Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Goldie: No regrets over backing SNP

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: 23 May 2008
ANNABEL Goldie, the Scottish Conservatives' leader, yesterday insisted she had "no regrets" about working with the SNP, despite accusations that the Tories have undermined the Union by propping up the Nationalist government.
Miss Goldie led the Scottish Tories in backing the SNP's Budget in return for concessions on police numbers, drugs policy and business rates in the face of intense criticism from other unionist parties.

She has now hit back at critics, telling Th
e Scotsman she would never let "philosophical" differences with another party prevent her from doing deals which help the people of Scotland.

Ms Goldie said: "I have no regrets about working with the SNP on an issue-by-issue basis and opposing them where they are wrong.

"If the suggestion is that it is wrong to work with another party to improve people's lives simply because of a separate philosophical issue, I would strongly disagree with that."

And she added: "By working constructively with the SNP, we have managed to get 1,000 extra police officers for Scotland, a cut in business rates, which has been very well received, and soon a drugs strategy to be published by the Scottish Government."

Miss Goldie said she was being "respectful" of Alex Salmond as Scotland's First Minister, but that did not mean she wanted to see him as prime minister of an independent Scotland.

Her comments came as the Scottish Tories gathered in Ayr for their annual conference, which starts today.

David Cameron, the party's UK leader, is due to address the conference this afternoon.

He is expected to use the Crewe and Nantwich by-election – which was forecast to be declared in the Tories' favour early this morning – to claim the Conservatives are on the way back to power.

Mr Cameron was expected to be in Crewe early this morning, before travelling to Ayr.

If, as appeared likely last night, the Tories defeat Labour in what has traditionally been one of the party's strongest areas, Mr Cameron will use the result to galvanise the Scottish Tories, telling activists that similar results can be achieved in Scotland, too.

Miss Goldie said she believed there was a "new optimism" in the Conservative Party north and south of the Border, which was reflected in the campaign for Crewe and Nantwich.

She said the "shambles" of Labour's on-off support for a referendum on independence had convinced an increasing number of people that only the Conservatives could stand up for the Union, which Labour had "betrayed".

The Scottish Tory leader also insisted she was not afraid to challenge Mr Cameron when necessary, and stressed the Scottish party's independence on devolved issues.

However, a Labour spokesman last night derided Miss Goldie's decision to support the SNP's Budget.

He said: "This is a Faustian pact Annabel entered into with Alex Salmond. She is propping up the SNP government, which would have collapsed had it not managed to get its Budget through.

"Meanwhile, Mr Salmond wants to do everything he can to help David Cameron into Downing Street, while he wants to capitalise on an anti-Tory vote in Scotland to undermine the Union."





Page 1 of 1

 
1

Al Ford,

Insch 23/05/2008 00:54:39
"(...) a Labour spokesman (...) said: "This is a Faustian pact Annabel entered into with Alex Salmond. She is propping up the SNP government, which would have collapsed had it not managed to get its Budget through.""

As if Scottish Labour would have wanted the SNP government to fall and to have had to fight a Scottish general election that might well have given the SNP an overall majority in the Scottish Parliament.

However one may describe the strategy adopted by the Scottish Tory leader since the SNP formed the government, she has retained her credibility while the Scottish Labour leader has lost any that she may have had.
2

Matt there,

somewhere 23/05/2008 02:01:38
"Faustian pact" my eye!

And anonymous Labour Drone said: "Vote Labour! Ye know it makes sense!"

Not any more, it doesn't...
3

donald,

glasgow 23/05/2008 06:05:21
Contrast the with the ignorance, hatred, blind venom and political amnesia of Her Bendiness Party in the wilderness, which marks Labour further to the right of the official Towries.
4

Anne,

Eaglesham 23/05/2008 06:19:19
Pragmatic politics are the way forward.
5

W Smith,

Middle East 23/05/2008 06:38:24
Well said Ms Goldie.

"If the suggestion is that is wrong to work with another party to improve peoples lives simply because of a seperate philsophical issue, I would strongly disagree with that".

