2008 16:25:14
#Not a socialist

I would not even being to guess what motivates other people in voting and as such have no idea what the main drivers were.

"isn't it time that all parties were given equal share of media coverage during elections?"

Agree

"I would have liked to see Lib Dems win Glenrothes, I think they have a lot to offer. But the fact is that their campaign just didn't engage with voters concerns enough."

Think it might be more to do with them being squeezed in a 2 horse race. And yes I agree they have alot to offer. In many ways their option of a significantly more powerful parliament with alot of tax powers within the uk maybe the most popular option. They also have alot to offer well beyond just the constitution.

53

karin.m,

12/11/2008 16:30:55
22 sam is not from greenock. sam is nowhere near greenock.

and by the way sam

yoooo hooooo im still here.............
54

Hamish Scott,

12/11/2008 16:31:34
#36
"I would say that the voters of Glenrothes were convinced by the smear and fear tactics of the New Labour Party, which continued onto the results platform, when Lyndsey Roy further claimed he would fight SNP cuts in Education. Odd really as the SNP - Lib Dems have increased the education budget by £24.8 million, whereas the last year of the Labour administration saw an £8 million cut in Education funding."

Just as well he wasn't a local education professional or he would have known the true figures.
55

karin.m,

12/11/2008 16:32:48
and one other thing sam when you read the new herald forum its not the cybernats that are all AWOL

nach eil?
56

57vintage,

Bridge of Don 12/11/2008 16:33:24
#43

"isn't it time that all parties were given equal share of media coverage during elections?"

There's about as much chance of Solidarity or the Senior Citizens' Party getting coverage equal to the 4 main parties, and especially whichever 2 of them are contesting a marginal, as any of the 10 SPL teams outside the Old Firm have of getting a) the same volume of press coverage as the OF or b) fair and unbiased coverage in the face of an OF-obsessed so-called 'national' media.
57

Miss H,

12/11/2008 16:38:31
I think people should actually calm down about the Glenrothes result.

Yes Labour lied - big wow, they usually do.

The SNP should have done more to rebut their claims, we didn't so they won and we lost.

C'est la vie. There is probably going to be a general election in spring next year however which gives us a chance to win it. By that time Lindsay Roy will probably have realised what a charade Westminster actually is and will be looking for a way out anywayl.
58

Miss H,

12/11/2008 16:47:44
24 57Vintage.

2 examples in campaign leaflets from Labour.

One woman said she phoned up the council to ask for Peter Grant’s help and was told that he was not interested in helping people from Buckhaven, he was only interested in people in Glenrothes. When I read that I thought how daft would you have to be to believe that? But it seems it had an effect. Not saying people are stupid but perhaps gullible.

In their main publication an old man is pictured by his bath and quoted as saying that he had phoned up the council and been told that they no longer helped disabled people.

The council ‘no longer helps disabled people.’

Of course they put that in as a quotation otherwise the council could have sued.

What the council should do in my opinion is to write to every household to set the record straight. Not for political reasons, the by-election is over and done with, but just to make sure that people who are disabled or are facing disability know that there is help available, that they will only be charged any fees if they are self-funders – and that they will be charged much less than under many other councils.
59

57vintage,

Bridge of Don 12/11/2008 16:50:53
#58

I think those who need calming down are your fellow Nationalists. They are by far the most numerous and bitter of all who post here.

By-elections are usually an opportunity for the opposition to the governing regime to kick it up the @rse, with non-marginal seats returning to the historical seat-holding party in a general election. Where Roy increased the vote and the %age take of the vote, tactical voting against Labour proportionally was too small to compete with the near 20,000 votes cast to Roy.

I would expect Labour to hold on to it, although the financial situation and voter attitudes may well be such that it'll be much closer than it was in 2005 or last week.

I also suspect that Labour will field a different candidate as Roy has all the appearance and demeanour of a horses for courses approach.
60

Miss H,

12/11/2008 16:52:15
51 yes there is an issue but I don't believe the SNP will make anything of it. Would simply undermine trust in the electoral process - particularly on top of the vote counting fiasco last year.

But rules on postal voting do need to be tightened up.
61

Miss H,

12/11/2008 16:54:06
57 In point of fact it is the law that main candidates must be given equal broadcast time during a by-election. You can't control editorial slant however.
62

Yeah1,

12/11/2008 16:55:07
#1

"Who Cares?"

Let's face it, if the SNP candidate had won you would be all over these forums going on and on about it - as I'm sure you did when there was a similar article about the new MP for Glasgow East starting at Westminster a couple of months ago.
63

,

12/11/2008 16:59:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
64

Yeah1,

12/11/2008 16:59:50
#20

""In a stunning defiance of the odds and a sign of Gordon Brown's improving fortunes, Lindsay Roy increased the party's vote share and saw off the Scottish National Party by 6,737 votes"

Claptrap. Their majority was down 40% from the last time."

