Scottish Election 2021

[cabbageandribs1875]

congrats to Anum qaisar-javed winning the Airdrie and Shotts by-election for the SNP, called due to Neil Gray swapping his Westminster seat for Holyrood after winning last week


SNP- 10,129
Labour- 8,372
Them- 2,812
Lib-Dem- 220



turnout was only 34.3% with a 2.51% swing SNP to Lab, SNP had a 5,201 maj last time with a 62% turnout

[SHODAN]

congrats to Anum qaisar-javed winning the Airdrie and Shotts by-election for the SNP, called due to Neil Gray swapping his Westminster seat for Holyrood after winning last week


SNP- 10,129
Labour- 8,372
Them- 2,812
Lib-Dem- 220



turnout was only 34.3% with a 2.51% swing SNP to Lab, SNP had a 5,201 maj last time with a 62% turnout

From Leith apparently, wonder if she's a Hibs fan?

[CloudSquall]

Labour came within 195 votes of winning it back in 2017 so it's a very decent hold by the SNP, especially given the number of Tories and Lib Dem voters again onhand to gift Labour their votes.

[cabbageandribs1875]

From Leith apparently, wonder if she's a Hibs fan?



well she better not be expecting a comp ticket :wink:

[Future17]

I don't have knowledge in the area but aren't there some sort of checks in place to stop what "Independent Green Voice" did?

It's clear as day what they were trying to acheive with the combination of the name, logo and slogan.

Sorry for bringing up an older post, but I saw yours at a point I didn't have time to respond and forgot to go back to it before now.

To answer your question, there are checks in place with the aim of stopping a political party registering an emblem which could confuse voters. This responsibility sits with the Electoral Commission. The problem tends to be that, for good reasons, those checks have to be undertaken objectively. So, in the case of "Independent Green Voice", it's not for the EC to assess whether the party's ethos or policies etc. are "Independent" or "Green" - in whatever context people may choose to define or interpret those words.

This potential problem is part of the reason why parties are required to apply to register emblems and why those emblems are displayed on ballot papers. The idea is that voters will know the emblem of the party they wish to vote for and, in the event of any confusion, the emblem will allow them to identify that party on the ballot paper. Emblems are a lot easier to evaluate objectively and emblem registration applications are rejected by the EC with relative frequency (for a variety of reasons, including similarity to already registered emblems and the potential to mislead voters).

In this instance, the article which was linked to seemed to suggest that the emblem of Independent Green Voice would cause voters to mistake that party for the Scottish Greens and vote for them in error. I'm not saying that didn't happen, but Independent Green Voice have as much right to be on the ballot paper as any other party and their emblem is nothing like the emblem of the Scottish Greens.

[Moulin Yarns]

Sorry for bringing up an older post, but I saw yours at a point I didn't have time to respond and forgot to go back to it before now.

To answer your question, there are checks in place with the aim of stopping a political party registering an emblem which could confuse voters. This responsibility sits with the Electoral Commission. The problem tends to be that, for good reasons, those checks have to be undertaken objectively. So, in the case of "Independent Green Voice", it's not for the EC to assess whether the party's ethos or policies etc. are "Independent" or "Green" - in whatever context people may choose to define or interpret those words.

This potential problem is part of the reason why parties are required to apply to register emblems and why those emblems are displayed on ballot papers. The idea is that voters will know the emblem of the party they wish to vote for and, in the event of any confusion, the emblem will allow them to identify that party on the ballot paper. Emblems are a lot easier to evaluate objectively and emblem registration applications are rejected by the EC with relative frequency (for a variety of reasons, including similarity to already registered emblems and the potential to mislead voters).

In this instance, the article which was linked to seemed to suggest that the emblem of Independent Green Voice would cause voters to mistake that party for the Scottish Greens and vote for them in error. I'm not saying that didn't happen, but Independent Green Voice have as much right to be on the ballot paper as any other party and their emblem is nothing like the emblem of the Scottish Greens.

The Ferret had a look at the figures

https://theferret.scot/ffs-scottish-greens-independent-green-voice/


(https://theferret.scot/ffs-scottish-greens-independent-green-voice/)
IGV’s candidate on the list got 1690 votes.

[CloudSquall]

Sorry for bringing up an older post, but I saw yours at a point I didn't have time to respond and forgot to go back to it before now.

To answer your question, there are checks in place with the aim of stopping a political party registering an emblem which could confuse voters. This responsibility sits with the Electoral Commission. The problem tends to be that, for good reasons, those checks have to be undertaken objectively. So, in the case of "Independent Green Voice", it's not for the EC to assess whether the party's ethos or policies etc. are "Independent" or "Green" - in whatever context people may choose to define or interpret those words.

This potential problem is part of the reason why parties are required to apply to register emblems and why those emblems are displayed on ballot papers. The idea is that voters will know the emblem of the party they wish to vote for and, in the event of any confusion, the emblem will allow them to identify that party on the ballot paper. Emblems are a lot easier to evaluate objectively and emblem registration applications are rejected by the EC with relative frequency (for a variety of reasons, including similarity to already registered emblems and the potential to mislead voters).

In this instance, the article which was linked to seemed to suggest that the emblem of Independent Green Voice would cause voters to mistake that party for the Scottish Greens and vote for them in error. I'm not saying that didn't happen, but Independent Green Voice have as much right to be on the ballot paper as any other party and their emblem is nothing like the emblem of the Scottish Greens.

Cheers for taking the time to respond, good to know the process and rationale behind it.

[Future17]

The Ferret had a look at the figures

https://theferret.scot/ffs-scottish-greens-independent-green-voice/


(https://theferret.scot/ffs-scottish-greens-independent-green-voice/)

That tally is enough to make me think it's a unionist conspiracy. :greengrin:

[Future17]

Cheers for taking the time to respond, good to know the process and rationale behind it.

No worries. I used to deal with these as part of my job and, whilst there's clearly a serious side to it, some of the applications used to make me laugh out loud.

They're all on the EC's website if you fancy disappearing down a rabbit hole for a few hours. :crazy:

[Glory Lurker]

Labour came within 195 votes of winning it back in 2017 so it's a very decent hold by the SNP, especially given the number of Tories and Lib Dem voters again onhand to gift Labour their votes.

It's a great result. Low turnout should have been a danger to the SNP. It follows last week's trend that says, for now and with no room for complacency, unionist tactical voting doesn't affect the SNP in seats it already holds.

