Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


SNP in debt after outspending Labour

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: 31 July 2008
THE SNP spent in excess of £1 million more on campaigning than Labour last year, it was revealed yesterday.
Details of the parties' accounts for 2007, published by the Electoral Commission, showed that the SNP spent £1,676,223 on campaigns last year. That compares with the £638,014 Labour in Scotland spent on its campaign.

The SNP accounts showed th
e party's income last year was £2,562,970. But it spent more than that, with expenditure amounting to £2,803,560 – leaving the Nationalists with a deficit of £240,590.

The Labour Party across the UK cut its debt by more than £6 million to £18.9 million last year. Labour made a £7.51 million operating surplus last year against an £814,000 deficit in 2006.

Jack Dromey, Labour's treasurer, said the party had shown "a new discipline of approach" and a determination to "live within its means".

The Conservative Party reduced the amount it owed from £9 million to £7.75 million, while the Lib Dems ended the year £1.3 million in the black.

The Tories recorded a £1.57 million surplus, down from £4.2 million. The Lib Dems recorded an operating deficit of £366,677, compared with a surplus of £1.18 million in 2006.

The commission's chief executive, Peter Wardle, said inconsistency between the parties' presentation of their accounts made comparisons difficult.

He said: "The commission is consulting on prescribing regulations that will set out how accounts must be presented with more consistency and transparency."

The accounts for the SNP also showed the party's membership in 2007 was 13,944 – an increase of almost 50 per cent from 2003, when it was 9,450.





Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 31 July 2008 1:10 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

,

31/07/2008 02:49:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
2

Fanling,

Switzerland 31/07/2008 02:54:14
#1
Just like your spelling and general propagandist twaddle.
3

Matt there,

somewhere 31/07/2008 02:56:50
Another none story. If you read the headline it looks as if the SNP were in more debt than Labour. And that is not true.

SNP deficit £240,590.
Labour deficit £18,900,000.

Oops.
4

,

31/07/2008 03:47:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

Snuffy Ivy,

Somewhere else 31/07/2008 03:47:14
Not a problem: Scots supporting a Scottish government should never be a problem. Send in your donation folks!
6

democracy,

Scottish Borders 31/07/2008 04:03:25
#4 Um, Your comment means nothing in the scheme of things, unless of course you are a Tory or Lib/Dum!
YAWN...........zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.............zzzzzzzzz
7

democracy,

Scottish Borders 31/07/2008 04:27:11
#4 Um, says "The SNP have been exposed time and again as being as bad, incompetant and corrupt as Labour."

Is he or she actually implying that either the Tories or Lib/Dums would be good,competent and non-corrupt?

Oh dear, what a naive politically inept thinker!!!
8

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 05:24:48
Honors for sale anyone......order of the snp thistle.......or snp saltire prize for benevolence (no insult to the flag intended)......or alexs booby prize......or the laird of summat or other title.....C.O.D ££££££££££££££
9

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 31/07/2008 06:17:52
Interesting how different sources put a different spin on this issue.The Herald headline today emphasises that the SNP spent most during last years campaign.The emphasis is that for the first time,the SNP was not outspent by labour.It also focuses on a growing membership and increased revenue.On the whole a positive asessment,unlike this article that focuses on the negative and buries the good news in one sentence at the end.A perfect example of the power of journalists to shape public perception.There have been many examples recently of this.The classic was the report on the first opinion poll held during the Glasgow East by election.One newspaper headline indicated that the poll showed that Labour would win,while another sauggested that the poll showed a collapse in Labour support.I guess that we need to learn to take newspaper reports with a "pinch of salt" and form our own conclusions.



10

Teamdroid,

31/07/2008 06:41:31
Suomi in Salo - you live in a country of 5 million people, correct? I've been trying to find out about the circulation figures of your national main newspapers. Would Helsingen Sanomat be the main one, selling over 400,000 copies daily?
Compare that with the Scotsman barely selling 50,000 copies, and you'll understand just how respected it is in Scotland :-)
11

Jimmy Le Pie,

31/07/2008 07:05:28
Join the SNP at www.snp.org

Anything you can afford from £1/month.

Go on you know it makes good sense.
12

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 31/07/2008 07:14:36
Um, just accept it - Liebore are finished.

