Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Friday, 5th December 2008

Haggis Hunt is now on!

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.

Labour by-election visits 'kept secret'



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: 15 July 2008
LABOUR was accused of running scared yesterday after Gordon Brown distanced himself from the Glasgow East by-election, and it emerged that senior Cabinet ministers have been making unannounced visits to the constituency to avoid the press.



Harriet Harman, the deputy Labour leader, visited the constituency at the end of last week with Des Browne, the joint Defence and Scottish Secretary, but both trips were kept secret.

Instead, the two Cabinet ministers went round the houses w
ith local activists, knocking on doors and talking through problems without any cameras or journalists present.

Douglas Alexander, the International Development Secretary, also visited the constituency twice last week and both of these visits were unannounced, too.

The same went for David Cairns, from the Scotland Office, and Europe minister Jim Murphy, as well as a succession of whips and junior ministers, all of whom were employed canvassing but whose presence was not flagged up to the press.

A Labour spokesman said this was a deliberate ploy to make sure attention was focused on Margaret Curran, the party candidate, not on senior figures from London. He said: "John Mason (the SNP candidate] is not allowed to speak out in this campaign. Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon speak on his behalf.

"Margaret is more than capable of speaking for herself and does not need others speaking for her. Government ministers have been here to listen to people on the doorsteps."

When asked whether the ministers' visits were kept secret from the press to stop journalists asking embarrassing questions, the spokesman replied: "Government ministers are asked questions constantly. I'm sure you wouldn't have any trouble tracking them down if you needed to."

The Prime Minister, however, is one minister who will not be visiting the constituency. Mr Brown made it clear yesterday that he would not be going to Glasgow East during the campaign. He also refused to get involved in speculation that a defeat next Thursday could cost him his job.

Asked whether he was planning to visit Glasgow East, Mr Brown said: "I have made that clear. It's not the tradition of prime ministers to go to by- elections."

Asked how confident he was that Labour could hold on to Glasgow East, and whether defeat would make his own position untenable, Mr Brown said: "We have got a very good candidate in Glasgow East, Margaret Curran. She is a very experienced local person who is fighting a very good local campaign and she is doing very well."

Angus Robertson, the SNP's Westminster leader, said: "First, Labour are so short of activists they are ordering MPs from outwith Scotland to prop up their campaign, now they are too embarrassed to let anyone see them. This is a Labour Party and candidate so embarrassed by its own government it doesn't want anyone in Glasgow East to know they are here.

"Labour are playing hide and seek with the voters."

He added: "People in Glasgow East have the right to expect answers from the Labour Party on the policies that are causing them so much financial pain. If Harriet Harman and Des Browne can turn up, where are Alistair Darling or Gordon Brown?"





The full article contains 532 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Castaway,

15/07/2008 00:05:58
Asked whether he was planning to visit Glasgow East, Mr Brown said: "I have made that clear. It's not the tradition of prime ministers to go to by- elections."
Uxbridge by-election, 1997-Labour's campaign included a visit by PM Tony Blair.
Eddisbury by-election, 1999-PM Tony Blair went to the constituency to campaign.
Hamilton South by-election, 1999-Personal appearance by PM Tony Blair.
Glasgow East by-election, 2008-Where's Gordon Brown ?
2

Jimmy the Pie,

15/07/2008 00:06:14
Not really a surprise considering how New Labour Sleaze run the country, a screwed up election campaign.

Would you want photographed with the Red Harridan????

3

Rufus T. Firefly,

15/07/2008 00:06:23
No sign of this Political Earthquake happening yet.

The bookies still have Labour streets ahead.


4

Jimmy the Pie,

15/07/2008 00:07:45
Does anyone remember Comrade Broon telling us all last year, just after he bottled the general election, that he wanted time to explain his vision of the future to the electorate?

He also said he was the only man to lead Britain out of the current economic 'downturn'.
When are you going to tell us what the master plan is Comrade?

Or will we have to wait until you've had your holidays????
5

Traquir , Alba,

15/07/2008 00:13:36
NEWSFLASH NEWSFLASH NEWSFLASH

"Labour 14% lead" should have read
"Labour 2.31% lead" !!
So from the Telegraph poll the swing need for the SNP
to take Glasgow East is 1.16% :)

The full ICM poll of Labour on 47% and SNP on 33% is now available :

see - tinyurl.com/5zyad3

Very interesting to see the actual voting and the actual sample size. The sample size is 516.
The number actual mentioning
who they want to vote for was 303 see page 3 first row.
The actual votes were :
Labour - 131, SNP - 124, Conservative 29, Liberal 10, Other 10.
Which translates to 43.23% Labour and 40.92% SNP.
No wonder the unionists are in a blind panic.

It is also interesting to see how various media sources
covered the same story - I wonder if they will restate
their opinion if they bother to read the full results.