Er...where exactly does the quote you posted mention anything about their majority? Labour DID increase their number of votes and vote percentage and they DID beat the SNP by 6,737 votes. So, no, that quote is not 'claptrap'.
65

57vintage,

Bridge of Don 12/11/2008 17:02:01
#59

That's the filthy dirty world of politics...

The SDP in the early 80s found out the hard way. Whilst their happy-clappy image and naieveté saw them flood the capital's housing schemes with earnest and idealistic supporters, they were not versed in the ways of party politics, especially during election campaigns.

They thought that it was a delight to be invited in to discuss their vision of a brave new middle class world over so many cups of tea, not realising that filthy, dirty, opportunistic Labour had briefed their supporters to act exactly that way on the occasion of an SPD canvass, whilst Labour chapped the doors and got their message across.

In court, the tactic of the defence lawyer is to cast enough doubt on the prosecution case to avoid a conviction. Not nice, but them's the rules.

"Labour isn't working"

"Free By '93"

"Jennifer's Ear"

all examples of manipulation.

Nobody is squeaky clean and I think "Alex Salomond For First Minister" entry on last year's Holyrood ballot paper is probably the among the most cynical of manipulations.

What was that biblical quote about sins and first stones?
66

Miss H,

12/11/2008 17:08:39
66 Sure it's the dirty world of politics but it does not actually do much for the democratic process when a candidate for Westminster campaigns on issues over which he has no control and no remit. Lindsay Roy will be unable to meet a single one of his campaign promises. Still, I have no doubt that SNP activists are even now putting together dossiers on Labour councils. It could be the weirdest general election campaign for a while if it ends up being fought on local government and devolved issues!

67

57vintage,

Bridge of Don 12/11/2008 17:10:29
#64

"shrill and hysterical accusation"

I beg to differ. I think I expressed the opinion calmly and reasonably.

As for the evidence, I haven't counted the posts (how sad would you need to be?), but these forums (fora?) are without doubt dominated by Nationalists and many show signs of bitterness, especially since last week's poll. If you can provide evidence to the contrary, of course, I will bow to the statistical facts.

As I say, I'm neutral when it comes to the SNP/Labour bitching, having voted for both in the past but unlikely to give either my vote in the near future.

68

57vintage,

Bridge of Don 12/11/2008 17:16:10
#67

Of course, one could counter the statement:

"when a candidate for Westminster campaigns on issues over which he has no control"

by asking exactly how the First Minister was going to ensure that there would be action taken on the cost of fuel bills "thudding" on to people's doormats through election of a minority party MP to Westminster?

I have been wary of Salmond wince "Free By '93" saw me lend his party my vote and nearly allow the tories to take the seat for the constituency in which I voted.

I've been four square against New Labour since the F1 donation, the broken promises on welfare and, of course, Iraq.
69

Alan B,

12/11/2008 17:19:26
#57vintage

I do not see a problem with a slogan like "Free By '93". It is just a slogan in an election campaign.

There is a difference between that and political parties like labour deliberately lying.

Miss H seems to accept it becuase she is involved in party politics and has seen it go on. But the fact that statement like politics is a dirty game can be said so matter of fact shows their is a big problem.

For us the public politicians lying is just not acceptable. The fact that politicians get away with corruption and dirty tricks is just not right. I do not think this type of thing can just be swept under the carpet and dismissed as the public being nieve about politics. Labour in 97 said they would clean up politics but are worse than any other party.

Miss H you indicate that the snp know that their was dirty dealing with the postal vote but are not going to do anything about it, as it will increase the distrust of people with politics. But it is becuase political parties will not stand up and expose dirty practises that it continues to go on.
70

MoClana,

12/11/2008 17:37:40
Ok, here goes, que the barage of angry Unionists...

In the Glenrothes by -election the 2 main runners were closely mapping their projected vote and on the day work hard to mobalise that support. Anyone involved in elctions knows the groundwork involved in this, driving out to expeted voters and drive them to the polling station if need be, on top of of this activists on the ground are tracking that support on the day by marking off their target voters as they go.

Both parties internal polling showed a narrow SNP win, both parties likewise did not admit defeat as the margin for error was to great and could have swung either way.

Postal voters can go under the radar, as there is no way in which this can be tracked close too or on the day, but you can take an avergage based on ground support and other projections calculated.

We know there was a large increase in postal votes in Glenrothes, the figures i saw were 2000 in 2005 elction to a massive 8000 this time around.

Can someone please explain given all the intellgence on the ground how and why ALL these postal votes seemingly were in support of Labour?
71

,

12/11/2008 17:38:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
72

Miss H,

12/11/2008 17:52:20
71 If the SNP had said that the First Minister would ensure that there would be action taken on the cost of fuel bills you might have a point.

But what the leaflet said was that in the last week of the Glasgow East by-election GB announced he was postponing the 2p rise in petrol duty. By voting SNP the people of Glenrothes could send a clear message they wanted to see action on domestic fuel bills as well. (Obviously they didn't, oops).

You could say that is spin or a gimmick - fair comment. But it is not a lie. Saying that the education budget for Fife council has been cut when it has been increased was a lie. Saying that services for disabled people have been cut is a lie. Saying that the SNP is going to release 4000 dangerous criminals onto the streets because the government plans to scrap short prison sentences is a lie.

I don't want to get into a big debate about it. It is the way it is. Labour would say anything to get elected. But other parties are not the same - and I don't just mean the SNP. Labour are the biggest liars by far.
73

Miss H,

12/11/2008 17:55:18
72 I know what you mean but the biggest turn off for voters is seeing the parties argue and accuse each other of things and behaving in a completely negative way. If we do that we all lose out because people don't necessarily distinguish between who is telling the truth and who is lying, they just think a plague on both your houses.

As regards postal votes - nobody knows anything for certain as far as I am aware. The council could run a verification exercise perhaps. It's not something that is easily proven.
74

MoClana,

12/11/2008 18:01:50
Miss H - I totally agree with you, how ever would this make the voters the biggest mugs by far ? I do not think so. I think that their lies and spin no doubt persuaded a few voters to switch to them, however by 7000 votes ???

The negativity was much worse in the Holyrood elections, even in time of recession the voters were not fooled by GB claim to be saviuor of the financial world.

Other varialbles were at play, these for some reason have not rasied any questions from our media or journalists. Its as if winning unexpectedly by 7000 votes agaisnt all odds and ground work happens every day, it simply doesnt.

On a UK election scale, for example the Labour defeat in 1992 you can see large discrepancies amongst 60 million voters, but on a concentrated population like Glenrothes the main players have a good idea how their campign is going....incredibly, this time around, with the stake so high for the PM and independnece on the map.. miracles happened!
75

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 12/11/2008 18:46:13
Congratulations to the man who stopped Salmond in his tracks.
76

,

12/11/2008 18:52:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
77

brownlie,

12/11/2008 20:14:23
No doubt one of the "old hands" will be showing him how to claim expenses so as not to rock the boat or overtly over-flowing the trough.
78

Scotsman in Dublin,

12/11/2008 21:28:11
I dont get how winning an election where you are defending a 10,000 majority makes you a surprise victor. Reading this paper is like reading a Labour manifesto - "In a stunning defiance of the odds"??? Labour lost 40% of their majority?!?

I dont buy the conspiracy theory about election rigging though, the only conspiracy thats going on here is the conspiracy from the unionist media to make a 40% loss of majority seem like a rousing victory. SNP cant expect to win them all and this will be a disapointment but Labour are still losing ground.
79

Alan Reid,

Ringkobing 12/11/2008 21:34:19
Funny the Unionits are quiet on Scotland getting only 1% of work for the olympics, better known as the Inner London Regeneration Project.
81 sm753, any comments?

80

Westfield Bairns,

falkirk 12/11/2008 22:03:18
Have to make room for another snought in the trough, well 2 including Emu
81

Scunnert,

12/11/2008 22:05:04
81 sm753, 12/11/2008 19:51:0879 etc

"Labour's private Glenrothes poll had shown SNP heading for defeat."

Was that a potal poll?
82

Scunnert,

12/11/2008 22:05:31
Was that a postal poll?
83

Scunnert,

12/11/2008 22:07:33
Boycott the London Olympics.
84

,

12/11/2008 23:36:02
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
85

,

12/11/2008 23:42:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
86

,

13/11/2008 00:00:44
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
87

,

13/11/2008 00:01:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
88

,

13/11/2008 00:05:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
89

,

13/11/2008 00:14:32
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
90

,

13/11/2008 00:18:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
91

,

13/11/2008 00:19:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
92

,

13/11/2008 00:29:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
93

,

13/11/2008 00:37:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
94

,

13/11/2008 00:42:19
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
95

,

13/11/2008 00:43:53
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
96

,

13/11/2008 01:06:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
97

,

13/11/2008 01:12:07
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
98

,

13/11/2008 01:14:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
99

,

13/11/2008 01:44:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
100

,

13/11/2008 01:56:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
101

,

13/11/2008 01:57:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
102

,

13/11/2008 01:57:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
103

,

13/11/2008 01:58:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
104

,

13/11/2008 01:59:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
105

,

13/11/2008 02:00:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
106

,

13/11/2008 02:02:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
107

,

13/11/2008 08:51:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.