[Stick]

There's another one called Jeggit from Dublin who is a complete throbber.



Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

Jason McCann. I attended a meeting a couple of years ago where he was the guest speaker. He came across as a very clever, thoughtful man, who answered all our questions politely. Keen on independence, and didn’t have a bad word to say against the snp or the first minister, ( as far as I remember). So I started to follow his blogs which were quite good, but over the last year or so his attitude and tone has changed for the worse.
And as you say he is now “ a complete throbbed), and I have stopped following his blogs.
I can’t fathom why he, and others like Campbell, have changed so much. I don’t go in for conspiracy theories generally, but honestly believe that the Uk establishment do have plants within the indie movement, ( they do have a history of such). Could this be the reason for the change in these people? Or do they just feel the need to be controversial?

[cabbageandribs1875]

SNP's Annabelle Ewing voted in as Deputy PO


Daughter of Winnie of course



2nd deputy PO voted in was Lib Dem Liam McArthur

[cabbageandribs1875]

Here's another of the helmet brigade, Ted Crilly at All Under one banner. Difficult to ignore but well worth the effort.

https://twitter.com/NeilMackay_/status/1392972316003512321?s=19

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk


out of curiosity where's Manny Singh nowadays ? :confused:

[cabbageandribs1875]

a letter from the widow of john smith to constituents in Airdrie and Shotts, spouting utter p@sh that Neil Gray walked away...no he didn't he moved,as the rules state, to represent his constituents in Holyrood instead of Westminster, she must have forgot to use her Baroness title whilst signing it, surprised her daughter didn't sign it as well

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.6435-9/185845123_4608551339173844_1941381734856168090_n.j pg?_nc_cat=104&ccb=1-3&_nc_sid=825194&_nc_ohc=qqSaGg33kbIAX8MyPXR&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&oh=035eac8d476740278e24e66c3c36b146&oe=60C5CF01

[degenerated]

out of curiosity where's Manny Singh nowadays ? :confused:I'm sure he left after there was a fall out when Mackay got caught with his fingers in the till. He made accusations about racism and started up an other group.

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[JimBHibees]

Jason McCann. I attended a meeting a couple of years ago where he was the guest speaker. He came across as a very clever, thoughtful man, who answered all our questions politely. Keen on independence, and didn’t have a bad word to say against the snp or the first minister, ( as far as I remember). So I started to follow his blogs which were quite good, but over the last year or so his attitude and tone has changed for the worse.
And as you say he is now “ a complete throbbed), and I have stopped following his blogs.
I can’t fathom why he, and others like Campbell, have changed so much. I don’t go in for conspiracy theories generally, but honestly believe that the Uk establishment do have plants within the indie movement, ( they do have a history of such). Could this be the reason for the change in these people? Or do they just feel the need to be controversial?

Either plants or people have something on them. Bizarre

[cabbageandribs1875]

across the sea Edwin Poots is new DUP Leader Edwin Poots: DUP’s new creationist leader is a savvy politician | Democratic Unionist party (DUP) | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/14/edwin-poots-dup-new-creationist-leader-is-a-savvy-politician)


The Democratic Unionist party has entrusted its future to a man who does not quite believe in the past. Edwin Poots is a young Earth creationist who thinks the planet is 6,000 years old.

[lapsedhibee]

across the sea Edwin Poots is new DUP Leader Edwin Poots: DUP’s new creationist leader is a savvy politician | Democratic Unionist party (DUP) | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/14/edwin-poots-dup-new-creationist-leader-is-a-savvy-politician)


The Democratic Unionist party has entrusted its future to a man who does not quite believe in the past. Edwin Poots is a young Earth creationist who thinks the planet is 6,000 years old.

Paisley was on Newsnight ranting at the BBC for introducing Poots as a creationist. "Taking the mickey out of his faith."

[cabbageandribs1875]

From Leith apparently, wonder if she's a Hibs fan?


i'm glad i googled a bit, she shares my Birthdate :greengrin just a decade + a very high VAT rate after me

[Pretty Boy]

across the sea Edwin Poots is new DUP Leader Edwin Poots: DUP’s new creationist leader is a savvy politician | Democratic Unionist party (DUP) | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/14/edwin-poots-dup-new-creationist-leader-is-a-savvy-politician)


The Democratic Unionist party has entrusted its future to a man who does not quite believe in the past. Edwin Poots is a young Earth creationist who thinks the planet is 6,000 years old.

Well I certainly hope we never see the day someone who is a member of a fundamentalist church ever reaches a position of power in the Scottish Parliament. Oh wait.....

[lucky]

Labour came within 195 votes of winning it back in 2017 so it's a very decent hold by the SNP, especially given the number of Tories and Lib Dem voters again onhand to gift Labour their votes.

No party owns peoples votes, people can change which party they vote for. As this was a Labour seat for years using your logic Labour voters are lending their votes to the SNP

[CloudSquall]

No party owns peoples votes, people can change which party they vote for. As this was a Labour seat for years using your logic Labour voters are lending their votes to the SNP

My logic is that there is a huge difference between generational shifts like we've seen in Laboour to SNP voting patterns (and in similar cases Labour to Tory in England) Vs the "I'm voting Tory/Lab to keep the SNP out" voting we've seen recently.

Maybe it's just my disgust at Labour voters being so willing to shift to voting Tory and vice versa with a "union at aby cost" mentality.

[Just Alf]

My logic is that there is a huge difference between generational shifts like we've seen in Laboour to SNP voting patterns (and in similar cases Labour to Tory in England) Vs the "I'm voting Tory/Lab to keep the SNP out" voting we've seen recently.

Maybe it's just my disgust at Labour voters being so willing to shift to voting Tory and vice versa with a "union at aby cost" mentality.In a way that's how I see it as well, one round of voting for someone else = lending your vote, next round is starting to be a grey area, after that you've moved over to whoever you've been voting for.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

In a way that's how I see it as well, one round of voting for someone else = lending your vote, next round is starting to be a grey area, after that you've moved over to whoever you've been voting for.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Decent way to look at it, but I've been lending my votes to the snp for longer than I can remember. That will change post independence 😁🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿😁

[Just Alf]

Decent way to look at it, but I've been lending my votes to the snp for longer than I can remember. That will change post independence [emoji16][emoji1022]󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿[emoji16]That's 100% how I see it as well, hopefully Labour get back into the game!


Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[lucky]

My logic is that there is a huge difference between generational shifts like we've seen in Laboour to SNP voting patterns (and in similar cases Labour to Tory in England) Vs the "I'm voting Tory/Lab to keep the SNP out" voting we've seen recently.

Maybe it's just my disgust at Labour voters being so willing to shift to voting Tory and vice versa with a "union at aby cost" mentality.

But surely if the biggest issue for people is the constitution then they vote accordingly. But for the record I could never vote Tory my voting preference has never changed

[MartinfaePorty]

Sturgeon just voted back in as FM. Anyone know why the Greens abstain? Is that standard? Seems weird they do that then congratulate her in their speech!

[Santa Cruz]

Sturgeon just voted back in as FM. Anyone know why the Greens abstain? Is that standard? Seems weird they do that then congratulate her in their speech!

Is this on the TV? Living in hope here for a new Ed Sec in a reshuffle.

[SHODAN]

Sturgeon just voted back in as FM. Anyone know why the Greens abstain? Is that standard? Seems weird they do that then congratulate her in their speech!

Maybe a bit miffed there wasn't a coalition offer.

[Moulin Yarns]

Sturgeon just voted back in as FM. Anyone know why the Greens abstain? Is that standard? Seems weird they do that then congratulate her in their speech!

Who else abstained? 28 abstentions is more than the Greens.

[MartinfaePorty]

Labour as well I would imagine, as the numbers for Ross and Rennie = their MSPs

Sent from my EML-L29 using Tapatalk

[7 Up]

Sturgeon just voted back in as FM. Anyone know why the Greens abstain? Is that standard? Seems weird they do that then congratulate her in their speech!

Yeah totally normal. Usually they only vote for a candidate from their own party and since neither Labour or the Greens put forward a candidate they both abstained.

[Moulin Yarns]

Yeah totally normal. Usually they only vote for a candidate from their own party and since neither Labour or the Greens put forward a candidate they both abstained.

And all opposition leaders went on to congratulate nicola sturgeon.

[GlesgaeHibby]

John Swinney moved from education to covid recovery.

[Sir David Gray]

John Swinney moved from education to covid recovery.

God help us!

[Skol]

John Swinney moved from education to covid recovery.

Moved before the OECD report is published to avoid another vote of no confidence.

[Santa Cruz]

Moved before the OECD report is published to avoid another vote of no confidence.

:agree:

[degenerated]

Moved before the OECD report is published to avoid another vote of no confidence.I doubt a vote of confidence is much of a worry to him, even if the greens voted with the unionists they couldn't win it.

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

I doubt a vote of confidence is much of a worry to him, even if the greens voted with the unionists they couldn't win it.

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

You might want to check your abacus. Does the presiding officer not have a casting vote in the case of a tied vote?

[degenerated]

You might want to check your abacus. Does the presiding officer not have a casting vote in the case of a tied vote?Do they not have to vote with the government in the case of a tie [emoji848]

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Moved before the OECD report is published to avoid another vote of no confidence.

It's not normally stopped people calling for a Vonc before the evidence is heard. 😱

[lapsedhibee]

It's not normally stopped people calling for a Vonc before the evidence is heard. 😱

:greengrin

[Skol]

It's not normally stopped people calling for a Vonc before the evidence is heard. 😱

When did this happen ?

[Crunchie]

John Swinney moved from education to covid recovery.
He must have something over Sturgeon, no way should he be put in charge of anything after his disastrous stint as our education Tsar.

[Skol]

I think the sad reality is that Swinney is the best of those supporting Sturgeon and there is a massive gap between Sturgeon and the rest.

I shudder to think where we will be when Sturgeon steps aside

[Santa Cruz]

He must have something over Sturgeon, no way should he be put in charge of anything after his disastrous stint as our education Tsar.

I don't rate him, not only a really poor Education Minister, I don't find him engaging at all when he speaks, for me he's not a convincing politician. I think he would have been better in the Constitution Minister role, that appears to be all he's interested in.

If NS is serious that covid recovery is her number one priority I would have preferred a coalition with the Greens. There's a few MSP's in that party that would be better suited to the vacant Cabinet posts. Greer has a passion and good understanding of Education. Harvie and Slater could have slotted in to either the new role being created to deal with climate issues or covid recovery. Alison Johnstone would have made a good health minister, imo she's wasted in the Presiding Officer role, she was one of the more impressive MSP's at FMQ's.

[SHODAN]

I think the sad reality is that Swinney is the best of those supporting Sturgeon and there is a massive gap between Sturgeon and the rest.

I shudder to think where we will be when Sturgeon steps aside

Angus Robertson maybe?

[Skol]

Angus Robertson maybe?

Jambo - so better hope he doesn't get the Finance brief

[Ozyhibby]

Angus Robertson maybe?

Kate Forbes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

When did this happen ?

Im surprised that you missed it. It was all the rage only a couple of months ago.

[ronaldo7]

He must have something over Sturgeon, no way should he be put in charge of anything after his disastrous stint as our education Tsar.

Height. 👍

[Skol]

Im surprised that you missed it. It was all the rage only a couple of months ago.

So when was it?

VoNC in Sturgeon was after her evidence was heard as far as I remember.

The two VoNC in Swinney were because he wouldnt release the evidence to be heard & after the exams debacle

Did I miss one ?

[ronaldo7]

So when was it?

VoNC in Sturgeon was after her evidence was heard as far as I remember.

The two VoNC in Swinney were because he wouldnt release the evidence to be heard & after the exams debacle

Did I miss one ?

As I said, many called for a vonc prior to evidence being heard. You only needed to be up with the daily express headlines, and the tory twittersphere to see it. Resign surgeon was all the rage back then.

[Skol]

As I said, many called for a vonc prior to evidence being heard. You only needed to be up with the daily express headlines, and the tory twittersphere to see it. Resign surgeon was all the rage back then.

Who called for a VoNC before Sturgeon's evidence was heard ?

[Curried]

So when was it?

VoNC in Sturgeon was after her evidence was heard as far as I remember.

The two VoNC in Swinney were because he wouldnt release the evidence to be heard & after the exams debacle

Did I miss one ?

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19162484.nicola-sturgeon-douglas-ross----no-confidence-vote-plans-revealed-tuesday/

A spokesman for Nicola Sturgeon said: “The fact that the Tories announced this vote before the First Minister had even appeared before the parliamentary committee to give evidence shows that this was always about grubby politics rather than supporting the women who were badly let down.