The Telegraph:

"Labour set for victory in Glasgow East"
see - tinyurl.com/68qurh

The Herald:

"Poll predicts Labour will cling on to Glasgow East"
see - tinyurl.com/5wtsqq

The Scotsman:
"Poll points to Labour by-election victory"
see - tinyurl.com/6ysk6l

The Sunday Post:

"Labour poll lead crumbles"
"A SHOCK poll in Glasgow East has seen a 15 per cent swing from Labour to the SNP in the first week of the by-election campaign."
see - tinyurl.com/yrf5nk

Ian Dale
"SNP Closing on Labour in Glasgow East"
see - tinyurl.com/5zldxp

Saor Alba
6

Vivas,

Edinburgh 15/07/2008 00:13:42
The Northbritishman is slipping up badly in this edition. I can't anywhere see a Tuesday rehash of the "SNP suffers another blow to local income tax plans" (Part 227).

Heads will roll for this oversight.
7

AM2,

Scotland,UK 15/07/2008 00:14:44
#5 Traquir

Ever heard of poll weighting? ICM weight their samples to ensure that they as representative as possible of gender, age, working status, social class, past votes and turnout likelihood.

That last one is particularly interesting. Some 72% of those expressing an intention to vote Labour said they were certain to vote, but the SNP vote in Glasgow East is significantly softer. Only 62% of people planning to vote SNP said they would certainly vote.
8

Conan the Librarian™,

15/07/2008 00:18:06
7
I have a horrible sense of deja vu...
9

The Spook in Leith,

15/07/2008 00:20:31
"Labour are playing hide and seek with the voters"

Sounds like fun, anyway on that note im off to my bed to play with my bum fluff..
10

,

15/07/2008 00:20:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

The Spook in Leith,

15/07/2008 00:21:33
#8 conan

lol, yeh me to.?? night night..
12

The Spook in Leith,

15/07/2008 00:23:32
#10

My last post btw.. er thats your opinion but certainly not shared by me and possibly many others..
13

Vivas,

Edinburgh 15/07/2008 00:23:47
#10 Number 6, I swear I can feel the heat from AM2's blushes after your passionate praise there.

Civil parntership for you boys LOL ?
14

Scotindy,

Los Angeles 15/07/2008 00:24:19
Looks like the labour party are so embarassed by their current political form that they cannot even face the electorate. Well the electorate will be facing them off on the 24th and sending their lying theiving butts back down to london. INDEPENDENCE IS THE ONLY TRUE AND HONEST ANSWER FOR SCOTLAND.
15

AM2,

Scotland,UK 15/07/2008 00:24:33
Leaving aside party loyalties, election funding is regulated to try and ensure a reasonably level playing field. Same goes for TV and radio exposure. But what about the number of activists and the time they devote to doorstepping and accosting people with their spin? Shouldn't their time be given some nominal hourly rate and included within spending limits?
16

Traquir , Alba,

15/07/2008 00:26:39
8 Conan the Librarian™,

"I have a horrible sense of deja vu..."

I suspect on this thread AM2 won't repeat the
allegation that John Mason is "almost" a
"supremacist", so hopefully we will not have to
repeat all of that again. Although he does have his
buddy Number 6 in tow so you just can't tell
where this might end up :)
17

AM2,

Scotland,UK 15/07/2008 00:30:22
Incidentally, I'm surprised that the Scotsman didn't seek an explanation for these "secret" visits. Here's what a Labour spokesperson said about it:

"We know people in the east end of Glasgow are not easily impressed so we are not having big visits. Ministers are coming to the constituency but they are chapping doors, stuffing envelopes and handing out leaflets. The voters in Glasgow East don't want airs and graces, they don't want ministerial photo-calls, they want hard graft and that is what we are giving them."

I'm not sure that election canvassing is the kind of hard graft the East End needs, but I thought it was worth quoting anyway.
18

monkey man,

15/07/2008 00:33:53
Labour are a joke at both local and national level yet still Fatty Salmond and the wee Bravehearts have no chance of winning Glasgoe East. The SNP are in decline already.
19

Peter,

SNP for me! 15/07/2008 00:35:18
Ah! The great Arghmatool returns to the fray with more posits of Unionist genius, irascibility and inaccuracy as he has done on a regular basis for the last 18 months.

Here's my take on this and it is: none of the Labour MP's from London want to be seen dead with Magrat Gurn as they are worried if she gets to Westminster she'll start doing a similar hatchet job on them as she did on Wendy. Also none of them want to be seen dead with a potentially failed Labour candidate in one of Labour's safest seats - Ancient Mariner, Albatross anyone and Labour do not look like they will be managing to stoppeth 1 in 3 to vote for them!
20

AM2,

Scotland,UK 15/07/2008 00:35:30
#16 Traquir

You just won't let it go, will you?

Mason said that he welcomes English people to Glasgow. That's good to know, although one might think it shouldn't need to be said. Anyway, he went on to explain why, saying that "it shows they think the city is better than those in England". To some, including me, that will carry a connotation which might be construed as "supremacist".

If you still can't see it, imagine an English politician saying that he's glad Scots are moving to Sheffield, say, as "it shows they think the city is better than those in Scotland". Would you think that was a benign remark or would it raise your hackles? Honestly!
21

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 15/07/2008 00:44:42
The tooth Fairies are out and about. Sweet dreams.