About time.

Funny how Ms Goldie had to push the SNP to cut business rates. I thought the SNP wanted Scotland to be business friendly like Ireland and if so why did they have to be pushed into it?

BTW
The Labour Party grudge-enomics/'class struggle' propaganda in Crewe didn't work as they portrayed David Cameron as a 'toff' - for going to the same school as Tam Dalyell and Tony Benn!

The Labour Party propaganda machine forgot to mention Blair was educated at Fettes and Darling at Loretto.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
6

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 23/05/2008 06:54:26
No, of course you don't have any regrets, Annabel. It's called reciprocation. Remember 1979?
7

donald,

glasgow 23/05/2008 07:09:30
Remember 2998 and the Tory-lib-lab Unionist Alliance.

At least Annabel has some respect,unlike the Bendy anti SNP party that opposes anything and everything out of blind hatred and prejudice.

8

Hugo of Garven,

23/05/2008 07:32:11
#1
"As if Scottish Labour would have wanted the SNP government to fall and to have had to fight a Scottish general election that might well have given the SNP an overall majority in the Scottish Parliament."

I could not say it any better.

Miss Goldie comes out of this with credit.

9

SouthernSkye,

Bonnie Bonn 23/05/2008 07:48:28
I thought Lab and LibDems worked together for many years so what's the problem with Tory and SNP?
Might be somewhat strange bed-fellows but as long as it suits them both and the results are beneficial to us lowley minnions....Bring it on !
10

,

23/05/2008 09:02:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

Alan B,

23/05/2008 09:05:19
The tories seem by far the best of the opposition parties, if only becuase they seem to have a sense of maturity.

The behaviour of labour almost seems quite childlike. The seem to lack the capacity to be constructive. Years of scotland returning labour no matter what have lead to a second rate bunch of mps/msps.

Nicol Stephen also has to get a grip. The lib dems could offer so much more.

12

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 23/05/2008 09:07:22
Annabel Goldie is the only opposition in the Scottish Parliament worth of the name. The rest are charlatans or coat-tail hangers.

Her professionalism and pragmatism has both Laboor and LibDems beaten hollow. With the further good news of Labour's thrashing in Nantwich and Crewe I'm sure Ms Goldie has much to celebrate and even more reason to mount an effective opposition or negotiated deals on a case by case basis.
13

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 23/05/2008 09:14:26
As I understand it the Tories backed Government policy they themselves offered up in their own manifesto.
Why wouldnt they back it?? Does this mean that New Labour and the Lib Dums would not support policies presented within their own manifestos if some other party proposed them first???
14

Copper,

Falkirk 23/05/2008 09:20:56


Contacted Annabel to see what she thought of Taxi McLetchie running his legal business inside Holyrood at the public expense

Bullsh@t reply

Contacted the Law Society to see what they thought about Taxi McLetchie running his legal business at the public expense

No reply

Suspect the Lawyers Protection Society thought he was a lucky BAST@D
15

Alan B,

23/05/2008 09:21:43
#Foulkes Off the CyberNat

Ur assemssment is correct. Labour would not back things they themselves would do, if the policy was put forward by the snp.

Labour want to ensure the interests of scotland do not get in the way of the advancement of the parties interests.

16

Alan B,

23/05/2008 09:22:37
#Copper

Given that McLechie had to resign in disgrace i do not know how he allowed to remain an msp.
17

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 23/05/2008 09:33:18
15

I just find it unbelievable how the UK establishment no longer even tries to hide its own corruption and failings. The party first second and last attitude of all the UK unionist political parties is no longer disguised nor papered over. They have nothing but complete contempt for the electorate and worse it may even be justified.
18

megz,

glasgow 23/05/2008 10:37:00
'ANNABEL Goldie, the Scottish Conservatives' leader, yesterday insisted she had "no regrets" about working with the SNP, despite accusations that the Tories have undermined the Union by propping up the Nationalist government.'