[Skol]

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19162484.nicola-sturgeon-douglas-ross----no-confidence-vote-plans-revealed-tuesday/

A spokesman for Nicola Sturgeon said: “The fact that the Tories announced this vote before the First Minister had even appeared before the parliamentary committee to give evidence shows that this was always about grubby politics rather than supporting the women who were badly let down.

That article was dated 15 March. From some googling Sturgeon gave evidence on 2nd March

https://www.thenational.scot/news/19131817.viewers-react-nicola-sturgeons-evidence-today-holyrood-inquiry/

[Future17]

Who called for a VoNC before Sturgeon's evidence was heard ?

Douglas Ross.

[Skol]

Douglas Ross.

Was it before the evidence though ? I am not sure it was if you read the links above.

I have noted my date for Sturgeon's evidence was wrong though. It was 3rd March not 2nd I think.

[7 Up]

Did the Tories not call for a vote of no confidence before the committee and/or the independent investigation had reported? I can't remember exactly.

[Ozyhibby]

Did the Tories not call for a vote of no confidence before the committee and/or the independent investigation had reported? I can't remember exactly.

Douglas Ross called for a vote of no confidence in Nicola Sturgeon two nights before she gave evidence on TV. The formal request for it did not come until later though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

Douglas Ross called for a vote of no confidence in Nicola Sturgeon two nights before she gave evidence on TV. The formal request for it did not come until later though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So the VoNC was after evidence was given and could be taken into account before the MSPs voted :-)

[Ozyhibby]

So the VoNC was after evidence was given and could be taken into account before the MSPs voted :-)

But the Tories had made up their mind to call it before evidence was given and publicly said so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

But the Tories had made up their mind to call it before evidence was given and publicly said so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I agree that was wrong, but they didnt actually hold it until after the evidence was heard.

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210519/8ea51b8876162fbcefecf82c2b59770c.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SHODAN]

Kate Forbes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Her socially conservative views will put a lot of people off. Me included.

[Moulin Yarns]

Was it before the evidence though ? I am not sure it was if you read the links above.

I have noted my date for Sturgeon's evidence was wrong though. It was 3rd March not 2nd I think.

Oh dear, you'll be dragged over hot coals for getting the date wrong :wink:

[SHODAN]

Is this on the TV? Living in hope here for a new Ed Sec in a reshuffle.

Shirley-Anne Somerville, my MSP.

[Santa Cruz]

Shirley-Anne Somerville, my MSP.

I've never heard of her. Any good as an MSP? Wonder why the Justice Sec got shuffled, that's a strange one.

[Ozyhibby]

I've never heard of her. Any good as an MSP? Wonder why the Justice Sec got shuffled, that's a strange one.

Yousaf might have asked for it? He will be looking at being FM at some stage and a depth of ministerial experience with varied portfolios can be a big help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Santa Cruz]

Yousaf might have asked for it? He will be looking at being FM at some stage and a depth of ministerial experience with varied portfolios can be a big help.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just looking at the news and it says Hyslop and Ewing have stepped down, does that mean they were no longer required? I might be confusing MSP's cos I don't know the lesser known SNP member's, were these the two accused of bullying?

[ronaldo7]

It's not normally stopped people calling for a Vonc before the evidence is heard. 😱


When did this happen ?


Im surprised that you missed it. It was all the rage only a couple of months ago.


So when was it?

VoNC in Sturgeon was after her evidence was heard as far as I remember.

The two VoNC in Swinney were because he wouldnt release the evidence to be heard & after the exams debacle

Did I miss one ?


Who called for a VoNC before Sturgeon's evidence was heard ?


Douglas Ross.


But the Tories had made up their mind to call it before evidence was given and publicly said so.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yes, I agree that was wrong, but they didnt actually hold it until after the evidence was heard.

I go out into the garden and miss all the fun.

"Calling for" and "holding" are two different things. I never once said holding, that was you.

Happy to let this lie, and let you bash on supporting Dross. :wink::greengrin

[He's here!]

Moved before the OECD report is published to avoid another vote of no confidence.

You're dead right. Even Teflon John would likely have struggled to deflect the flak on the way when that report lands. No coincidence that it was keep buried by the Scottish Government until after the Holyrood elections.

Of course his successor will put a spin on it along the lines of how much they're relishing the challenge of improving Scottish education :rolleyes:

[He's here!]

Angus Robertson maybe?

Let's hope so. That smarmy, nauseating jambo would turn voters off in their droves.

[Moulin Yarns]

You're dead right. Even Teflon John would likely have struggled to deflect the flak on the way when that report lands. No coincidence that it was keep buried by the Scottish Government until after the Holyrood elections.

Of course his successor will put a spin on it along the lines of how much they're relishing the challenge of improving Scottish education :rolleyes:


Aye, we're ***** so we urr!

https://www.freepressseries.co.uk/news/national-news/18814317.scottish-pupils-ranked-fourth-global-issues-study-involving-27-nations/

https://www.tes.com/news/scottish-pupils-among-top-performers-new-pisa-test

[ronaldo7]

You're dead right. Even Teflon John would likely have struggled to deflect the flak on the way when that report lands. No coincidence that it was keep buried by the Scottish Government until after the Holyrood elections.

Of course his successor will put a spin on it along the lines of how much they're relishing the challenge of improving Scottish education :rolleyes:

You sure about that?

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19161139.oecd-education-report-conservatives-lib-dems-fire/

"But correspondence shows the Scottish Government wrote to the OECD's Directorate for Education and Skills on March 9 to ask formally if it would be possible to publish the draft report following last month's education debate and vote at Holyrood

The organisation's response states: "We are in receipt of your request for reaction on the motion by the Scottish Parliament calling for the immediate publication of the draft OECD report on the Review of CfE, which was shared with the Government on 2 February for fact checking purposes.

"At the outset, please note that disclosure of documents and other material produced or disseminated by the OECD for consideration of its Members is governed by the rules of the OECD.

"In particular, we note that the preliminary draft report regarding the Curriculum for Excellence Review 2021 is classified as confidential and not for dissemination.

"As such, the said report is protected and cannot be published and disseminated to the public.

"We trust that this information will be of use in your deliberations."

[He's here!]

But surely if the biggest issue for people is the constitution then they vote accordingly.