Here's a shilling and a great big tax hike.

Here's tae Labour
Wha's like them?
Unionists!
Maurs the pity - can they no be a ' deid?
22

,

15/07/2008 00:52:08
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
23

,

15/07/2008 00:54:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

,

15/07/2008 00:54:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
25

Ewan Kerr - Juans brother,

15/07/2008 00:54:41
AM2 :

"it shows they think the city is better than those in England".

EVERYONES A SUPREMACIST THEN!!!!!! Everyone has a prticular pride in their area. It is part and parcel of being the human family.

Would you say Great britain is supremacist , given they use he word GREAT. As your logic dictates above that can be the only satisfactory outcome for you.
26

Ewan Kerr - Juans brother,

15/07/2008 01:00:45
#15 - Why. IS that you admission the Labour party have no grass roots support?

Imagine them trying to get 300 ordinary folk out, they would hav e to approve it through the glasgow parks division so as the cronies can geet paid.
27

,

15/07/2008 01:01:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
28

Alex, Young Laird d' Drumchapel,

Madrid 15/07/2008 01:06:38
Doonhamer,
There is another problem with the weighting. Many 'undecided' and 'won't says' will be attributed to the Libs and Tories. The reality is that their vote is being squeezed as many of them will vote either Labour or SNP. My gut feeling is that a sizeable majority of squeezed Libs and Tories will vote tactically against Labour.
29

Traquir , Alba,

15/07/2008 01:08:53
15 AM2,Scotland

"Leaving aside party loyalties, election funding is regulated to try and ensure a reasonably level playing field. Same goes for TV and radio exposure. But what about the number of activists and the time they devote to doorstepping and accosting people with their spin? Shouldn't their time be given some nominal hourly rate and included within spending limits?"

Feeling a bit outnumbered are we ?
"level playing field" has got to be the biggest
joke on this forum for some time.

The BBC from its own independent review highlighted "Anglocentricity and London-centricity"
"136 stories on Health Care, all 136 dealt
with England alone."
"too preoccupied with the interests and experiences of London"

- see tinyurl.com/6md9t5

The leading "Scottish Media" dare I say have shown
significant bias towards Labour and they
did not and have still not reported on the
weeks old major story about
Scottish Oil which was picked up copious numbers
of non-Scottish papers :

"North Sea oil 'will last for another half century'"
see - tinyurl.com/6ml3np and in fact
"'North Sea oil will last for 100 years'"
see tinyurl.com/54wl8e

Yep from a Unionist perspective the playing field
is level, or at least they are willing to
overlook the gross slanting since it is
in their favour - democracy British style.

Now AM2 wants to even up more of the
playing field to try and no doubt
compensate for the fact the nationalists
have passion and fire in their bellies
whilst the Unionists just repeat the same
jingoism and use every statistic they can to help
prove why Scotland can not thrive as
a country in her own right. We live in a democracy
and if 100's of Unionist campaigners want
to canvas Glasgow East with their stories
on the glories of the Union then go ahead
wrapped up in the Union flag whilst singing
God Save The Queen. Interestingly not
even Labour's first choice
candidate George Ryan wanted any part of that.

"But some councillors
30

Traquir , Alba,

15/07/2008 01:09:14
cont.

"But some councillors in Glasgow claim the union flag has sectarian connotations in the west of Scotland, while the national anthem, God Save the Queen, is offensive to Scots."

"They want Glasgow ceremonies to feature the saltire and use the song Flower of Scotland instead."

"Councillor George Ryan is among those backing the alternative plan."

see - tinyurl.com/5hd5ec


Evidently AM2 would now like to control the
uncontrollable - the canvassers, the internet
and of course the newspaper forums where
equal numbers of Nationalist and Unionists
would be governed by strict quotas :)
End of the day it is a numbers games and
slowly but surely the Unionistas are losing
it and they know it.

Saor Alba
31

AM2,

Scotland,UK 15/07/2008 01:09:54
#26 Ewan Kerr

Your ice cream analogy makes no sense. Actually you're missing the whole point, but perhaps that's partly my fault, because I should have provided a broader context showing John Mason's attitude towards England.

This should suffice. During the 2006 World Cup finals he received a complaint from a pupil at Hillhead High School about the supposedly “excessive” number of English flags being hung at the school. He then said:

“It's all very well saying sport and politics shouldn't be linked but sport is so huge, especially football, they are linked.”

“If England is being pushed by a particular school I would consider that to be political activity” ... “I accept that for other people this is a minor issue but for me it's an extremely major issue” ... “I'd not have expected one of our schools to be favouring one country over another” ... “the World Cup is an international event and I would expect the school to dig out 32 flags.”

“I'm in politics for one reason and that is to break up the UK and so any suggestion of a strengthening of a link between Scotland and England is what I'm opposed to.”
32

,

15/07/2008 01:11:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
33

AM2,

Scotland,UK 15/07/2008 01:12:13
Goodnight Traquir. I'm not even going to try and unravel that nonsense.
34

Traquir , Alba,

15/07/2008 01:18:01
34 AM2, Scotland

"Goodnight Traquir. I'm not even going to try and unravel that nonsense."