says it all really, surely any political party up here should be working in the interests of scotland, not the union. This is where the 3 unionist parties fall down as their first allegience is the union and not the country they are supposed to be representing. It is probably why there have been such marked increases in popularity of the SG and belief that they are working in Scotlands interest as they are actually a Scottish party whereas the others are run from london.
19

megz,

glasgow 23/05/2008 10:40:10
meant to say of all the other leaders goldie is the only one that has come out with and credibility, nicol is wavering on the fence just now and it could go either way.
20

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 23/05/2008 11:22:48
After last night's heavy losses in the Crewe by-election the likelihood of a Tory government at Westminster must surely be increased. I wonder how Scotsman headlines telling of the SNP 'picking fights' with Westminster will ring then? I suspect a Scottish audience, with a Tory government in place at Westminster, will be quite happy to see an SNP government at Holyrood standing up for them. And what will the Labour party's position be then? Will they also stand up for Scotland? Or will they continue to put forward the argument that the SNP government are picking fights with a Tory government? Labour's current tactics, as with the Scotsman's, have a limited shelf life; the limits of which are becoming more obvious with every passing day.
21

Alan B,

23/05/2008 11:25:26
#20

completely agree
22

Ugly George,

edinburgh 23/05/2008 11:55:03
20 Gregor
If their is a Tory govt. A lot will depend on how Cameron plays his hand. I tend to think that he'll try to appear dignified and and stress that he is trying to be fair (he would - would't he). He says that he will prevent Scottish MPs voting on issues that don't concern them but the SNP would agree with that. The crunch is going to come when he comes up with plans to replace the Barnett formula. I think he may well set up some kind of commission to look into it. Much will depend on the composition of that commission but he may well try to emphsasise that it is politically neutral if that is possible. Then of course we will have to see what the commission comes up with. Meanwhile I would not be surprised if he offers some relatively small concession just so that we can see what a decent, fair-minded chap he is. This could all be part of the preparation for making the SNP appear to be the unreasonable ones. I certainly don't think that he will pick a fight straight away.
23

Foulkes Off the CyberNat,

Edinburgh 23/05/2008 12:37:11
22

Whether Cameron picks a fight or not wont make any difference as to how it is reported in the media.
The Media will decide to tell us whether Cameron is fair to Scotland or unfair depending on who owns and controls the media outlet irrespective of what he does or says.
24

Neil,

Glasgow 23/05/2008 12:56:29
Labour think they have a divine right to run the country. They consider it lese majeste for anybody, even the Tories, not to dutifully support them whenever & only whenever required.
25

Neil,

Glasgow 23/05/2008 12:56:52
Labour think they have a divine right to run the country. They consider it lese majeste for anybody, even the Tories, not to dutifully support them whenever & only whenever required.
26

Alan B,

23/05/2008 13:12:35
#Ugly George

The problem for cameron is, that no matter what he does, it could be portrayed badly in scotland. Labour will have a choice. slag the snp or slag labour.

The prevention of scottish mps voting on english matters will not matter to the snp per se but it does have 2 issues
1)labour and the lib dems could potray this as anti scottish. It will be hard for them not to given that that is there effective position now.
2)the snp while happy for that in principle could have issue with what is regarded as an english issue. this is due to 2 things
a)the fudge over so many powers.
b)the financial arrangments. Most things in england effect spending in scotland indirectly.

For cameron to get the snp on board he will have to be conscilatory to certain snp demands.

This could be for more powers and particularly fiscal autonomy.

The fact is if he gets rid of barnett what are the choices.
1)scottish parliament raises its own expenditure (or some of it)
2)westminster finances the sp. if this option continues it means that any drop in funding is going to be portrayed as anti scottish.

How can Cameron alter barnett without cutting scottish funding?

The only way to get the snp onside is fiscal autonomy. It is also the cleanest way of dealing with banning scottish mps on english matters, when most of these matters will effect scotland financially.