Absolutely. Scottish Labour should have got on board sooner with the Tories' tactical voting proposal and Sturgeon might have ended up short of an independence majority, even with her lapdog Greens on board. The election was all about the constitution despite Sturgeon's 11th hour claims to the contrary and Sarwar ended up nowhere with his sitting on the fence approach. I still think and hope he could be a big vote winner for Labour but his election tactics have set them back still further.

See what really nips ma heid about the SNP? The way they seem to think they have ownership of the phrase 'the people of Scotland' as though they speak for a united nation of Saltire waving independence obsessives. How about the majority who didn't vote SNP? Are we not 'the people of Scotland' too? Not to mention the 40% or so of the electorate who didn't vote at all. Break those numbers down and the pro-independence vote was probably only about 30% of the total Scottish electorate. Not exactly a resounding 'mandate' for a referendum.

It seems to me that for all the gloss they've tried to put on things the SNP didn't actually do anything like as well as they'd hoped. Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.

[Future17]

Was it before the evidence though ? I am not sure it was if you read the links above.

I have noted my date for Sturgeon's evidence was wrong though. It was 3rd March not 2nd I think.

Yeah, he called for it before Sturgeon gave evidence.

[lapsedhibee]

Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.

But very different from the position we were in 7 years ago.

[ronaldo7]

Aye, we're ***** so we urr!

https://www.freepressseries.co.uk/news/national-news/18814317.scottish-pupils-ranked-fourth-global-issues-study-involving-27-nations/

https://www.tes.com/news/scottish-pupils-among-top-performers-new-pisa-test

Nice to see our young folk doing so well. :aok:

[ronaldo7]

Absolutely. Scottish Labour should have got on board sooner with the Tories' tactical voting proposal and Sturgeon might have ended up short of an independence majority, even with her lapdog Greens on board. The election was all about the constitution despite Sturgeon's 11th hour claims to the contrary and Sarwar ended up nowhere with his sitting on the fence approach. I still think and hope he could be a big vote winner for Labour but his election tactics have set them back still further.

See what really nips ma heid about the SNP? The way they seem to think they have ownership of the phrase 'the people of Scotland' as though they speak for a united nation of Saltire waving independence obsessives. How about the majority who didn't vote SNP? Are we not 'the people of Scotland' too? Not to mention the 40% or so of the electorate who didn't vote at all. Break those numbers down and the pro-independence vote was probably only about 30% of the total Scottish electorate. Not exactly a resounding 'mandate' for a referendum.

It seems to me that for all the gloss they've tried to put on things the SNP didn't actually do anything like as well as they'd hoped. Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.


We didnae even have street stalls. Hardly everything we'd got. :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

Absolutely. Scottish Labour should have got on board sooner with the Tories' tactical voting proposal and Sturgeon might have ended up short of an independence majority, even with her lapdog Greens on board. The election was all about the constitution despite Sturgeon's 11th hour claims to the contrary and Sarwar ended up nowhere with his sitting on the fence approach. I still think and hope he could be a big vote winner for Labour but his election tactics have set them back still further.

See what really nips ma heid about the SNP? The way they seem to think they have ownership of the phrase 'the people of Scotland' as though they speak for a united nation of Saltire waving independence obsessives. How about the majority who didn't vote SNP? Are we not 'the people of Scotland' too? Not to mention the 40% or so of the electorate who didn't vote at all. Break those numbers down and the pro-independence vote was probably only about 30% of the total Scottish electorate. Not exactly a resounding 'mandate' for a referendum.

It seems to me that for all the gloss they've tried to put on things the SNP didn't actually do anything like as well as they'd hoped. Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.

But more resounding than the mandate to block one. :wink:

Comfortable pro-Indy majority won on a clear mandate to hold Indyref2 by SNP & Greens despite all the Salmond nonsense and mud throwing antics of Unionism. I was pretty chuffed with that. :aok:

[Moulin Yarns]

Absolutely. Scottish Labour should have got on board sooner with the Tories' tactical voting proposal and Sturgeon might have ended up short of an independence majority, even with her lapdog Greens on board. The election was all about the constitution despite Sturgeon's 11th hour claims to the contrary and Sarwar ended up nowhere with his sitting on the fence approach. I still think and hope he could be a big vote winner for Labour but his election tactics have set them back still further.

See what really nips ma heid about the SNP? The way they seem to think they have ownership of the phrase 'the people of Scotland' as though they speak for a united nation of Saltire waving independence obsessives. How about the majority who didn't vote SNP? Are we not 'the people of Scotland' too? Not to mention the 40% or so of the electorate who didn't vote at all. Break those numbers down and the pro-independence vote was probably only about 30% of the total Scottish electorate. Not exactly a resounding 'mandate' for a referendum.

It seems to me that for all the gloss they've tried to put on things the SNP didn't actually do anything like as well as they'd hoped. Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.

I can't remember your former name, but I definitely recognise the style. :rolleyes:

And 71 seats for Independence referendum supporting parties is a decent majority

[scottish_sleepy]

The Tories only got 34% of the eligible UK voters to get them into power in the last general election.

Don't see too many of the unionists complaining about how unfair that is.

34% and they can pretty much get anything they like through Parliament without the remaining 66% being able to do anything about it.

[SHODAN]

I've never heard of her. Any good as an MSP? Wonder why the Justice Sec got shuffled, that's a strange one.

She replied to me personally when I raised the issue of potholes in an SNP local survey, so from my own perspective she's great! Don't know much about her otherwise, though I think she's in Sturgeon's inner circle.

[Santa Cruz]

She replied to me personally when I raised the issue of potholes in an SNP local survey, so from my own perspective she's great! Don't know much about her otherwise, though I think she's in Sturgeon's inner circle.

Cheers for replying.

[Skol]

I go out into the garden and miss all the fun.

"Calling for" and "holding" are two different things. I never once said holding, that was you.

Happy to let this lie, and let you bash on supporting Dross. :wink::greengrin

lol - fair cop, although I wont accept the supporting of Ross as that's not something I have ever done that I recall ! My point was that no VoNC actually happened without the evidence but I did say I didnt agree with the noise about calling for it before the actual vote

[Skol]

You sure about that?

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19161139.oecd-education-report-conservatives-lib-dems-fire/

"But correspondence shows the Scottish Government wrote to the OECD's Directorate for Education and Skills on March 9 to ask formally if it would be possible to publish the draft report following last month's education debate and vote at Holyrood

The organisation's response states: "We are in receipt of your request for reaction on the motion by the Scottish Parliament calling for the immediate publication of the draft OECD report on the Review of CfE, which was shared with the Government on 2 February for fact checking purposes.