Night, night don't have too many nightmares about
the prospects for the Union as a true level playing
field emerges driven by the emerging and uncontrollable
power of technology like the internet. I bet
the Unionistas would love to follow your
suggestion and be able to control
the number of canvassers, the newspaper forums
and internet, but guess what it ain't gone happen.

Saor Alba

35

AM2,

Scotland,UK 15/07/2008 01:23:05
Traquir

Actually, three more quick facts before I go, because I notice that – like John Mason – you seem to place oil at the centre of your independence argument.

1. Average UK oil production in January 2008 was 1.2m barrels per day compared to the 1999 peak of 2.7m barrels per day

2. Last month, the Institute for Fiscal Studies debunked another SNP oil myth by warning that “it is far from clear that there will be a net gain to the public finances” from higher oil prices.

3. Then this month, investment bank Lehman Brothers predicted that, as OPEC increases its supply and the slowing global economy squeezes demand, the price of crude will fall back to about $93 a barrel next year.

Goodnight!
36

Cpt Incredible,

Edinburgh 15/07/2008 01:24:39
Why does AM2 and No6 bother posting on these forums?
Their views are constantly shot down in flames, by other more logical,analytical and truthful posters.
It's beyond me why they constantly try,but are inevitably humiliated on a daily basis.
37

Castaway,

15/07/2008 01:32:11
....... canvassing but whose presence was not flagged up to the press.
What no photo shoot with Margaret Curran she will be disappointed .
What no photo shoot with the Glasgow East voters, they will be disappointed.
They seek them here, they seek them there
The press seek them everywhere
Why are they hiding not showing their face ?
Why did they come to Glasgow East in the first place ?
38

Traquir , Alba,

15/07/2008 01:34:06
36 AM2,Scotland

Hmm, another old favourite Unionista chestnut,
if a nationalist mentions oil just dismiss it
as some irrelevance - it is not significant, the
price is too high, the price is too low,
the stuff is running out, ....

I must admire your skills though you have clearly
mastered the guide on how to "Preserve The Union",
you must be almost at Grand Master level by now,
or perhaps you are in fact the creator of
the guide ?

see - tinyurl.com/5ncw8z

I wonder if you really mean good night this time ?
Also it was interesting to note that the last
time we had a discussion on the topic of
establishing a "level playing field" you also
quickly ran away - which interestingly is
one of the top recommended tactics in the guide
on how to the "Preserve The Union". Congratulations
again on mastering the guide to such an expert level.

Saor Alba
39

,

15/07/2008 01:38:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
40

Iainbroch,

Moary 15/07/2008 01:38:59
I see Bendy Dougie Wendy has been rumbled again!Intersting article on rags to riches and how Liebaah really cares about all those poor Africans!
41

Iainbroch,

Moary 15/07/2008 01:42:01
I am beginning to think that Liebaaah are nothing more than Ferengi!
42

Maisie from Morningside,

15/07/2008 02:00:22
The real problem for Labour is that the SNP is putting forward policies that the Labour Party would if it had not turned Thatcherite.
43

,

15/07/2008 02:00:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
44

Ewan Kerr - Juans brother banned for no reason,

15/07/2008 02:03:56
Anybody fancy proving the Scotsman as biased, vindictive against posters and completely against human rigfhts of free speach?

Thinking of consulting a lawyer about the Hootsmon comments policy in relation to freedom of speach.

I am sure a number of posters would appreciate a class action to show what we all know.

I may consult the Govan Law Centre......
45

frank mcbride,

lusitania 15/07/2008 02:10:15
#36, AM2.

1. Oil at it's Jan. 2008 levels produce a Scottish Budget surplus of £4.4bn.

2. Could our National finances be in a worse state?

3. At $98/barrel, Scotland would have a Budget surplus of +/-£3bn.

AM2, why, oh why, do you try to defend the indefensible with your questionable statistics?
46

FrancesP,

15/07/2008 02:15:00
"A Labour spokesman said...'John Mason (the SNP candidate) is not allowed to speak out in this campaign'."

REALLY? Thank heavens we've got 'Labour spokespeople' to point these things out to us. It would never have occurred to me in a million years that John Mason had to give his SNP minders the slip to take part in that extended Newsnight Scotland interview last night, but now I know.
47

Edward,

15/07/2008 02:45:18
BBC's Newsnight Scotland had an interview with John Mason, the SNP Candidate
Glen Campbell wasted so much time going around and around trying to trip up John Mason that it just descended into a yawn - Thanks Glen!
Instead on asking about various subjects, Glen got his needle stuck on 'break up of the uk' and knife crime, which as John Mason pointed out is actually a devolved matter, so Glen retorts to the 'So whats the point of going to Westminster' question
48

Traquir , Alba,

15/07/2008 03:36:16
The Labour Circus just goes from farce to
farce. From the London Times :

"It must rank as one of the more bizarre by-election tactics of recent times. Labour Cabinet ministers are campaigning in the crucial by-election battle in Glasgow East - but the party does not want anyone to know they are there."

One Labour MP, who did not know of the visits until told of them by The Times, said: “I agree it looks a bit strange. Maybe they realise that Harriet is a bit twee for folk up here and that she would only have annoyed people if they'd known she was here.
So they sent her to what you might call a bijou part of the constituency to protect her."

"As far as Des Browne is concerned maybe you would have invited a lot of shouting and bawling about Iraq and Afghanistan by telling people."

see - tinyurl.com/6ndfdc

This is just getting embarrassing - senior Labour
ministers skulking around Glasgow East
too afraid to face the people. Perhaps
they are going around in disguise also - false moustache, dark glasses and a rain coat :)
Now their game is up and a new sport has just been
unleashed "spot the minister" and it looks like
all of the media will be in on it - I wonder
what the prize will be a £500,000 David Marshall
style all expenses home office or perhaps
a one million £ Maggie Curran style luxury
house in one of Glasgow's most prestigious areas ?


49

Dougie Douglas,

Brisbane 15/07/2008 04:43:42
What a peach from AM2
"
AM2,Scotland,UK 15/07/2008 01:23:05
Traquir

Actually, three more quick facts before I go, because I notice that – like John Mason – you seem to place oil at the centre of your independence argument.

1. Average UK oil production in January 2008 was 1.2m barrels per day compared to the 1999 peak of 2.7m barrels per day

2. Last month, the Institute for Fiscal Studies debunked another SNP oil myth by warning that “it is far from clear that there will be a net gain to the public finances” from higher oil prices.

3. Then this month, investment bank Lehman Brothers predicted that, as OPEC increases its supply and the slowing global economy squeezes demand, the price of crude will fall back to about $93 a barrel next year"

LOL - what desperation

Make your mind up - if oil prices are going to go down (3) surely that would mean that revenue would increase (2).

What utter nonsense. Oil pricing is going one place.

Up

Up

Up more

$200 a barrel - no problem.

10 years time - $400?

The people of Scotland blew it in the 70's because they swallowed the lies, they have another chance now - if they don't swallow the massive lies pushed forward by AM2 and his ilk.
50

TommyKaye,

UK 15/07/2008 04:45:04
sh AM2 - Lehman Brothers eh, wow tel me would this be the same bank that is going to collapse in the next month or so?

Good to see you are using really good research though I would suggest you try to use a better bank like Goldman Sachs or Morgan Stanley who expect US$150 to US$200 a barrel.

Lehmans! a ha ha ha shAM2 you are such a parochial amateur better to just snipe at people as if you want serious debate we will blow you out of the water To be frank I think you have peaked already about a year ago I think - face it sonny you contribute nothing to the debate.
51

Boy Wonder,

15/07/2008 06:27:12
I can see a new TV prog coming out of this. The Secret Election! Maybe RTD can write it?
52

walter,

15/07/2008 07:10:53
Angus Robertson, the SNP's Westminster leader, said: "First, Labour are so short of activists they are ordering MPs from outwith Scotland to prop up their campaign.
I do not know the mentality or IQ of Angus Robertson but I am sure that all these MPs represent Scottish constituencies.
Des Browne, Kilmarnock and Loudoun
Douglas Alexander, Paisley and Renfrewshire South
David Cairns, Greenock and Inverclyde
Jim Murphy, East Renfrewshire
53

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

15/07/2008 07:24:11
#46 £4.4 billion sounds great until you realise that Norway has a surplus of £44 million in the current year.

The reason for this difference is not only the higher taxes and lower public expenditure that the Norwegians have but also the fact that they still have a substantial stake in the extraction of North Sea Oil through the state-owned Statoil.

Unless there were a radical overhaul in fiscal policy in Scotland as well as a major restructuring of the oil industry any talk of building up a petroleum fund on par with Norway's is pure fantasy.
54

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

15/07/2008 07:32:14
#39 Actually Traquair - there are also some Nats who recognise that there are problems with the "It's Scotland's oil" approach - it may work politically for short-term gain but as a long-term strategy is flawed. Some have argued that the SNP should be pushing the idea that it is possible to have a vibrant Scottish economy without relying on North sea Oil.

Whether or not independence happens I personally believe that we have to restructure the Scottish Economy to make it less reliant on oil, the public sector and public finances.
55

Jimmy the Pie,

15/07/2008 07:33:20
Just read an article in the Times about Broon's new nuclear power stations. Found this in the comments section.

Seems the natives are getting restless

"The Planning Bill which will build the nuclear power stations is only relevant to England. It does not apply to Scotland - and although in theory it applies to Wales, because of the fear of upsetting Plaid, won't be implemented there, or indeed in Kirkcaldy. Time for an English Parliament."
56

Jimmy the Pie,

15/07/2008 07:36:23
#53 walter,

They won't be representing Scottish constituencies much longer!!!!!
57

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 15/07/2008 07:39:17
Why should any Glasgow East Ender vote Labour? But then why should any of them vote SNP? What practical policies have the nats to put in place after a victory, that can't be put in place today? I suspect none. 'Better the devil you know' will be the predominant motive evidenced by these voters.

(Glad to see AM2 back and on form).
58

,

15/07/2008 07:43:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
59

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 15/07/2008 07:44:02
It's pure fantasy if we the people don't allow it to happen. Continuing to vote Labour or Tory will guarantee it won't. How can an oil fund NOT work here if it works in Norway? Typical unionist arrogance & froth.
60

,

15/07/2008 07:44:30
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
61

Big Red,

Aberdeen 15/07/2008 07:48:30
By all accounts Glasgow East is swarming with SNP activists who are turning up in their droves to help.

On the other hand, there's narey a Labour activist to be seen and the party are resorting to using MP's to do the nitty gritty work like handing out leaflets etc.

How embarrassing. Labour can't even drum up support in one of it's strongholds.


62

eric,

lothian 15/07/2008 08:00:11
The unionists arent fighting for the union.as its well gone .its just digging in heels holding onto poverty with their nails to save face.they just think they have the god given right to govern.no matter what the result snp are winners.Roll on general, England will have the last say.
63

jacquesmac,

In a vacuum 15/07/2008 08:00:50
If the "accused" were actually in Glasgow East, they were probably kept apart from the Great Unwashed, the journos I mean, for their own good.

All the SAS and SBS are deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq so could not be avaiable for close protection dusties and 50 or so boys in blue around the "accused" would suggest to the "Great Unwashed" that arrests were imminent on expenses fiddles, oh sorry home office expenses errors.
64

,

15/07/2008 08:02:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
65

sam the god,

15/07/2008 08:10:01
If the constituents of Glasgow East vote in new liebour they deserve everything they get but it will have a direct knock on effect to the rest of the country as Maggie broon will think he has carte blanche to carry on as he is doing just now. The constituents of Glasgow East have basically got the future of the Country in their hands vote for anyone but new liebour for the sake of the country.
66

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 15/07/2008 08:10:19
It seems that AM2 not only is Scotlands foremost Polling Expert but he fancies himself as an Oil Analyst.

AM2 said:
"Traquir

Actually, three more quick facts before I go, because I notice that – like John Mason – you seem to place oil at the centre of your independence argument.

1. Average UK oil production in January 2008 was 1.2m barrels per day compared to the 1999 peak of 2.7m barrels per day."

BP in there World Energy Report released in June puts UK Oil production at 1.63 Million Barrells per day in 2007 a 2% increase over 2006 production.

"2. Last month, the Institute for Fiscal Studies debunked another SNP oil myth by warning that “it is far from clear that there will be a net gain to the public finances” from higher oil prices."

Considering that Oil company Profits generated 9.9 Billion in Tax Revenue in 2007 and is expected to reach 12.2 Billion in 2008 I find that argument rather wanting.

"3. Then this month, investment bank Lehman Brothers predicted that, as OPEC increases its supply and the slowing global economy squeezes demand, the price of crude will fall back to about $93 a barrel next year."

Well if Lehman new what they where doing they would not be in such financial trouble.

According to the International Energy Agencies Medium Term Oil Market Report released last week Global Oil Demand will grow 2.2% per annum (1.9 MBD) between now and 2012.

They predict that supply will grow by 1.2% per annum (1.03 MBD) between now and 2012. You will not see Oil below $100 per Barrell any time in the next 5 years.

"Goodnight!"

Goodnight AM2,
67

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

15/07/2008 08:19:41
#60 Richard replies in his usual style without actually adressing the issue. The point I was making (and have done before) is that unless there is radical rethinking of economic policies then any thought of building up an oil fund on par with Norway's is pure pie in the sky - that's true whether or not independence happens.

Norway has a substantially higher surplus becasue of its substantial income from Statoil and becuase of its higher taxes and lower government expenditure. Scotland, whether in or out of the union cannot hope to achieve such a fund with our present surplus unless there is a radical alteration of fiscal policy, restructuring of the Scottish economy and involvement by the Scottish government not only in the distribution of oil but also its extraction.
68

jacquesmac,

Still in a vacuum 15/07/2008 08:26:37
#64

Or that former MP Marshall had been found
69

Number 6,

Germany 15/07/2008 08:38:28
So Labour back to slithering about in the Shadows , offering no visible support to their last resort Candidate. The compulsive liar Curran. She who has lived "All her life" in the East end, apart from now.

How ironic that as Labour face political annihilation in Englandshire they are still alive and lying in "One of the most deprived areas of Europe".

They and their supporters must be so proud of that legacy.
70

,

15/07/2008 08:44:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
71

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 15/07/2008 08:48:04
#68 Federalist

"Norway has a substantially higher surplus becasue of its substantial income from Statoil and becuase of its higher taxes and lower government expenditure. Scotland, whether in or out of the union cannot hope to achieve such a fund with our present surplus unless there is a radical alteration of fiscal policy, restructuring of the Scottish economy and involvement by the Scottish government not only in the distribution of oil but also its extraction."

Utter nonsense, given that the UK taxes Oil Company Profits at twice the Normal Rate (52%) then their is absolutely now need to radically overhaul anything.

It is like having a 52% stake in every oil company operating in the UK. It came to 9.9 Billion Pounds in 2007 and is expected to reach 12.2 Billion Pounds in 2008. More than enough to start an Oil Fund.
72

,

15/07/2008 08:50:04
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
73

jacquesmac,

15/07/2008 08:53:47
Nice one Alberto

Stealth Taxes
Stealth MPs

Hidden Taxes
Hidden MPs


Lying Taxes
Lying MPs

Thieving MPs
The Jail!
74

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 15/07/2008 08:55:57
Just a word or two on the recent poll and the misrepresentation of the result in recent articles, here and on the Scotsman.

As ratzo pointed out on the Herald's "Brown denies he is dodging Glasgow Election" thread:

"The actual votes were :
Labour - 131, SNP - 124, Conservative 29, Liberal 10, Other 10.
Which translates to 43.23% Labour and 40.92% SNP"

I would like to make some observations of my own (if you will bear with me).

For a poll with a sample size of 500, the likely margin of error is about 4.5%.

To get the required +/-3% the sample needs to be about 1,000 and for a margin of error of 1.5% the sample size needs to be about 4,000. Bear in mind these margins apply only to the proportion of the sample favouring a particular candidate (for example if 33% of respondents say they will vote for Mason and the poll has a margin of error of +/- 4.5%, this means that the percentage of support for him could range from 28.5% to 37.5%).

It is a common mistake for newspapers to report the margin of error when comparing the LEAD one candidate has over another. When doing this, the margin of error is in fact greater than 4.5% (a typical multiplier being 1.7 x the overall margin of error). So 4.5% x 1.7 = 7.7%.

So to summarise, a poll of this type with a sample size of 500 will produce a margin of error of 4.5% when reporting the proportion supporting a particular candidate. When comparing the lead of one over another (as is happening here) the error rises to 7.7%.

Incidently, the way the pollster treats "non-respondents" is critical. Trying to assign a non-repondent's view to any particular candidate is a step into the unknown. The methodology used here seems deeply flawed, as has been pointed out on other threads.

My prediction, looking at the recent trends is a victory for the SNP with a majority of 2,500.
75

,

15/07/2008 09:03:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
76

BIG EYE,

Paisley 15/07/2008 09:09:22
I remember getting 11/2 AGAINST Jim Sillars in the last week before the Govan result so the bookies seem ripe for the taking yet again.

The ICM poll has already been devalued as inaccurate and the feeling on the ground is that a very big swing is being achieved by the SNP.

I know the results from plenty of voters in Glasgow East how many doors have the bookies knocked?

By the way some bookies are limiting the amount you can put on the SNP. I tried to put £500 on yesterday online but the bet was restricted to £200.
77

Linda,

Edinburgh 15/07/2008 09:09:45
AM2 On election expenses what about adding cost of 21 days of anti SNP propaganda from Daily Record.

Also cost of Labour using North of England Call centre and Cramlington Direct Marketing company.
78

,

15/07/2008 09:17:47
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
79

Jock 1O7,

15/07/2008 09:19:17
"(the SNP candidate] is not allowed to speak out in this campaign. Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon speak on his behalf."

This would make sense. On Sunday, he referred to embryonic research as "experimenting on babies". Can this man be trusted even to dress himself without minders?
80

Wynn,

CLYDESDALE 15/07/2008 09:19:50
Jacquesmac... nice one. Nice.
Butgetting back to the article "so the press wouldn't ask awkward questions" is only the top layer of the story. If the Scottish broadsheets were up to the professionalism they grease themselves with ,they'd copy ACPO and make a friend in every street so the politicians couldn't sneak in without the press knowing.. That way the politicians couldn't escape having the deadliest questions reported, not those asked by the press, but those asked by the public. Simple questions from simple folks ...they dread them and DON"T want them reported.
a classic example was when Blair was stopped dead by the lady's NHS question and I remember one of the few occasions when Thatcher too was stopped in her tracks, Belgrano-time, again by an ordinary lady.
81

john z,

edinburgh 15/07/2008 09:32:16
It really is a sad reflection of Journalism in the whole of the UK, but especially Scotland, that all these senior government figures can come to Glasgow East and not one of the journalists had his ear to the ground.

Every political Journalist covering this story should be sacked for gross incompetence/ corruption.

LLabour really should stop getting so excited about 'winning' this seat, I mean for heavens sake, its one of Labours safer seats. I just hope the people of Glasgow East see through the Labour lies, and give them a right good Electoral kicking. For the last ten years, the Labour government have blatantly ignored Glasgow East as it is a 'safe' Labour seat. Only when the electorate of Glasgow East make this an unsafe seat for any party, will they get the investment they deserve.

People of Glasgow East, if you re-elect Labour, you will Never see a cabinet minister again. This is your one in a lifetime chane to make a difference.
82

bluehead,

edinburgh 15/07/2008 09:37:57
there is nothing secret about labour' for it is quite clear, they can be summed up in one word
Useless!!!!
83

Cauchy Riemann,

Wales 15/07/2008 09:41:05
I think Labour will win this seat. It is such a safe seat for them that the mere contemplation that they could lose it is unbelievable and shows the trouble Labour are in.


84

All Politicians are the same,

Scotland 15/07/2008 09:42:09
#59

Are you John Mason? Come on the man is typical of the lightweight thick councillor type politicians that we get in Scotland. If you are any good you do not become a councillor. PS the rest aren't much better, the reason salmond makes them look stupid is he learnt his game at Westminster debating world issues not whether the bin men should move their round from Monday to Wednesday.
85

Talorthane,

15/07/2008 09:44:06
5 Traquir , Alba

The earlier poll in the Telegraph was also a bit dubious.

This is the Scottish poll that showed SNP with a 4% lead on Labour and where 49% wanted John Mason to win.

There was then a discrepancy on the issue of independence between what the Telepgraph reported on theior web edition and what the SNP had on their website.

It turns out that the SNP got the information from the printed edition of the Telegraph. So they were saying one thing online and another thing in print.

I think it's all headed in one direction, and after John Mason's performance on Newsnight last night, I think he's going to win.
86

Border Thistle,

north of Hawick 15/07/2008 09:44:22
68 The Federalist. Norway would not have been able to build up an oil fund if it had opted for Federal status with Sweden instead of going for full Independence. It is obvious that only with full sovereign independence can Scotland benefit fully from the natural resources of our land.
87

Jock MacTamson 2,

Highlands 15/07/2008 09:45:32
#84 Cauchy

I would agree they will most likely win this seat but the real shock is how close will it get.

Are there no safe labour seats in Scotland ?

If they the SNP win this by-election I will be delighted.

88

Talorthane,

15/07/2008 09:48:20
7 AM2,Scotland,UK

"Ever heard of poll weighting? ICM weight their samples to ensure that they as representative as possible of gender, age, working status, social class, past votes and turnout likelihood."

But one fo the problems in the weighting being used is in past voting intentions for Westminster.

As there has been such a significant change in voting intentions for Westminster, the results of even two years ago are redundant.

Weighting on this basis means that the polls fundamentally flawed.

For example, the Telegraph poll that showed independence lagging 12% behind support for the union was based on a poll that was weighted to ensure that there were more that twoce and many Labour voters than for the SNP.

If this was corrected to represent the shioft in voting intentions, it would not only have shown that support for independence was in the lead but that it almost had a majority.
89

Auckland Arab2,

15/07/2008 09:48:56
Reading the above you might be led to believe that the SNP have to win this seat. Well they don't - this is Liebour's 3RD safest seat in Scotland. If Liebour can't hold on to that they face a wipe out in the next General Election. Curran will scrape in with a low turnout and a big but not big enough swing to the SNP. Frankly it does not matter because in 2 years time Scotland will be faced with a stark choice: 10 - 20 years of Tory rule or independence. Voting Liebour will be like spoiling your ballot paper. The By election is interesting only in so far as it would be interesting to see if Brown could hang on if they lose. No doubt Liebour will claim this as some great victory, great revival but the intelligent will see through this. Liebour are finished and are doomed to years of infighting as the left tries to re-establish control over the party. They haven't gone away the looney left, they just wear flasher suits these days and they are waiting for revenge on the Blair Gang.
90

Miss H,

15/07/2008 09:48:58
I said this to a couple of people who didn't believe me.

They are using them to do the activists' work because they don't have enough activists.

91

Alan B,

15/07/2008 09:49:21
#54 and 55 The Federalist

Scotland will not have an oil fund on a par with Norway as we have squandered oil revenue for the last 30yrs. What we can do is have something starting now.

In regard to ur point about restructuring the scottish economy i do not think the snp would disagree. Salmonds target is to transform scotland from a low growth economy that we have seen in the last 30yrs and labour have done little to transform, to a high growth economy matching the best in europe. ie match the small nations known as the arc of prosperity that have averaged growth just under 4% over the last decade to our roughly 2% growth.

The point about oil is without it scotland would have large deficits due to economic mismanagement over the last 30yrs and more within the union. As such without u really should change this situation go through the pain of structural change to sort out this economic mess. Without the transition can be made easier. What is not acceptable is to keep on squandering oil so in 30yrs when it is no longer the source of revenue that it is now, we have nothing to fall back on.

You are correct about needing to restructure our economy to a fast growing one something the snp leadership want to do. The problem at the moment is the scottish parliament do not have the powers to address our economic problems. We also have had a labour government whose smart successful scotland so called economic policy has failed. Even wendy slagged it off and she was the brains :) behind it.

Without powers over fiscal policy we cannot even start the debate about how we should structure the scottish economy.

We also need an independence assessment of the impact of scotland adopting the euro. We have the ridiculous situation of labour and the lib dems in scotland apparrently supporting the euro in principle but not willing to argue fo