Hootsmon, ditto.
13

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 07:24:17
#9 suomi(bill)

here is ypur own nations newspapers go there where you belong bye! bye!


http://www.hs.fi/
14

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 31/07/2008 07:27:07
Yes #10 Teamdroid,the Helsingen Sanomat has a good circulation.I take your point about the decline in the popularity of the Scotsman.You would think that would motivate the owner to aim for higher standards of Journalism.For example,the underlying issue in this article is about the funding of political campaigns.The days when running a few jumble sales and a constituency campaign on a £1000 are long gone.To win you need to spend and spend.This poses a problem for some parties and perhaps there is a need to cap electoral spending.Even that would not create a level playing field unless the media were neutral.

There are some very goodjournalists that are very professional and balanced but there is a lot of mediocre reporting.Since the journalist writing this article missed the underlying theme,I wonder whether she was too lazy to develop the article,or whether content was prescibed by the owner? My anarchist friends tell me that there is no such thing as freedom of the press and there is a lot of anecdotal evidence to support that assumption.I recall talking to SUN journalists at an SNP conference in Inverness.I discovered that they did not necessarily believe much of what they wrote about political issues.I guess,like all of us,they have bills to pay and dpend on the pay cheque.I would be very interested to know whether Katrine Bussy "buys" everything that she wrote here.This question is the very reason why the SNP and other political parties spend large amounts of money in an attempt to win votes.
15

Suomi,

Salo,Finland 31/07/2008 07:49:45
Thanks Nikostratos #13,I know the Finnish newspapers.However,my nation is Scotland and for that reason I also read the Scottish newspapers.I need to keep up on developments at home because I will be returning once the working life finishes here.

These comment sites can be very informative providing people respect other points of view. I try to scan the comments most days.Unfortunately I need to go and do some work now.
16

kt mcallan,

scotland 31/07/2008 07:50:02
Thank God the SNP did spend on winning the election.Now we have a competent government working really hard for the PEOPLE OF SCOTLAND, which is something liebour never did. The SNP debt is NOTHING compared to the liebour debt, so what exactly is the POINT of this "story" please?
17

Nebulous,

Aberdeen 31/07/2008 08:05:24
My impression from the campaign last year was that spending was tightly controlled and that Labour did spend more. The gap was probably smaller than it has been in the past. We tried to make every pound count though.

It's impossible to say what happened because Labour clearly get some support from over the border, which would not reflect in their accounts. Nowhere does the article substantiate the headline - Being in debt and a one-off deficit in election year are not the same thing! It would have been helpful if they told us what this 'debt' was given it is in the main headline!
18

yockel,

31/07/2008 08:10:58
Obviously a bankrupt labour party should not be in a position to outspend anyone but how much government spending and labour in england spending is used to shore up labour in Scotland? Take that into consideration and the figures would look a little different then add in the cost to the BBC and the Hootsmon of supporting labour.
19

Daveunderwater,

31/07/2008 08:25:55
Well at least they are not in debt to Westminster
20

GM,

31/07/2008 08:25:57
Lets put this story another way -

"The SNP again showed a greater interest in scotland by spending more on campaigns than labour for the first time. More illustration that labour has turned its back on a traditional heartland, or at least taken it for granted"

"Labour party debt stands at £18.9m which is almost 80 times the SNP's deficit of £0.24m"
21

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 31/07/2008 08:29:21
At one time, the SNP could only dream about spending in excess of a two million pounds on campaigning.

The Nationalists may appear to be spending relatively large sums in pursuit of their goal but in comparison to Labour, Conservatives, and even Lib-Dem Party, the overall budget, and deficit, is still very modest.

Imagine, if the Nationalists were able to attract multi-million donations like the Tories and Labour?
Such a future possibility must be of great concern to the Scots Unionist parties!

IF, the SNP bubble doesn't burst and its luck holds out then many more crypto-nationalist financiers might well fancy investing larger sums in the party?

22

John S,

31/07/2008 08:37:32
The data from the Electoral Commission also revealed how the grassroot popularity of the Nationalists is growing exponentially with membership rising from just 9458 in 2003 to 13,944 in 2007, an increase of almost 50%.
This, coupled with increased subscription charges, boosted income from membership over the same period from £54,147 to £310,805.
The party's accounts revealed how the average age of an SNP member was 53 with a quarter over 65. Herald 31 July 2008--http://tinyurl.com/687xu7
31 March 2008 SNP membership 14,183.
30 July 2008 SNP membership continues to rise with 250 new members signing up over the recent Glasgow East by-election.
Scottish Labour Party membership in 2007 was 17,000.
23

Number 6,

Germany 31/07/2008 08:51:48
London controlled labour hardly spent anything because
they thought it would be a waste of money. "Why should they have to spend our hard earned bribes on the peasantry. They will vote for us no matter what we do." Or don't do in the case of Scotland.