"At the outset, please note that disclosure of documents and other material produced or disseminated by the OECD for consideration of its Members is governed by the rules of the OECD.

"In particular, we note that the preliminary draft report regarding the Curriculum for Excellence Review 2021 is classified as confidential and not for dissemination.

"As such, the said report is protected and cannot be published and disseminated to the public.

"We trust that this information will be of use in your deliberations."

Thanks for that link and this wasnt something that I saw reported at the time and does explain why the report wasnt published which seems to be reasonable. I guess we just have to wait and see what it says when it is published and make our mind up then

[ronaldo7]

lol - fair cop, although I wont accept the supporting of Ross as that's not something I have ever done that I recall ! My point was that no VoNC actually happened without the evidence but I did say I didnt agree with the noise about calling for it before the actual vote

:greengrin:aok:

[Hiber-nation]

I can't remember your former name, but I definitely recognise the style. :rolleyes:



Just what I was thinking.

[Jonnyboy]

Absolutely. Scottish Labour should have got on board sooner with the Tories' tactical voting proposal and Sturgeon might have ended up short of an independence majority, even with her lapdog Greens on board. The election was all about the constitution despite Sturgeon's 11th hour claims to the contrary and Sarwar ended up nowhere with his sitting on the fence approach. I still think and hope he could be a big vote winner for Labour but his election tactics have set them back still further.

See what really nips ma heid about the SNP? The way they seem to think they have ownership of the phrase 'the people of Scotland' as though they speak for a united nation of Saltire waving independence obsessives. How about the majority who didn't vote SNP? Are we not 'the people of Scotland' too? Not to mention the 40% or so of the electorate who didn't vote at all. Break those numbers down and the pro-independence vote was probably only about 30% of the total Scottish electorate. Not exactly a resounding 'mandate' for a referendum.

It seems to me that for all the gloss they've tried to put on things the SNP didn't actually do anything like as well as they'd hoped. Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.

Does the fact that Sarwar, Ross/Davidson and Rennie also widely used ‘the people of Scotland’ also nip yer heid?

[Peevemor]

Absolutely. Scottish Labour should have got on board sooner with the Tories' tactical voting proposal and Sturgeon might have ended up short of an independence majority, even with her lapdog Greens on board. The election was all about the constitution despite Sturgeon's 11th hour claims to the contrary and Sarwar ended up nowhere with his sitting on the fence approach. I still think and hope he could be a big vote winner for Labour but his election tactics have set them back still further.

See what really nips ma heid about the SNP? The way they seem to think they have ownership of the phrase 'the people of Scotland' as though they speak for a united nation of Saltire waving independence obsessives. How about the majority who didn't vote SNP? Are we not 'the people of Scotland' too? Not to mention the 40% or so of the electorate who didn't vote at all. Break those numbers down and the pro-independence vote was probably only about 30% of the total Scottish electorate. Not exactly a resounding 'mandate' for a referendum.

It seems to me that for all the gloss they've tried to put on things the SNP didn't actually do anything like as well as they'd hoped. Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.The SNP has more right to speak for the people of Scotland than the tories, which is what they'll be stuck with for the foreseeable future under a unionist status quo.

[Hibrandenburg]

I think the sad reality is that Swinney is the best of those supporting Sturgeon and there is a massive gap between Sturgeon and the rest.

I shudder to think where we will be when Sturgeon steps aside

Could be worse.

[degenerated]

Could be worse.Jackson Coleslaw as FM and Annie Wells as deputy FM. Doesn't bear thinking about, does it. We could have had Adam Tomkins as the secretary of the peepul and Murdo Fraser as kulchur secretary :greengrin

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[Kato]

Does the fact that Sarwar, Ross/Davidson and Rennie also widely used ‘the people of Scotland’ also nip yer heid?

"The people of Scotland don't want another referendum."

"The people of Scotland already rejected independence in 2014."

Sentences ad infinitum by Tory/Labour Party spokespeople for years.

Politicians in lack of nuance shock!

[Moulin Yarns]

Jackson Coleslaw as FM and Annie Wells as deputy FM. Doesn't bear thinking about, does it. We could have had Adam Tomkins as the secretary of the peepul and Murdo Fraser as kulchur secretary :greengrin

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

They would be fighting for the post of the weeurapeepul secretary. 😉

[1875godsgift]

Absolutely. Scottish Labour should have got on board sooner with the Tories' tactical voting proposal and Sturgeon might have ended up short of an independence majority, even with her lapdog Greens on board. The election was all about the constitution despite Sturgeon's 11th hour claims to the contrary and Sarwar ended up nowhere with his sitting on the fence approach. I still think and hope he could be a big vote winner for Labour but his election tactics have set them back still further.

See what really nips ma heid about the SNP? The way they seem to think they have ownership of the phrase 'the people of Scotland' as though they speak for a united nation of Saltire waving independence obsessives. How about the majority who didn't vote SNP? Are we not 'the people of Scotland' too? Not to mention the 40% or so of the electorate who didn't vote at all. Break those numbers down and the pro-independence vote was probably only about 30% of the total Scottish electorate. Not exactly a resounding 'mandate' for a referendum.

It seems to me that for all the gloss they've tried to put on things the SNP didn't actually do anything like as well as they'd hoped. Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.

Regardless how you try to manipulate the figures to suit your own agenda, it's still a majority, and that's all that matters :wink:

[The Harp Awakes]

Absolutely. Scottish Labour should have got on board sooner with the Tories' tactical voting proposal and Sturgeon might have ended up short of an independence majority, even with her lapdog Greens on board. The election was all about the constitution despite Sturgeon's 11th hour claims to the contrary and Sarwar ended up nowhere with his sitting on the fence approach. I still think and hope he could be a big vote winner for Labour but his election tactics have set them back still further.

See what really nips ma heid about the SNP? The way they seem to think they have ownership of the phrase 'the people of Scotland' as though they speak for a united nation of Saltire waving independence obsessives. How about the majority who didn't vote SNP? Are we not 'the people of Scotland' too? Not to mention the 40% or so of the electorate who didn't vote at all. Break those numbers down and the pro-independence vote was probably only about 30% of the total Scottish electorate. Not exactly a resounding 'mandate' for a referendum.