Also what will calman report?
27

Alan B,

23/05/2008 13:13:36
oops meant to say "Labour will have a choice. slag the snp or slag the tories".
28

Noxious,

Edinburgh 23/05/2008 13:16:10
# I have to laugh at Nu Liebour accusing wee Eck of picking fights with Westminster. If Liebour had stayed in power up here and the Tories got in at Westminster, are they saying they would co-operate fully with Westminster? The point was always going to come when there would be different parties in charge in Scotland and Westminster, leading to conflicts between the two and a heightening of the public perception in Scotland that Westminster doesn't serve our best interests. This is another example of liebour's tactical ineptitude - they believed that giving devolved powers to Scotland would eradicate calls for independence and wipe out the SNP - didn't really think it through and are now reaping what they sowed.
29

Noxious,

Edinburgh 23/05/2008 13:17:52
#28 - my comment related back to #20
30

Lance Boyle,

23/05/2008 13:48:57
20

Gregor, nonsense. When the Tories take power, watch the SNP make their beds for them.
31

Calvinist,

23/05/2008 13:50:10
#20
#22
You may well be right; it is very likely that the Westminster government will be a Tory one with a substantial majority. This is why I think that Salmond has made a tactical error in not holding a referendum ASAP. His presumption is that Scots will be alarmed at the election of a Tory government and will vote in droves for independence. This may or may not be the case. It is very likely that there will be a revival in the fortunes of the conservative party in Scotland at the next election. After all what alternative is there for former Labour supporters who do not back separatism? This will muddy the waters even further and may even result in a reduction of support for the SNP. It is also most unlikely that the 20 or so predicted SNP Westminster MPs would hold the balance of power at Westminster if the events of last night were repeated throughout the UK. Even if the 2010 (or whenever) referendum produces a yes vote, he will be in the position of having to negotiate with a strong Tory government rather than a weak Labour one. Cameron will effectively have the upper hand in such negotiations and is likely to string him along until, say the oil revenues run out. Better to go for a referendum now- this would put pressure on the existing Labour government and on the incoming Tory one as it will be an ‘issue’ at the general election.
32

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 23/05/2008 13:51:20
31

Lance, spot on. It happened before and it will happen again; and Scotland will suffer but, hopefully, not for 17 years this time.
33

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 23/05/2008 13:53:14
32

Calvinist, an interesting post. Do you think that the recent converts to Scottish nationalism will return to their original home in the Tory Party?
34

Anec Dotal,

Ukraine 23/05/2008 14:09:02
#32

Calvinist, what means "Calvinist"? Anec thank you. Goodbye.
35

Calvinist,

23/05/2008 14:15:27
#35 Anec: it means whatever you want it to mean.
36

Alan B,

23/05/2008 14:28:42
#Calvinist

I think u are being very optimistic if u think the tories will make a significant revival in scotland at the next election.

Remember at the last scottish election there support went down. The snp won becuase they took votes of all the parties except labour. The labour vote in scotland actually and surprising stayed quite steady (only a small dip).

"His presumption is that Scots will be alarmed at the election of a Tory government and will vote in droves for independence."

i think there is good reason for this thinking and it is not just anti tory. scotland will probably have next to no mps in scotland next election. the tories are already talking about stopping scottish mps voting on english matters and scrapping barnett. Nothing wrong with that in itself but will the tories be trusted to do it.

also labour will be without its scottish influence. they will be cleared out if labour lose. Labour will have to chose to slag the tories or the snp.

Can labour really say that cameron has scotlands best interests at heart if he pursues an agenda that labour dislike ie back to thatcherism.
37

Alan B,

23/05/2008 14:35:08
#33 Patrick O'Reilly

if scotland vote snp scotland control the government we get. we will only get tory if scotland votes tory (very unlikely).

we got tory for 17yrs because people voted labour. labour thought the decimation of scotland by thatcher was a price worth paying for the union.

The reason we got 17yrs of tory government in scotland was 2 fold.
1)england voted tory in overwhelming numbers. scotland being so much smaller will not have an influence on which party for a government of the day unless england is split down the middle (not likely to happen with our first past the post voting system).
2)labour put undemocratic rules into the assembly vote in 79.

the fact is if u vote labour then we are at the mercy of which party england chooses at the election. historically that tells us it will be the tories more often than not.
38

The Man Who Knows,

Republic of Perth 23/05/2008 14:39:11
38

Fair enough Alan but I am sure that, in 1979, the SNP voted with the Tories in the motion of no confidence and, in the general election which followed, the SNP lost most of its MPs?
39

Lance Boyle,

Linlithgow 23/05/2008 14:53:38
TMWK, you are correct. The SNP had 11 MPs prior to collusion and only 2 afterwards.
40

Calvinist,

23/05/2008 15:11:31
#34 Patrick,

I certainly think that the anti-labour vote will be split, as there will be two credible alternatives. I suspect we will see much evidence of tactical voting if the priority is to vote Labour out of office. This may not necessarily favour the SNP. I have a theory that many Scots are happy to support independence in public but when it comes to the privacy of the ballot box…….?


41

Alan B,

23/05/2008 16:12:56
#The Man Who Knows

u are correct. the snp voted against the labour government at the time in a motion of no confidence.

But why would anyone expect the snp to vote with labour in that vote of no confidence.

Labour had refused any referendum on independence. Had put in undemocratic 40% rules to scupper there own referendum on a scottish assembly. (a vote which which the majority of the over 60% turnout voted for, but failed due to this undemocratic law).

Labour were lying about scotland oil wealth. A fact the mcrone report showed 30 odd yrs later.

Labour in the 70s were completely incompetent. 25% inflation at one point. Lost support of the unions with the winter of discontent. This had caused as failure in its income policy central it economic policy. And had to go to the imf for emergency loans as it virtually bankrupted britain. It was also the only party in the history of the nhs to cut its expenditure. Not becuase it wanted to, just becuase the imf ordered it to.

Great reasons for the snp to vote with labour.

Lets faces it. If the snp had supported labour despite how bad it was. It would have delayed the election, what by a yr and then they would have got trashed. And then we would have 17 yrs of tory rule.

Labour lost elections in the uk had nothing to do with the snp. As u rightly say the snp had few seats. That is why in 80s labour were talked about the feeble 50.

42

antifa,

23/05/2008 17:22:37
1000 new police. Really?
43

Geoff,

sa 23/05/2008 19:13:17
11 Alan b-good analysis. The tories may not be the most popular party in scotland but they do see to have a more realistic grip on things. Also agree about Nicol Stephen-they should be able to capitalise far more than they have on Labours demise
44

Geoff,

sa 23/05/2008 19:18:51
43 Spook-re Annabelin her St.Andrews uniform-reminiscent of Margaret Rutherford?
45

Liberal for life,

Dunblane 23/05/2008 23:39:08
Goldie like most Tories is a complete hypocrite. For any self respecting Conservative and Unionist voter to accept what the Tories are doing is anything other than a betrayal of the United Kingdom shows what a bad lot they are. Rotten to the core!
46

MtnKat,

24/05/2008 10:38:14
Interesting board this morning with many thought provoking posts.
7 Donald
30 kimba's proctologist
I agree. Given the habit of opposing just for the sake of it is counter productive. I'd like to see the term 'Opposition' disappear from the political landscape. Perhaps then the politicians will do the job we voted (read: hired) them to do, which is run the country efficiently and effectively. Ideally they would operate as a board of directors.

26 Alan B. You are sailing close to the notion of Federalism. Scotland raises all monies and only sends to London our share in defense, etc.
Even with Independence there would likely be some type of confederation of this islands nations.

32 Calvinist
I disagree that the SNP should hold a referendum now and that they are counting on a Tory government being installed in Westminister in 2010.
On the first point, it would appear to be a knee jerk reaction to Bendy's antics and as far as the second is concerned, 2010 was presented in their manifesto long before Brown opened the door to a Tory resurgence.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



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.