Once again their sickening arrogance came back to haunt them. 19 million in debt, 19 million !!!!!.

And they want the Scottish people to let them govern our finances. Aye right Labour, you really HAVE lost the plot,haven't you.
24

Sunrise,

Fife 31/07/2008 09:13:33
Labour will have to spend much more than a £1 Million a year in interest payments on their huge dept.

Membership of the Labour Party is way down and the unions will be putting on the pressure for policy changes to continue to “partially” bank roll them;

(Labour/Union people never like to solve problems, they like to keep the recipients of benefit dependent. They even act like this with each other it seems.)

Yes, labour are in a lot of trouble financially. That’s the real story!

Makes me wonder why the headline was all about the SNP finances as they have no real problems at all?

Weird reporting from the Scotsman….
25

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 09:13:54
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/55da9d76-5d7f-11dd-8129-000077b07658.html
26

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 09:14:20
yeah
27

Sunrise,

Fife 31/07/2008 09:20:23
#29 Nikostratos

Good article in the FT. Thanks for the link
28

An Greumach Mor,

Highlands 31/07/2008 09:41:55
So a snap shot of statistics with no historical data leads me to wonder how much the labour party spent in the preceeding years. If it was good I am sure we would have had the information.

Did the SNP spending increase dramatically or did labour spending decrease dramatically? I don't know.

Anyway how do you manage to take yourself seriously as a reporter.

Labour in £18.90 Million of Debt.
Tories in £7.75 Million of Debt
SNP in £0.24 Million of Debt

The figures give a much clearer report than the Headline and article. More shame on you.
29

An Greumach Mor,

Scotland 31/07/2008 10:08:45
Nikostratus

#29 , #30

You seem very pleased with the article in the FT.com talking about Scotland and Scottish people being caught in the past, looking back and generally being pathetic.

Why does this please you ?

30

,

31/07/2008 10:23:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

Scottish 'N British,

31/07/2008 10:24:14
The true Separatist-spin free insight into Scotland's march towards a separate state -

The ruling party wins a by-election with 20% of the actual vote, and records its total membership at less than 14,000.
32

dido-bendigo,

Scotland 31/07/2008 10:27:24
If an individual or company make a donation to a political party, through pure altruism, can they offset it against tax?

I ask as I suspect that windfall tax is looming in (at least segments of) the renewables field. I'm sure the SNP would like to know that their investment is safe and not subject to the Darling grip on matters?
33

,

31/07/2008 10:38:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
34

,

31/07/2008 10:38:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
35

Dandyesque,

Aberdeen 31/07/2008 10:55:40
There appears to be some confusion in the numbers here- I'm no accountant, but there is a very large difference between DEFECIT and DEBT. Debt is the amount you owe overall. Defecit is the difference between expenditure and revenue in one year.
There is nothing in this story (apart from the headline) to indictate the SNP are in debt.

If the SNP spent £1.6M on an election, and ended up with a defecit of £0.24M, you could anticipate an operating profit of £1.36M in a non-election year- ie clearing the deficit within the first quarter of the following financial year.

Obviously, this doesn't account for the fact that donations are likely to be lower in non-election years as well, but still, I doubt the defecit mentioned would be a great cause for concern- in fact it was probably budgeted for.

Non-story.
36

Miss H,

31/07/2008 10:57:13
41 That is correct. It's only a picture of the balance sheet at one particular time. If any political party were not running a deficit in an election year you would have to wonder what was going on.
37

Miss H,

31/07/2008 10:57:50
38 No.
38

Alex Salmond's Briefcase Carrier,

Let me see...Thursday right? 31/07/2008 10:58:20
I'm totally glad to report that the Glasgow by-election has been a break-even, as impromptu donations hve matched the expenditure. As of July 31st 2008 we are in the black, still poor but debt-free.

The SNP tally for the same date is 14,759, sorry S&B.
39

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:02:32
35
40

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:02:51
john
41

Alex Salmond's Briefcase Carrier,

@snp.org 31/07/2008 11:03:04
Ooops! Correct that, is 14,841, thanks Aileen.
42

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:03:09
kay
43

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:03:30
is
44

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:03:48
member
45

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:03:56
of
46

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:04:14
Scottish
47

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:04:57
government’s
48

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:05:08
council
49

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:05:15
of
50

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:05:29
Economic
51

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:05:43
Advisers
52

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 11:05:54
get it
53

Alex Salmond's Briefcase Carrier,

@snp.org 31/07/2008 11:08:39
So what? From some we do exactly the opposite they propose.
54

Alex Salmond's Briefcase Carrier,

@the movies 31/07/2008 11:15:55
http://www.guynews.tv/2008/07/in-bunker-after-glasgow-east-result.html

The SNP Film of the Year.
55

Miss H,

31/07/2008 11:36:54
Nikistratos there is much that I agree with in the article you post:

The surge in the fortunes of the SNP, based on recognition of these economic realities, is associated with a shift from a culture of complaint to a more constructive agenda. The once barely concealed Anglophobia has been suppressed. The demand for unjust enrichment in the slogan “it’s our oil” has at least partly given way to analysis of a more substantive economic question. Why has Scotland’s growth rate not matched that of other small European states in the “arc of prosperity” that stretches from Ireland to Finland?

But Margaret Curran, Labour’s candidate in Glasgow East, offered no sense of this change in mood when she pledged to continue the fight against injustice despite defeat. Outcomes in Glasgow East are indeed unjust, but that injustice is not the fault of multinational companies, the World Trade Organisation, the UK government or other agencies outside Scotland. Scotland’s economic problems, like its opportunities, are of its own making.

A Scottish government cannot protect the country from the vagaries of the global economy and should not try. The need is to develop and exploit the competitive advantages of Scottish businesses on an international scale. If Scotland seems to be drifting towards independence, it is not because of the economic logic of that outcome but because, like Ms Curran, opponents cling to a tradition of Red Clydeside that values heroic failure above pragmatic success.

That is an argument in favour of independence so what point do you think you are making - as a unionist - in drawing our attention to it?
56

Scottish 'N British,

31/07/2008 11:46:35
60

What I want to know is what Salmond has in store for Mason's speech at the H of C - what positive changes are in store following Scottish Labour's years of failure?

Surely this is much more important sniping flicks.
57

Nevsky,

Moscow 31/07/2008 12:14:16
62:

Lets see first (not of course playing down the importance of Mason) what Mr Brown is going to do about a 35% rise in fuel prices first shall we. Slightly more pressing problem for those who cannot afford it don't you think?

58

Publius,

London 31/07/2008 12:22:27
By my reckoning the SNP spent 2.52 pounds for every vote they won in the Scottish elections last year and Labour spent 98 pence per vote. It would seem that the SNP has replaced the Tories as the preferred party of those rich enough to give money to parties.
I wonder whether this will be the same at the UK elections in 2010. The wealthy like to be on the winning side, so it's likely that some of the rich who funded the SNP in 2007 will fund the Tories in 2010.
59

Publius,

London 31/07/2008 12:35:38
#61 Miss H

You've changed your tune. It's only a few weeks since you attacked me on this board for saying that as children we learn to be Anglophobic, but some of us grow out of it. You denied that Anglophobia was part of a Scottish childhood.
Also both you and John Kay are now arguing that Scotland's socialist tradition - 'Red Clydeside' - is part of the economic problem, not the solution. Can we now take it that the SNP has abandoned socialism?
60

Scottish 'N British,

31/07/2008 12:58:20
62

So, not playing down Mason's importance then, as you say, what will his/SNP's contribution to the needs of Glasgow East be?
61

Scottish 'N British,

31/07/2008 12:59:30
66

It gets better - it's a "global problem" now - last week the focus was on Brown.
62

Miss H,

31/07/2008 13:04:48
66 I don't think anglophobia is a part of growing up in Scotland for most children. And as Professor Kay says The surge in the fortunes of the SNP is actually associated with a shift from a culture of complaint to a more constructive agenda - so it is the opposite of the chip on the shoulder mentality which those of us who believe in independence are accused of having. We are the ones who are actually focussed on the future, not obsessed with the past.

Equally while I agree with what he says about the mentality of many Labourites who values heroic failure above pragmatic success that doesn't mean a rejection of collective values. It's just about having a more modern social democratic outlook.
63

Arfur,

31/07/2008 13:07:06
Labour in £18.90 Million of Debt.
Tories in £7.75 Million of Debt
SNP £0.24 Million DEFECIT

Headline: SNP in debt.

FFS Hootsman.
64

,

31/07/2008 13:12:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
65

Sunrise,

Fife 31/07/2008 13:30:02
#61 Miss H,

Yes, I took the same from this article as you did it seems.

Bearing in mind that reporters from down south perhaps don't quite get Scotland totally (why should they), I find often they can see things our own lot often miss (or misinterpret, or misrepresent when they do actually understand what is there to see).

I feel so many of our own journalists are part of the establishment up here and therefore have their vistas stunted by a needing to ‘belong’. Not all are like this but many are.

This Article in the FT is a case in point. I don’t think many people will get the positives here. It is a good piece that hinted at the vision that was needed for the future while highlighting the concerns and prejudices of the past (including his own I feel).

I think most people in Scotland will get this view but that most of the Establishment political party people, including most of our TV and Newspaper reporters will not.

One last point:
It’s a fine thing when the FT can be relied upon to be more balance and have a better perspective on the situation of our nation than Scotland’s National Newspaper.
66

brownlie,

31/07/2008 13:32:48
67 Scottish

Strange question for us unionists to be asking. Surely if Mason visits the constituency once a year it will be a damn sight more than the previous MP appears to have done.
67

Sunrise,

Fife 31/07/2008 13:37:33
#71 G,dundy

Please stop it. You’re embarrassing yourself.
68

CLX,

31/07/2008 13:42:47
Interesting read if you fancy it....

http://www.theherald.co.uk/search/display.var.2413521.0.for_whom_would_independence_be_a_catastrophe.php
69

Scottish 'N British,

31/07/2008 13:49:05
23

SNP "publicists" - here? Neveeerrrrr!!

After all, if the grammar is an indication of what passes for a professional activist, well...

....how do we get a refund?
70

Scottish 'N British,

31/07/2008 13:53:29
73

Not srange at all, quite the opposite. No pointers either to his 'vision for Glasgow East's future', I note...

But then this was the man who has to read his victory speech from scribbled notes... DOH!!

His maiden speech'll be a beauty. Will end up as a hit on YouTube, nae danger.

71

brownlie,

31/07/2008 13:56:15
77 Scottish

No doubt he can point out the good work he carried out as a local councillor and contrast that with the "good work" carried out by our outstanding previous MP.
72

Publius,

31/07/2008 14:14:39
#72 Sunrise

For what it's worth John Kay the author of the article in the FT is a Scot. He was born in Edinburgh. I doubt whether a non-Scot would have Kay's insight into Anglophobia or the rhetoric of Red Clydesiders.
But I think he is mistaken in thinking that the SNP has put Anglophobia and the culture of grievance aside. Alex Salmond wears his mask well, but his followers - especially those who post to this board - sometimes slip.
73

jtdx,

31/07/2008 14:15:03
You can actually look at the accounts at the electoral commissions website.

SNP member deficit = -584,814 (31st Dec 2007)
Scottish Labour party member funds = +328,900
Scottish Lib Dems Deficit = -22,131

*shrug* no idea if it means anything.

ps. if you search for "scotland" in the accounts section then "LIberal Democrats in England" comes higher than "Labour Party - Scottish Labour Party", and indeed much higher than "Liberal Democrats Scotland". I guess all government IT systems work as well as each other!

74

Publius,

London 31/07/2008 14:16:43
#72 Sunrise

P.S. Forget visions. Politicians' visions always turn out into nightmares for everyone else.
75

Publius,

London 31/07/2008 14:20:59
#78 brownlie

I wish John Mason well, but his having being a councillor is not a good sign. Scotland doesn't need any more councillors c.u.m MPs/MSPs.

P.S. Sorry about the dots in c.u.m. The Scotsman's computer won't process this word without the dots! It must have a very dirty mind.
76

,

31/07/2008 14:29:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
77

Scottish 'N British,

31/07/2008 14:37:42
78

So you're saying the people of Glasgow East can look forward to unemployment falling even further and more affordable housing and school building?

When's this going to happen?
78

A Clamper,

Edinburgh 31/07/2008 14:41:25
Um - face facts - Labour are finished and Scotlands' future is Independent.
79

Nevsky,

Moscow 31/07/2008 14:45:42
78:

Don't believe he said that at all, where did you get that reading.

At least they wll get an honest MP who will work for them and not a corrupt, useless waste of space who left some of the constituents the most deprived in Europe!

You really expect the SNP to sort out the problems of Glasgow East in a week, i think it ll take slightly longer to sort out the mess Labour has left it in after 60 years don't you?
80

Nevsky,

Moscow 31/07/2008 14:51:14
78:

Why are Labour not doing it..they are in power in Westminster aren't they? How about reduction in fuel charges for a start and re-allocation of oil money so Scotland can build the new schools and infrastructure in Glasgow East? Any thoughts?

81

Scottish 'N British,

31/07/2008 15:05:34
86

Once again Separatists found backsliding on promises.

The by-election message from the SNP was that Scottish Labour had failed them, and that a vote for Mason would change things for the better.

We don't expect to see massive changes within a week, but if his message that the SNP would do better was more than mere rhetoric, then he must have some plan of acion, surely?

Then let's hear it.

Or is the plan more of the same? Bit if that is the case, shouldn't the SNP/Mason have been morally obliged to highlight that to voters instead of offering them Utopia?

82

Miss H,

31/07/2008 15:06:50
83 What is really stupid is any SNP supporter replying to you.

Anybody who says ‘The SNP have been exposed time and again as being as bad, incompetant and corrupt as Labour’ is just trying to provoke a reaction.

You know what you are saying is not true.

The SNP is not as bad as Labour in any respect. In every respect they are better.

83

,

31/07/2008 15:17:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
84

Scottish 'N British,

31/07/2008 15:19:12
89

Some of the things alleged

That dodgy dossier of a manifesto "Broken Promises"
Timing of support for Islamfest
Scottish Futures Trust
Second homes in Edinburgh

Then there was the "John Lewis list" - blamed on Labour, which only the fool would suggest the rest (including SNP) hasn't/wouldn't abuse....

Then there were the allegations over

Aviemore
Aberdeenshire
Large donors and transport policy



People in glass houses, and all that...

85

,

31/07/2008 15:27:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
86

,

31/07/2008 15:31:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
87

Sunrise,

Fife 31/07/2008 15:45:14
#97 Publius

I see where your coming from but...

1) John Kay still provides an outside perspective that is valuable even if his local knowledge dates back to his time at Edinburgh Uni in the 70s. That and the fact that he is learned man.

BTW, I highly recommend his book "The Truth About Markets"

2) I do not for one minute think that some of the rantings in this forum are reprehensive of either labour or the SNP supporters in general. Most voters are reasonable people and no fools, even if some politicians treat them as such

3) Although I feel Mr Salmond is not perfect, I do believe him to be clever, in every sense of the word. I also believe that many Labour people are in general either not clever or don’t allow themselves to be seen to be clever. Sad!
88

Sunrise,

Fife 31/07/2008 15:51:09
#81 Publius

Please cheer up.
Not all people, even all our politicans, are bad.
Some of them do good.

And..... everbody needs a vision.

89

,

31/07/2008 16:08:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
90

Miss H,

31/07/2008 17:11:23
91 Posting allegations is pointless. Post facts.

For example when Angus MacNeil reported the Labour Party to the polis for selling peerages he did so on the basis that every donor who had given the Labour party more than £1 million has been given a knighthood or a peerage. That meant that 80 pence in every £1 donated to the Labour party by individuals had come from people who have been rewarded with a peerage.

That's a fact. You can argue that it's all just a coincidence but the facts are as they are.

In contrast what factual evidence that the SNP arew as bad as Labour have you or Um come up with? Hee haw.

Alex Salmond having Sean Connery to dinner? Please. Jack McConnell had him to dinner as well.

Likewise just mentioning Donald Trump doesn't cut it. What are the facts in connection with Donald Trump that prove corruption.
91

McNic,

glasgow 31/07/2008 17:47:04
Why no mention of Coulport????????
92

,

31/07/2008 18:02:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
93

,

31/07/2008 18:44:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
94

,

31/07/2008 18:50:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
95

Nikostratos,

31/07/2008 18:51:13
#101 meths

http://www.thespiderawards.com/AwardsPass/WINNERS-NOMINEES/PRO-advertising/images/The-Five-Sen



and kindly don't say......eh to me
96

kimba,

31/07/2008 19:10:35
107. Oh Meths, did your Mother never teach you manners,you don't say "eh" you say " pardon or excuse me"
97

,

31/07/2008 19:26:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
98

Publius,

London 31/07/2008 19:52:44
#95 Sunrise

I agree most of what you write - but not about visions. Visions and missions and such like things are dangerous in politicians. What we need is politicians who are competent, who can solve problems and get things done. Politicians with visions should be taken away by men in white coats and put in rest homes behind high walls until they regain their sanity!
99

connaughtboy,

stonehaven 31/07/2008 19:57:14
Katrine Bussey, you are not a journalist but a cheap, spin merchant!!
100

Calvinist,

31/07/2008 20:48:33
Not a problem for the SNP. They can always ask that nice tolerant, liberal minded man, Brian Soutar for more money.
101

MoClana,

31/07/2008 21:43:56
Katrine Bussey....theres a name to remember (or not), given the utter Unionist spin put on this non story then we can expect yet more embarrasing nonsense purporting to reflect main stream Scottish opinion.

How and when is the Scotsman going to give up the chase, and actually reflect the true political landscape of Scotland? Its like watching a toothless person trying to chew steak...give in , Independnece is going to happen and its only the Ultra Brits who care to keep the fight going.

Dont you realise how extreme your views are? how ignorant your rational is? YOU are embarrasing your selves!

Mind you it gives everyone else a laugh !

102

Iainbroch,

Moray 31/07/2008 22:34:39
No article on the incredulity in relation to Liebaahs books!The obvious inconsistencies and oh the lack of transparency! Yet the article is almost a swipe exclusively at SNP - No pretence at balance or any analysis - another Unionist "media wHo Re" passing themseleves off as a Journalist?

Soutar is a red herring thrown in by failing toadys. They fail to explian how it is that Soutar has no problem getting his franchises renewed south of the border and indeed winning new ones!

More Cyber Pimp trash with each passing day.I guess Soutar will not be getting a Knighthood though!
103

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 31/07/2008 23:39:23
SNP budget deficit?

No probs, Messrs Hills and Ladbrokes will have paid out more than that following John Mason’s famous victory.

My contribution is already on it’s way to MacDonald Road.

Does Lord Clyde of Shawfield beckon?

Ahh no, just the quiet glow of satisfaction that one more nail has been hammered into the Unionist coffin.

NB
(No Iraqis were harmed in the formulation of this post).
104

Jimmy Le Pie,

31/07/2008 23:44:22
JOIN THE SNP

www.snp.org

From £1/month up to whatever you can afford

Money well spend
105

Jimmy Le Pie,

31/07/2008 23:47:18
Um - various rambling, incoherant posts.

Don't you feel a bit stupid, coming onto this forum and being humiliated every time???
106

Scottish 'N British,

01/08/2008 08:17:10
1119

Wonder if membership is past 15,000 now?

lol
107

aedis,

Glasgow 01/08/2008 14:12:13
tinyurl.com/6f2us9

The real numbers of Labour's Scottish membership are worked out on this website:-

---------

Then there's the collapse in their membership - sitting at 158,868 UK-wide at the end of June this year, compared to 407,000 in 1997 - a drop of 61% in 11 years.

They don't publish Scottish figures, but a population share of their UK figure, assuming Scotland to be 9% of the UK population would give them 14,298 members - the same size as the SNP except that the SNP is increasing in size and Labour is shrinking.

Looking at Labour's Scottish accounts, however, tells a different story - membership and subscription fees for Scotland fell from £123,076 in 2006 to £114,403 in 2007.

That figure includes "Fees received from MPs and MSPs", but that isn't quantified, so we'll have to treat the whole lot as membership income.

Labour's membership fees are £36 a year with a concessionary rate of £12 a year.

If every member paid the full rate there would be 3,178 Labour members in Scotland; if every member paid the concession there would be 9,534 Labour members in Scotland.

The true figure will be somewhere in between (remembering that there will also be an adjustment for MPs and MSPs).

No wonder Labour membership numbers in Scotland are secret.

-----------

It seems to me that Labour Party in Scotland are hiding behind that proportional 9% figure.

A figure of around 3000 would put them roughly on a par with the Scottish Conservatives and Scottish Liberal Democrats!

In which case there are liable to be more nationalists than unionists as members of political parties in Scotland.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


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.