It seems to me that for all the gloss they've tried to put on things the SNP didn't actually do anything like as well as they'd hoped. Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.

Another democracy denier.

Holyrood has a healthy and increased pro independence majority whether you like it or not and defacto have a mandate for indyref2 and to promote an independence agenda. End of.

By all means stand up for what you believe in, but leave the denial and spin to biased Tory politicians.

[Peevemor]

Good to see our MSPs wearing their colours with pride!

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210521/be63ab4f0f2072cd28f85cf1acac85ed.jpghttps://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210521/3277fab7074a766bf8fb800f0916826b.jpg

[cabbageandribs1875]

George Galloway enters Batley and Spen by-election race, vowing to oust Keir Starmer as Labour leader (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/george-galloway-enters-batley-spen-081513274.html)


Former MP and veteran campaigner George Galloway (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/george-galloway) has announced he is running in the forthcoming Batley (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/batley) and Spen by-election with the explicit aim of ousting Sir Keir Starmer (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/keir-starmer) as leader of the Labour (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/labour) Party.


:rolleyes: why do the media give this tw@t column space

[CloudSquall]

George Galloway enters Batley and Spen by-election race, vowing to oust Keir Starmer as Labour leader (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/george-galloway-enters-batley-spen-081513274.html)


Former MP and veteran campaigner George Galloway (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/george-galloway) has announced he is running in the forthcoming Batley (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/batley) and Spen by-election with the explicit aim of ousting Sir Keir Starmer (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/keir-starmer) as leader of the Labour (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/labour) Party.


:rolleyes: why do the media give this tw@t column space




I'm guessing he considered All for Unity's 0.9% as job done for the union :greengrin

[lucky]

George Galloway enters Batley and Spen by-election race, vowing to oust Keir Starmer as Labour leader (yahoo.com) (https://uk.news.yahoo.com/george-galloway-enters-batley-spen-081513274.html)


Former MP and veteran campaigner George Galloway (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/george-galloway) has announced he is running in the forthcoming Batley (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/batley) and Spen by-election with the explicit aim of ousting Sir Keir Starmer (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/keir-starmer) as leader of the Labour (https://www.standard.co.uk/topic/labour) Party.


:rolleyes: why do the media give this tw@t column space




Best post on this thread

[cabbageandribs1875]

Best post on this thread


and that other repugnant git follows...



Ex-Britain First ‘politician’ who tanked against Nicola Sturgeon is running again in a by-election (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/ex-britain-first-politician-who-tanked-against-nicola-sturgeon-is-running-again-in-a-by-election/ar-AAKr7tG)


A ‘politician’ associated with the far-right group Britain First (https://www.indy100.com/topic/britain-first) has been undeterred by her latest dismal election result and has announced she is standing in another by-election.
Jayda Fransen (https://www.indy100.com/topic/jayda-fransen), who received just 46 votes (https://www.indy100.com/politics/jayda-fransen-scottish-elections-46-votes-b1844149)when she stood against Sturgeon in Glasgow Southside earlier this month, announced she is dusting herself off and standing in Batley & Spen, in an email sent to her supporters.

[cabbageandribs1875]

I'm guessing he considered All for Unity's 0.9% as job done for the union :greengrin


this ones 46 votes a few weeks back could have changed the outcome of the Scottish elections :cb not


Ex-Britain First ‘politician’ who tanked against Nicola Sturgeon is running again in a by-election

[Hibrandenburg]

and that other repugnant git follows...



Ex-Britain First ‘politician’ who tanked against Nicola Sturgeon is running again in a by-election (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/ex-britain-first-politician-who-tanked-against-nicola-sturgeon-is-running-again-in-a-by-election/ar-AAKr7tG)


A ‘politician’ associated with the far-right group Britain First (https://www.indy100.com/topic/britain-first) has been undeterred by her latest dismal election result and has announced she is standing in another by-election.
Jayda Fransen (https://www.indy100.com/topic/jayda-fransen), who received just 46 votes (https://www.indy100.com/politics/jayda-fransen-scottish-elections-46-votes-b1844149)when she stood against Sturgeon in Glasgow Southside earlier this month, announced she is dusting herself off and standing in Batley & Spen, in an email sent to her supporters.

I'm guessing she's asking for finacial support.

[cabbageandribs1875]

I'm guessing she's asking for finacial support.


ach most likely, it's all about getting publicity for they Roasters, i hope she gets called-out down there as well

[CloudSquall]

I'm guessing she's asking for finacial support.

The Tommy Robinson business model.

[Moulin Yarns]

and that other repugnant git follows...



Ex-Britain First ‘politician’ who tanked against Nicola Sturgeon is running again in a by-election (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/ex-britain-first-politician-who-tanked-against-nicola-sturgeon-is-running-again-in-a-by-election/ar-AAKr7tG)


A ‘politician’ associated with the far-right group Britain First (https://www.indy100.com/topic/britain-first) has been undeterred by her latest dismal election result and has announced she is standing in another by-election.
Jayda Fransen (https://www.indy100.com/topic/jayda-fransen), who received just 46 votes (https://www.indy100.com/politics/jayda-fransen-scottish-elections-46-votes-b1844149)when she stood against Sturgeon in Glasgow Southside earlier this month, announced she is dusting herself off and standing in Batley & Spen, in an email sent to her supporters.

That's the constituency where Jo Cox was murdered. She will unfortunately have a bit more support. It also voted 60% for Brexit.

[Hibrandenburg]

The Tommy Robinson business model.

And her ex Paul Golding's. It can be a nice little earner being a pretend journalist/politician, providing you have enough suckers willing to send you money.

[Jones28]

and that other repugnant git follows...



Ex-Britain First ‘politician’ who tanked against Nicola Sturgeon is running again in a by-election (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/ex-britain-first-politician-who-tanked-against-nicola-sturgeon-is-running-again-in-a-by-election/ar-AAKr7tG)


A ‘politician’ associated with the far-right group Britain First (https://www.indy100.com/topic/britain-first) has been undeterred by her latest dismal election result and has announced she is standing in another by-election.
Jayda Fransen (https://www.indy100.com/topic/jayda-fransen), who received just 46 votes (https://www.indy100.com/politics/jayda-fransen-scottish-elections-46-votes-b1844149)when she stood against Sturgeon in Glasgow Southside earlier this month, announced she is dusting herself off and standing in Batley & Spen, in an email sent to her supporters.

Surely it wouldn'y have taken that long to go and tell them all in person?

[JimBHibees]

Absolutely. Scottish Labour should have got on board sooner with the Tories' tactical voting proposal and Sturgeon might have ended up short of an independence majority, even with her lapdog Greens on board. The election was all about the constitution despite Sturgeon's 11th hour claims to the contrary and Sarwar ended up nowhere with his sitting on the fence approach. I still think and hope he could be a big vote winner for Labour but his election tactics have set them back still further.

See what really nips ma heid about the SNP? The way they seem to think they have ownership of the phrase 'the people of Scotland' as though they speak for a united nation of Saltire waving independence obsessives. How about the majority who didn't vote SNP? Are we not 'the people of Scotland' too? Not to mention the 40% or so of the electorate who didn't vote at all. Break those numbers down and the pro-independence vote was probably only about 30% of the total Scottish electorate. Not exactly a resounding 'mandate' for a referendum.

It seems to me that for all the gloss they've tried to put on things the SNP didn't actually do anything like as well as they'd hoped. Independence supporters gave this election absolutely everything they'd got, but when the dust settled the SNP won only won one extra seat and we're pretty much in exactly the same position as we were five years ago.

Clearly a crock. The share of the vote the SNP got of 47.7 percent was last bettered in a U.K. General election in 1959. Also need to take into account the clear tactical voting going on to keep them out in key seats which could have meant more seats than they did get.

[7 Up]

Murdo Fraser is in The Scotsman today calling for the Holyrood voting system to be changed because he feels there's too big a difference between the vote share and eventual seat share. I wonder if he has similar concerns about the Westminster system where the Tories won 56% of the seats with only 43% of the votes?

[degenerated]

Clearly a crock. The share of the vote the SNP got of 47.7 percent was last bettered in a U.K. General election in 1959. Also need to take into account the clear tactical voting going on to keep them out in key seats which could have meant more seats than they did get.If anything it's the unionist parties that didn't do as well as they hoped, even with the tactical voting. Labour and lib Dems both had a very poor and uninspiring performance which saw them lose seats and the Tories barely stood still.

Sent from my CPH2009 using Tapatalk

[CropleyWasGod]

Murdo Fraser is in The Scotsman today calling for the Holyrood voting system to be changed because he feels there's too big a difference between the vote share and eventual seat share. I wonder if he has similar concerns about the Westminster system where the Tories won 56% of the seats with only 43% of the votes?

Does he have a point, though?

I thought that was the basic ethos of PR.

[SHODAN]

Murdo Fraser is in The Scotsman today calling for the Holyrood voting system to be changed because he feels there's too big a difference between the vote share and eventual seat share. I wonder if he has similar concerns about the Westminster system where the Tories won 56% of the seats with only 43% of the votes?

I'd be fine with PR if it's also applied to Westminster.

[7 Up]

Does he have a point, though?

I thought that was the basic ethos of PR.

Strict proportionality doesn't seem to be his chief concern given that he supports the first-past-the-post system at Westminster. You can compare the 2021 constituency vote, regional vote and seat share here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Scottish_Parliament_election#Votes_summary

[Ozyhibby]

I’m sure Murdo earns a few quid churning out these articles weekly. It doesn’t really matter what he says though because he’s an irrelevance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

Strict proportionality doesn't seem to be his chief concern given that he supports the first-past-the-post system at Westminster. You can compare the 2021 constituency vote, regional vote and seat share here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Scottish_Parliament_election#Votes_summary

If I read them right, the shares show that the Tories are slightly overrepresented in the Scottish Parliament. Unusually selfless of Fraser to be complaining about that.

[lucky]

I’m sure Murdo earns a few quid churning out these articles weekly. It doesn’t really matter what he says though because he’s an irrelevance.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He’s that big an irrelevance you know he “churns out weekly articles” and he’s mentioned on a Hibs fans website. I’m not sure how many other MSPs have his profile? I dislike his politics but trying to dismiss him as irrelevant because he’s a Tory is just plain stupid

[CloudSquall]

he’s mentioned on a Hibs fans website. I’m not sure how many other MSPs have his profile?

Just about choked on my Mendoza red.

[Future17]

He’s that big an irrelevance you know he “churns out weekly articles” and he’s mentioned on a Hibs fans website. I’m not sure how many other MSPs have his profile? I dislike his politics but trying to dismiss him as irrelevant because he’s a Tory is just plain stupid

I suppose, as with everything, it's about context (I.e. irrelevant to what?) In this case, I'm presuming the answer will be independence. :rolleyes:

[Kato]

Bpb owns a very large amount of properties for rent in edin, which might bugger his working class hero thing a bit


I've no idea if this is true but it was the first thought I had when I heard him spouting off, so it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.


If he's your mate then I suppose you can tell us if he has multiple properties that he rents (as implied earlier in this thread)



I never mentioned what he raised I'm sure lots of it is spot on. And yes he does own many properties and yes you surely can't talk about being working class whilst doing so whichhe obviously revels in, being from leith and listening to his voice I'd doubt he started there either. Him salmonds new gang are heaven Sent for the tories and Labour to split the vote


I met up with Bob last week. Lovely to see him after so long. He had heard about this thread so we spoke a bit about it and he gave me permission to point a couple of things out.

He doesn't own and never has owned "lots of" properties, i.e. he has never owned more than one property at a time. He did work for a company that rented properties out and he always tried to find long-term tenants and give them a decent deal.

He has never claimed to be working class at any time but didn't deny being a tit.

cheers

[WeeRussell]

I met up with Bob last week. Lovely to see him after so long. He had heard about this thread so we spoke a bit about it and he gave me permission to point a couple of things out.

He doesn't own and never has owned "lots of" properties, i.e. he has never owned more than one property at a time. He did work for a company that rented properties out and he always tried to find long-term tenants and give them a decent deal.

He has never claimed to be working class at any time but didn't deny being a tit.

cheers

:applause: :greengrin Quality, Kato.

[WeeRussell]

I suppose, as with everything, it's about context (I.e. irrelevant to what?) In this case, I'm presuming the answer will be independence. :rolleyes:

His only relevance to independence, for me, is that he's a slavering dislikeable cretin who sometimes talks about independence.

Similar to the way that I'm relevant to football I guess.

[Kato]

:applause: :greengrin Quality, Kato.

He deserves a wee bit comeback given the remarks.

I'm just glad at least one person noticed. :aok::wink: