BBC BLOGS - Blether with Brian
« Previous | Main | Next »

Minimal swearing

Brian Taylor | 12:00 UK time, Thursday, 19 May 2011

And with a nod - or, more precisely, three nods - Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond becomes the first first minister with a full working majority.

At the Court of Session in Edinburgh this morning, Mr Salmond swore the relevant oaths which make him first minister of the Scottish executive and keeper of the Scottish Seal.

Actually, in keeping with Scottish legal custom, the swearing was minimalist.

The oaths were read by the Lord President, Lord Hamilton.

The first minister merely nodded in silent, contented acquiescence.

Immediately prior to that, Mr Salmond handed over the Royal Warrant appointing him to office.

It was signed by Her Majesty the Queen in Dublin where she is presently undertaking an historic visit to Ireland.

Historical notes

Simple but solemn, this ceremony finally marks Mr Salmond's accession to majority power in the parliament which will, as he purposes, feature a referendum on independence

Little historical notes on all sides.

Firstly, "Scottish executive". That remains the legal title, as set out in the Scotland Act 1998, and is thus used by the court.

However, the Scotland Bill, presently before Westminster, proposes to change that title to "Scottish government", admitting into law the nomenclature already used in practice.

The newly reconfirmed FM, of course, has a list of other proposed changes to that bill: a list which grows, incrementally, as he steps up the pressure upon the UK government, partly in preparation for the referendum.

Then the Seal. It is the post-Union descendant of the Great Seal of Scotland, the symbol of monarchical authority.

Distinctive status

In the Act of Union (Clause 24 for the enthusiast), it is provided that "from and after the Union, there be One Great Seal for the United Kingdom of Great Britain, which shall be different from the Great Seal now used in either Kingdom." (In the interim, the Great Seal of England was to be used.)

It is provided further that "a Seal in Scotland after the Union be alwayes kept and made use of in all things relating to private Rights or Grants, which have usually passed the Great Seal of Scotland and which only concern Offices, Grants, Commissions, and private Rights within that Kingdom."

It is, in effect, a devolved Seal: subordinate in nature and yet reflecting the distinctive status of Scotland within the union.

The reconfirmed keeper will no doubt conduct those duties assiduously - while, equally eagerly, seeking to alter the constitutional status of Scotland.

Comments

Page 1 of 2

  • Comment number 1.

    Bankers bounuses blog topic on 'the other Scottish site' closed by the BBC after less than a day with only 8 comments allowed (all critical).

    Surely the Scots have bigger balls thasn this???

  • Comment number 2.

    Who continues all this non-value adding establisment tat! Unfortunately there are a minority that continues to have all this waste of time and money to justify their lot in life! 3 x NODs, is that akin to funny handshakes.....

  • Comment number 3.

    Time for change. That's what people want.
    That's what they voted for.
    Time to put that mad dog known as the Tram Project, down.
    -----------------------------
    Tram boss quits
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-13454021
    -----------------------------

    They need to hand over the dosh for the contract -and tell them to take a hike.
    Never darken our doors again. Thankyou. Goodbye.
    Don't call us again, ever. We'll call you.

    If they don't the financial damage to Edinburghs city centre could be incalculable, it's hanging on by its fingernails as it is.
    Another 10 months of chaos would kill the Edinburgh golden goose for good, she's severely beaten and stunned after the previous tram stuff and now we've got this credit crunch piling on the pressure.
    They should have trusted the locals, instead of what are laughingly known as "experts" up here.

    What a mess.
    Time to get yer shovel out Mr Salmond, those Edinburgh voters are in a fickle mood and they're watching.

  • Comment number 4.

    Scottish parliament building [public sector] - late; way over budget.

    Wembley Stadium [quasi-public sector] - late; way over budget.

    Heathrow Airport's terminal 5 [private sector] - on time; within budget.

    So which model was followed for the Edinburgh trams project? No surprise that it is overbudget, and will not deliver what was promised!

    Couldn't believe the discussion on Radio Scotland's "Call Kaye..." yesterday, when the principal supporter of the project expressed the view that it was better to finish a curtailed tram system, because it could serve as a spine and later be added onto. So, not only does he want a tram service whatever the cost, but he fully intends repeatedly returning to ask "Please can I have some more?" to extend it in the future.

    On yer bike.

    Come to think of it, Edinburgh should have invested in a few million bikes, and made them available for free (or nominal fee) to visitors and residents alike - it would have worked out far cheaper,.....

  • Comment number 5.

    3.At 12:47 19th May 2011, Ady

    How much of the £440m has Richard Jeffrey "earned" in his two years? His predesessor quit after two years as well. Were they paid bonuses?

  • Comment number 6.

    I wonder if anyone can tell me where I can see today's swearing in and yesterday's speeches in parliament by Alex, Gray, et al?

  • Comment number 7.

    3 Ady ... Who are the 'they' you fulminate over ??? ... The Contractors, Tie or Embra Coonsil ??? ... My 126 from the immediately previous thread is a hint that 'we' (if I'm right in the assignation of your labels) could be at least in part to blame, by not being good or smart enough in constructing the Contract ... Do such possibilities never cross your mind ??? ...

    History suggests that, as the size of a Project grows, the complexities combine exponentially to derail (as it were) the Plan, often because there was simply not enough thinking done before the action started; hubris ineluctably precedes incipient vertical realignment (this applies equally to caterpillars) ...

  • Comment number 8.

    The "full working majority" is the problem. One of the benefits of the minority government was that SNP had to prepare proposals and bills that would, could and did suffer oppositional if not hostile scrutiny. However the CUP (Combined Unionist Parties) proposals, the Tram, Calman, cheap booze, the Tesco Tax, were not subjected to sufficient scrutiny as the CUP had a full working majority on those and ignored their opposition.

    Let us hope that the (ever changing) leadership of the CUP now swear, privately or publicly, to give honest opposition to today's SNP juggernaut.

  • Comment number 9.

    Scottish parliament building [public sector] - late; way over budget.
    But delivered functional and fit for purpose.

    Wembley Stadium [quasi-public sector] - late; way over budget.
    But delivered functional and fit for purpose.

    Heathrow Airport's terminal 5 [private sector] - on time; within budget.
    Unfit for purpose and international shambles. Still has lost luggage from when it opened and is still a mess.

    There is always more to the story. You can have good, cheap, or on time. Pick one.

    As for the swearing in, well it seems Brenda thinks fully independent Ireland is more important than one of her sovereign lands since she couldn't be bothered to even take a one hour flight to Edinburgh today. She could easily have flown to Edinburgh and back from Dublin for the swearing in of one of her Parliaments and still have proceeded with the state visit. That she didn't speaks volumes about how Scotland is valued in the Union. The Union isn't working.

  • Comment number 10.

    Since Brian seems to want to be pedantic, I presume that his reference to "the Act of Union" is in fact to the two Acts of Union (Scotland's "Union with England Act 1707" following on from the English Parliament's "Union with Scotland Act 1706").

    Also, Brian refers to the "Scottish executive" being enshrined within the terminology of the Scotland Act. Not so; the Scotland Act 1998 (Section 44) concerns itself with the "Scottish Executive" - Each Word Merits A Capital Letter. Similarly, I know of no one who has referenced the "Scottish government" (meaning the institution rather than its function) rather than the "Scottish Government".

    Is the 'Shift' key on Brian taylor's keyboard not working properly? The foregoing follows on from his pre-election move to refer to Wee Eck as the "first minister" rather than the "First Minister".

    Petty politicking or what....

  • Comment number 11.

    Watched Kenny MacAskill being interviewed on RT (Russia Today) (Channel 85 Freeview). He was relaxed and gave a good account of the case for wanting representation in the World's various forums as an Nation State. I pondered on why he came across so well, was it the confidence gained from the election result and/or the interviewer who wasn't as beligerent or dismissive as the UK journalists tend to be thus giving space for his case to be made.
    Also in the current Head of State's speech in Dublin she used a good phrase to describe the UK's relationship with Ireland viz 'firm friends and equal partners'. This seemed good enough to describe our aspirations for our future relationship with England and Wales and Northern Ireland in contrast to the negative southern journalists who believe that we can't have a relationship other than subservience due to size, wealth and intellect.

  • Comment number 12.

  • Comment number 13.

    Brian Taylor is pure dead brilliant, and never makes any mistakes factual, typographical or grammatical.

    (Wonder if that will clear moderation, unlike post no.10, which PROVED that the contrary is the case.)

  • Comment number 14.

    after the Scottish news night debacle. does anybody know what happened to David mcletchie,s live speech.as the program closed early with no explanation, other than technical problems at Dundee.
    leaving me feeling quite bemused!

  • Comment number 15.

    12 MADPIRATEDAD: Thank you.

  • Comment number 16.

    Dear Brian, Can you inveigle the First Minister into a discussion about yon greatest of misnomers, 'Scottish Enterprise', please? I have been trying to find out how their budget divvies up into salaries, consultants salaries, committee members salaries, a multitude of offices, car fleet and expenses, travel, how much cash they invest in Scotland (particularly in SME's) and how many jobs they have created in the last 12 months (not 'saved' or 'protected')? Even with the freedom of information act I can't mange to get top the bottom of this. Personally, I have never known a bigger bunch of warmers. What fine and satisfying views of their colons they must have...

  • Comment number 17.

    "And with a nod - or, more precisely, three nods - Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond becomes the first first minister with a full working majority"

    and

    "and with three nods - Anabella Gouldie, Iain Gray and Tavish Scott resigned enmasse as leaders of their unionist parties"

    Whose got who by the short and curlies now?

    Chortle!

    C McK

  • Comment number 18.

    Miserable excuse for using 'Scottish Executive' - even the official government web site uses 'Scottish Government.'

    Also, why do you continue to use the term 'first minister' instead of 'First Minister'. Try to come to terms with the political reality Brian, there's a good boy. It is noted that you have never had problems with 'Secretary of State for Scotland.'

  • Comment number 19.

    I found Goldie condescending to the other politicians with her matronly school marm Thatcherite camp girl nonsense.

    Not suitable for a professiona politician.

    Fortunately, she was largely ignored by everyone.

    Rennie, a lot of great big enormous small background hiss. LibDems are now pointless true blues.

  • Comment number 20.

    Life Is A Cabaret@13 : Why not put your comment on the "site that must not be named".

    I don't doubt you for a minute.


    I believe "lessons are being learned" from ..............North Korea

  • Comment number 21.

    I agree with R ( post nine ) If we have to kow-tow to Lizzie Saxe-Coburg Gotha ( and why should we?), her horse-loving Majesty could at least have left Phil the Greek at the stables and made the effort - just don't send the "Joke of Rothesay" - that would have been an even bigger insult...

  • Comment number 22.

    I was astonished and not a little annoyed by Aunty Bella's snide and unpleasant little response to Alex yesterday. She reminded Alex that the SNP did not get a majority of votes from the Scottish people. Well strike me down with a lead-filled loofah but how many people in the UK voted for her Lord and Master, Cameron? Even less. She obviously can't deal with the anihilation of her cabal of list MSPs. Sorry Ms Goldie, you are an ex-parrot. Her parting of shot of suggesting Alex was really after a Scottish Republic was low and unworthy.

    Iain Gray on the other hand was refreshingly concilliatory in his speech and he is to be applauded for it, he knows why he lost and is man enough to admit it.

    And Willie Rennie, yes I didn't know who he was until the election, seems to be sitting on a bucketload of snide comments that he can't wait trot out at FM's Questions..to paraphrase wee Wendikins, Bring It On!!! He seems to think that the talking heid, Michael Moore is in charge and thinks that Alex should bow down before him. I think one of the things Alex should press for the abolition of the office of Scottish Secretary. We don't need a Viceroy!!!!

  • Comment number 23.

    After four years of attempting to influence Scottish viewers culminating in spectacular failure on 5th May 2011, I am afraid that most people with even half a brain are not taking you seriously any more.

  • Comment number 24.

    @23 bencruachan

    Were you talking to someone in particular? Brian? To us all? :-)

  • Comment number 25.

    We don't even know if a yes vote would allow us to break away yet.
    Reminds me of the Hungarians when they tried to break away from the Soviet Union.

    ---------------------------------------
    The current bill does not deal with the prospect of a referendum, and Mr Moore will not guarantee that if Scotland does vote yes to independence the Westminster government will consent to its breaking away from the UK.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13458257
    --------------------------------------

    The Irish only got away from the Union after a heck of a struggle.

    Going to be a long road this one...

  • Comment number 26.

    The Lib Dems have shown themselves to be neither Liberal nor Democratic, Moore seems to think he is in charge of Scotlaand and can dictate what we can and cannot have. I have no idea about Willie Rennie but that is no great loss.
    My own local MP Malcolm Bruce had his usual column in one of the local weekly papers where he started off trying to be magnanimous but fell into his usual arrogant snide comments about the SNP, I look forward to the next Westminster election and look forward even more to the people of Gordon giving hime the heave ho too!

  • Comment number 27.

    reincarnation

    Sorry! I should have said "Scottish voters" I was taking to Brian and his employers.

  • Comment number 28.

    Treaty of Union

    Treaty

    "Treaties can be loosely compared to contracts: both are means of willing parties assuming obligations among themselves, and a party to either that fails to live up to their obligations can be held liable under international law."

  • Comment number 29.

    BBC Scottish Election Results 2007 & 2011

    BBC Vote 2007

    Number of seats
    Lab 46
    Con 17

    BBC Vote 2011

    Number of seats
    Lab 37
    Con 15

    My calculation gives:

    Lab 46 - 37 = (-9)…… Not (-7)
    Con 17 - 15 = (-2)….. Not (-5)

    Where the BBC has shown inconsistency are the two following seats:

    Dunfries Result: 2007 Labour - Hold

    Dunfries Result: 2011 Labour - Gain

    Eastwood Result: 2007 Labour - Hold

    Eastwood Result: 2011 Labour - Gain

    Brian, my mate is a ‘conspiracy theorist’ of the first order, whilst I feel that it is merely down to confusion or miscalculation. Please can you clarify so that I can silence his theories!

  • Comment number 30.

    @ 25. At 20:13 19th May 2011, Ady wrote:
    We don't even know if a yes vote would allow us to break away yet.
    Reminds me of the Hungarians when they tried to break away from the Soviet Union.

    ---------------------------------------
    The current bill does not deal with the prospect of a referendum, and Mr Moore will not guarantee that if Scotland does vote yes to independence the Westminster government will consent to its breaking away from the UK.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13458257
    --------------------------------------

    The Irish only got away from the Union after a heck of a struggle.

    Going to be a long road this one...

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    I've just been reading the article too, Ady. It strikes me that Westminster (Tories especially) will be caught by the dilemma of getting rid of Labours most likely way of getting back in Number 10 or explaining to their entire electorate why Scotland is so essential to the "success" of the UK Union.

    Either way they lose all credibility quicker than Clegg breaks promises ;P

  • Comment number 31.

    @25
    The situation reminds me more of the velvet divorce of Czechoslovakia into Slovakia and the Czech Republic. There will be bumps along the road, but in general everything will be pretty amicable. The situation with Ireland was quite, quite different due to the rather charged times that it happened in.

    As for Westminster blocking independence after a successful referendum...oh that would be brilliant. That would be the most optimum outcome. You see that would trigger an automatic UDI which, due to being backed by a successful internal vote, all EU countries would be bound to accept by treaty. It would also mean we could dump any and all national debt on England as well as lawfully seizing all assets (Faslane etc) of the state within Scottish borders. If England accepts the result, we have to negotiate for a degree of national debt to carry, as well as negotiate to see what assets of state we can retain. Those will be hard negotiation at which England will most certainly cheat. I'd much rather they get on their high horse and refuse to accept the vote TBH, it would be cheaper for the resultant independent Scottish state.

  • Comment number 32.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 33.

    Just watched Kenny MacAskill being interviewed on Russia Today. A great interview, the journalist asked some tough questions but listened and allowed Kenny to answer. The result was a good piece of journalism and telly, very critical and informative - which is the point. Take note Paxman, yer style is tedious and infantile.

  • Comment number 34.

    I wonder if anyone can explain to me just why Scotland should share part of the UK national debt?

    We did not cause the debt, that was all Westminster incompetence.
    We never shared in the boom years, our pocket money stayed the same.

    So since we never shared in the good years and the debt is all down to Westminster, just why should we take a share of the debt?

  • Comment number 35.

    to post #18 - bmc875,

    disgraceful isn't it, the independent Scottish judiciary refusing to comply with the new FM's use of 'government' instead of the legal title 'executive', as Brian says it's going to change, but until they do the court has to use the correct term, we don't want the appointment of Alex to be in doubt do we.......?

    to post #9 - R,

    think you'll find the queen will be here to formally open Parliament......

    good post Brian, momentous day with the swearing in of the first majority government's FM, here's hoping for bold, innovative, but above all, wise use of the majority.

  • Comment number 36.

    em dubbieside; how about the RBS and HBOS bail out.....? just one of many reasons.....

    and as for Westminster, we voted for the individual M.P's from Scotland we send there, so it's our problem as much as any other part of the UK....... if we don't like it and don't want to be responsible, we should return a majority of SNP M.P's....we didn't tho.

  • Comment number 37.

    #22 crazyislander

    you might have struck on something, over the talking heid.if we need a secretary of state for Scotland he should be picked from the ruling party of the Scottish parliament to insure impartial negotiations.

    ps anymore on David mcleachi,s speech

  • Comment number 38.

    @36 leithlad
    "em dubbieside; how about the RBS and HBOS bail out.....? just one of many reasons....."

    Please enlighten us ignorant heathens in what you are blethering about!

  • Comment number 39.

    @29 - Due to redrawn boundaries some of the seats were notionally held by parties other than those who had taken them at the previous election.

  • Comment number 40.

    Leithlad

    You mean the bail out that Brown arranged so his incompetence would not mean many thousands of account holders loosing their savings. Just what part did Scotland play in that.

    When RBS paid the largest capital gains tax bill of any company ever in the UK what was Scotlands share of that? When did Halifax move to Scotland?

    Yet more proof that the feeble fifty followed by the feeble forty were just that, feeble.

  • Comment number 41.

    Alex Salmond is no walkover. He is a fighter and has delivered a mighty uppercut to many party leaders. As for Michael Moore, his days are few as The Scottish Office is no longer relevant. We had not heard of 'call me Dave' proposals yet, he is letting Michael Moore take the mighty blow from Salmond. But little does he know, Salmond has some sharp jabs to knock Cameron to the canvass. Cameron will not allow himself to be beaten to a pulp with a Salmond sucker punch, and use anyone available to take it for him.

    Saor Alba.

  • Comment number 42.

    #29, Roll_On_2011, I believe the gains and losses are based on the notional 2007 results under the new boundaries. For instance, Glasgow Southside is shown as an SNP gain because, notionally, it was held by Labour under the new boundaries, even though Nicola Sturgeon has held the real seat for the past four years.

  • Comment number 43.

    I yon Tony Blair is off in the Middle East telling Israel it has to recognise a Palestinian state and working for Palestinian independence, and being backed by Cameron et al too, and yet opposing the same goal of self determination and statehood for Scotland. it seems the great and good of Westminster are all for independence and self determination for everywhere bar Scotland. NIMBYs the lot of them.

  • Comment number 44.

    I wonder if anyone can explain to me just why Scotland should share part of the UK national debt?
    --------------------------------------------

    You get the good bits and you get the bad bits when you have a divorce.

    At least we won't be saddled with invading countries full of swarthy people in the future. There always seems to be an "emergency contingency budget" for them things, which in english means more giant wodges of debt.

    We all owe about $180,000 apiece as far as the national debt is concerned.
    Mainly through the socialist bailout of the banks.
    The car industry, shipbuilding industry, coal industry, aircraft industry, rail industry, machine tool industry etc etc etc all got left to go belly up, but Westminsters pals all work in the financial services sector, so we get to pay for their mess.

    This isn't going to be the easy road with a garden of roses at the end of it as some seem to imagine.
    It's going to be a long hard slog.

    1. Getting out of the Union with all it's baggage
    2. Rebuilding a sustainable financial future

    The longer we wait the worse it's going to get, London is enslaving everyone with amazing levels of debt, we're second only to Ireland if memory serves.
    This debt means an ever increasing upward spiral of taxes as they factor in the repayment of your own personal $180K of debt across a lifetimes work.

    London seems to be hell bent on dragging us into a financial abyss and the sooner we bale out the better, Westminster is riddled with incompetents and financial impropriety and it aint going to get better anytime soon.

    If I had kids, I'd seriously consider emigrating, each individual in your family is about $180 grand better off if they quit the country.

    I just re-read this post...what a pessimist...at least we've got a route out and a shot at turning things around.

    If we don't grab this chance then we deserve everything we get.

  • Comment number 45.

    We need new working practices, to motivate our workforce.
    Germany is now the second biggest exporter of goods in the world, after China.
    We need bosses who understand workers!

    German insurer Munich Re held orgy for salesmen
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-13454160

  • Comment number 46.

    Ady

    What were the good bits? That must have passed me by.

    We gained nothing extra from the so called boom years, so we owe nothing from the bust years, simple.

  • Comment number 47.

    hi dubbieside,

    63% of us in Scotland played a part in that by voting in the last UK election in 2010, more than the 50 or so % that voted this year in the Scottish General election....which we declare to the be the will of the peole - no argument from me on both counts - both the will of the people, however you can't have it both ways, we're just as complicit in the actings of Westminster as we will be included in the actings of Holyrood

    ...as for the profits made by HBOS (registered head office - the Mound Edinburgh) and RBS they're dwarfed by the taxpayer bailout that we ALL contributed to whether we live in Scotland, Wales, NI or even, dare I say it England, last I heard they paid taxes down there too...

  • Comment number 48.

    evening cheesed off,

    who are the 'ignorant heathens' that I need to explain things to? Try lightening the tone a little, you seem a little aggressive....

  • Comment number 49.

    @44 Ady
    "the socialist bailout of the banks"

    eh?

  • Comment number 50.

    I thought Iain Macwhirter was a reasonable antidote to the FUDvert masquerading as the Gray/Brewer interview on NNS tonight.

    Didn't the First Minister run through some examples of the levels of cooperation possible after devolution? Why are some organisations insistent that I ought to be confused and uncertain about what 'independence' might mean.
    Oh, the fear! the uncertainty! the doubt!

  • Comment number 51.

    @48 leithlad

    Why bail out bankrupt global corporate businesses?

  • Comment number 52.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 53.

    @47 leithlad

    All those Unionist MPs that Scotland sent to Westminster meant that Scots voters thought it was a spiffing idea to share the debt. Fortunately, we share the assets as well.

  • Comment number 54.

    hey cheesed off,
    my argument is not about the pros or cons of bailing out the banks, merely that we in Scotland were complicit in that action by returning members to the Westminster parliament, therefore we're liable to pay back a proportion of the debt incurred in bailing them out as the debs was incurred through the actions of our elected representatives. In the same way we're complicit in all the debts incurred by Westminster.
    if we wanted to cut up the 'joint' UK credit card we should have voted - before the bailout - for a majority of SNP M.P's and forced independence - we didn't so the debt falls to be paid, divided up between Scotland and the remainder of the Uk if we get independence.

  • Comment number 55.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 56.

    @54 leithlad

    What proportion are we liable to take on? And of how much (for the 'bailout' part of the UK's national debt)?

  • Comment number 57.

    Anybody got the result of the Bucksburn and Daneston by election?

  • Comment number 58.

    @56 mrbfaethedee

    In the Velvet Divorce, Slovakia and the Czech Republic agreed to split it in proportion to population. In our case, that would mean 8'5% of the debt and the assets.

  • Comment number 59.

    #57 reincarnation

    The count will take place at the Britannia Hotel, Bucksburn, from 10.30am on Friday 20 May.

  • Comment number 60.

  • Comment number 61.

    @59 Roll_On_2011
    Come to think of it, why are they hiring a hotel to do the count? Did the previous council sell off all their halls?

  • Comment number 62.

    #61 reincarnation

    Probably cheaper than one of their places?

    If you have any queries regarding this, or any other news story, please contact Aberdeen City Council on: 08456 080910

  • Comment number 63.

    I see my comments on MacAskill's Russia Today interview are still being moderated. Don't know why.

    Anyway, we should stop talking about sharing military bases with England. It causes confusion and gives Westminster something to oppose. The bases will be Scotland's and we may, just may, allow ANY of our allies access to them. But they will be our bases and our choice.

  • Comment number 64.

    @ #63 govanite

    An independent Scotland should retain military bases in Scotland for defensive measures only and never be used in such cases as Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan etc Unless they attack Scotland/UK first.

  • Comment number 65.

    I know this is an old article but it is certainly worth rereading:

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article5728477.ece

    Can anyone explain why this is an acceptable way for a partner of equals to behave?

  • Comment number 66.

    #29 Roll_On_2011
    "BBC Scottish Election Results 2007 & 2011 ...
    Brian, my mate is a ‘conspiracy theorist’ of the first order, whilst I feel that it is merely down to confusion or miscalculation. Please can you clarify so that I can silence his theories!
    "

    Iain's #39 is quite correct in stating that "Due to redrawn boundaries some of the seats were notionally held by parties other than those who had taken them at the previous election."

    Both the BBC and STV used Prof Denver's notionals on their vote 2011 sub-sites.

    Brian's Boundary changes could give Tories electoral boost of 8 September 2010, gives a good summary of them and includes a link to "Prof David Denver's boundary changes study in full". It's in PDF, so I can't link to it direct.

    Unfortunately, extracting the data in from the PDF is not entirely straightforward, but Mods permitting, I'll post the notional results in tabular form shortly, using the PRE tag.

  • Comment number 67.

    PS to my #66

    The notional results in the plurality seats were:

    Seat	Region	1st	Lead%	Notional 2007
    1 106 SNP 1.4 Aberdeen Central
    2 106 SNP 13.1 Aberdeen Donside
    3 106 L-D 7.3 Aberdeen S & Kincardine N
    4 106 SNP 14.1 Aberdeenshire East
    5 106 L-D 12.5 Aberdeenshire West
    6 104 Lab 2.6 Airdrie & Shotts
    7 103 SNP 0.0 Almond Valley
    8 106 SNP 20.9 Angus North & Mearns
    9 106 SNP 19.7 Angus South
    10 102 SNP 2.8 Argyll & Bute
    11 107 Con 12.7 Ayr
    12 106 SNP 39.2 Banffshire & Buchan Coast
    13 102 L-D 8.6 Caithness, Sutherland & Ross
    14 107 Lab 14.6 Carrick, Cumnock & Doon Valley
    15 105 SNP 2.8 Clackmannanshire & Dunblane
    16 108 Lab 10.6 Clydebank & Milngavie
    17 107 Lab 3.7 Clydesdale
    18 104 Lab 18.3 Coatbridge & Chryston
    19 105 Lab 14.6 Cowdenbeath
    20 104 Lab 7.9 Cumbernauld & Kilsyth
    21 108 SNP 0.1 Cunninghame North
    22 108 Lab 9.2 Cunninghame South
    23 108 Lab 5.3 Dumbarton
    24 107 Con 2.1 Dumfriesshire
    25 106 SNP 16.5 Dundee City East
    26 106 SNP 8.4 Dundee City West
    27 105 L-D 0.3 Dunfermline
    28 104 Lab 6.8 East Kilbride
    29 107 Lab 6.7 East Lothian
    30 108 Con 11.2 Eastwood
    31 103 L-D 2.5 Edinburgh Central
    32 103 Lab 1.8 Edinburgh Eastern
    33 103 Lab 7.2 Edinburgh Northern & Leith
    34 103 Con 8.6 Edinburgh Pentlands
    35 103 L-D 12.3 Edinburgh Southern
    36 103 L-D 17.2 Edinburgh Western
    37 107 Con 5.2 Ettrick, Roxburgh & Berwickshire
    38 104 Lab 6.1 Falkirk East
    39 104 SNP 2.6 Falkirk West
    40 105 SNP 9.1 Fife Mid & Glenrothes
    41 105 L-D 15.5 Fife North East
    42 107 Con 7.7 Galloway & Dumfries West
    43 101 Lab 20.1 Glasgow Anniesland
    44 101 Lab 7.0 Glasgow Cathcart
    45 101 Lab 4.5 Glasgow Kelvin
    46 101 Lab 17.2 Glasgow Maryhill & Springburn
    47 101 Lab 19.8 Glasgow Pollock
    48 101 Lab 28.2 Glasgow Provan
    49 101 Lab 22.5 Glasgow Shettleston
    50 101 Lab 0.1 Glasgow Southside
    51 108 Lab 15.6 Greenock & Inverclyde
    52 104 Lab 13.3 Hamilton, Larkhall & Stonehouse
    53 102 SNP 13.6 Inverness & Nairn
    54 107 SNP 4.0 Kilmarnock & Irvine Valley
    55 105 Lab 11.7 Kirkcaldy
    56 103 Lab 0.9 Linlithgow
    57 103 Lab 5.2 Midlothian N & Musselburgh
    58 107 SNP 3.7 Midlothian S, Tweeddale & Lauderdale
    59 102 SNP 25.9 Moray
    60 104 Lab 22.8 Motherwell & Wishaw
    61 102 SNP 5.0 Na h-Eileanan an Iar
    62 102 L-D 28.6 Orkney Islands
    63 108 Lab 14.6 Paisley
    64 105 SNP 21.5 Perthshire N
    65 105 SNP 4.5 Perthshire S & Kinross-shire
    66 108 Lab 11.1 Renfrewshire N & W
    67 108 Lab 20.4 Renfrewshire S
    68 101 Lab 21.4 Rutherglen
    69 102 L-D 50.1 Shetland Islands
    70 102 L-D 10.3 Skye, Lochaber & Badenoch
    71 105 Lab 1.2 Stirling
    72 108 Lab 10.0 Strathkelvin & Bearsden
    73 104 Lab 20.9 Uddingston & Bellshill

    Totals Party Seats
    Lab 35
    SNP 21
    L-D 11
    Con 6
    Total 73

  • Comment number 68.

    PS to my #66 & 67

    The notional results in the list seats were:


    Region SNP Con Lab L-D Grn Ind Notional 2007
    101 5 1 0 1 0 0 Glasgow
    102 2 2 3 0 0 0 Highlands & Islands
    103 4 1 0 0 1 1 Lothian
    104 5 1 0 1 0 0 Scotland Central
    105 2 3 2 0 0 0 Scotland Mid & Fife
    106 0 3 3 1 0 0 Scotland North East
    107 3 1 1 2 0 0 Scotland South
    108 4 2 0 1 0 0 Scotland West
    25 14 9 6 1 1 Totals


    So the 2007 notional totals by party were:

    Party Plurality List Total
    SNP 21 25 46
    Lab 35 9 44
    Con 6 14 20
    L-D 11 6 17
    Grn 0 1 1
    Ind 0 1 1
    Total 73 56 129

  • Comment number 69.

    #64 Caledonia 67

    i'm not sure what i said excludes your opinion, with which i have some sympathy

  • Comment number 70.

    Scotland 5more years. with abit of luck if we use our selective rubber ears as we did in may 5Th. taking in the positive and disregarding the negative.if we do we can filter out the bias of the media taking that they take the same approach as pre may 5Th if we do we can give westminster our last double whammy!

  • Comment number 71.

    PS to my #66, 67 & 68

    So the gains/losses in seats for 2011 are:

    Party	2007	2011	Change
    SNP 46 69 +23
    Lab 44 37 -7
    Con 20 15 -5
    L-D 17 5 -12
    Grn 1 2 +1
    Ind 1 1 none
    Total 129 129

    The changes agree with those currently stated on the main Scotland [sic] politics page of this webite.

  • Comment number 72.

    70 Rouser

    With four decent years of governance and experience behind us, we also have the momentum of a majority, a reinvigorated SNP team, demoralised opposition that don't know if its New Year or New York and the final realisation that Labour's grip of Scotland may be in tatters.

    There's a fair wind behind us and I can't see it letting up.

    Come on ye SNP, don't let us down.

    Maybe Brian and his colleagues might care to join us on the way.

  • Comment number 73.

    "In the Act of Union (Clause 24 for the enthusiast), it is provided that "from and after the Union, there be One Great Seal for the United Kingdom of Great Britain, which shall be different from the Great Seal now used in either Kingdom." (In the interim, the Great Seal of England was to be used.)"


    Look forward Brian, not backwards, do you believe the great seal is of any relevance toa single mum living in povery in Drumchapel, an OAP in Abroath or a fisherman in Skye.

    Scotland needs to move on, if bbc and other media are prepared to fight Scots move to self determination, popular opinion will deem you irrelevant as other media channels gain popularity.

    The English Queen this week spoke of partnership of equals between Ireland and britain, inconsistent when britian seeks to keep Scotland as its prized possession.

    The election on 05 May 2011, had one meaning, Scotland is moving forward with confidence and optimism. Get on the bus or get left behind!

    C McK

    P.S. any news of the Scottish Six???

  • Comment number 74.

    72.At 09:46 20th May 2011, Louperdowg wrote:
    "Maybe Brian and his colleagues might care to join us on the way."

    Judging from this article Could Alex Salmond scupper the Scotland Bill? I think this is unlikely.

    I tried to comment on this yesterday, but obviously dissent is not allowed.

    I'll leave it to you to decide for yourselves.

    Oh, and BTW this article had a different title yesterday. Maybe my dissallowed posts had something to do with the name change.

  • Comment number 75.

    My 32 was a CORRECTION!!!!! They are not allowed anymore. How rediculous can you be??????

  • Comment number 76.

    @58 reincarnation
    "In the Velvet Divorce, Slovakia and the Czech Republic agreed to split it in proportion to population. In our case, that would mean 8'5% of the debt and the assets."

    Thanks,
    It seems hard to argue against debt and asset redistribution based on population, and it's not obvious to me that there are any useful alternative approaches.
    Perhaps a little to straightforward a basis for this FUD filled stage of the progression to independence ;)

  • Comment number 77.

    brian, I see you still have a chip on your shoulder regarding referring to Alex Salmond as "first minister".

    Honestly you should let it go, move on. I guarantee you will feel a lot better.

  • Comment number 78.

    SHOULD SCOTLAND GO IT ALONE AND SHOULD WALES FOLLOW SUIT?

    Better than a blether and not so biased.

  • Comment number 79.

    @74 X_Sticks
    "
    Oh, and BTW this article had a different title yesterday. Maybe my dissallowed posts had something to do with the name change.
    "

    X_Sticks, what was the original title?

  • Comment number 80.

    79.At 12:14 20th May 2011, mrbfaethedee wrote:
    "X_Sticks, what was the original title?"

    Holyrood v Westminster
    Two parliaments square up over Scotland Bill

    It still has this title on the UK politics page.

  • Comment number 81.

    Winning the Dyce/Buckburn/Danestone ward on the first count, there's another large swing, primarily from L-D to SNP, since May 5.

    I suggest Mr Rennie needs to re-think rather urgently his unqualified support for Calman and now Calman Minus. If he does not find the federalist roots, which even Tavish Scott finally seemed to grasp are the sole hope for the L-Ds, his party is in severe danger of sinking without trace.

    Yesterday's Dyce/Buckburn/Danestone by-election produced the following:

    First Preferences %
    Party 2007 2011 Change
    SNP 36.2 51.4 +15.2
    Lab 24.9 23.1 -1.8
    L-D 26.2 11.0 -15.2
    Con 8.3 8.7 +0.4
    Grn 2.0 2.2 +0.2
    Ind 2.4 3.7 +1.3
    Total 100.0 100.0


    This compares with the May 5 swings in the Aberdeen Donside plurality seat:
    Votes %
    Party 2007 2011 Change
    SNP 44.8 55.4 +10.6
    Lab 31.7 28.5 -3.2
    L-D 16.0 6.0 -10.0
    Con 7.5 8.1 +0.6
    Ind 1.2 +1.2
    NF 0.8 +0.8
    Total 100.0 100.0


    And in the Scotland North East list vote:
    Votes %
    Party 2007 2011 Change
    SNP 40.5 52.7 +12.2
    Lab 19.6 16.4 -3.2
    L-D 15.2 6.8 -8.4
    Con 15.2 14.1 -1.1
    Grn 3.2 3.9 +0.7
    Other 6.2 6.0 -0.1
    Total 100.0 100.0

  • Comment number 82.

    @80 X_Sticks
    "Holyrood v Westminster
    Two parliaments square up over Scotland Bill

    It still has this title on the UK politics page.
    "

    So I see, classy!

    Och well, I live in hope that this sort of confrontationally tribal offering from the BBC becomes more rare as the BBC itself starts to aspire to reason and maturity in its coverage of constitutional affairs.

  • Comment number 83.

    PS to my #81

    The Dyce/Buckburn/Danestone ward result is now reported on this website's SNP's Neil MacGregor secures Aberdeen by-election win.

    Apart from being bad news for Mr Rennie, it's not good for the L-D group on Aberdeen City Council, as the Hootsmon reports.

  • Comment number 84.

    82.At 12:41 20th May 2011, mrbfaethedee wrote:
    "Och well, I live in hope that this sort of confrontationally tribal offering from the BBC becomes more rare as the BBC itself starts to aspire to reason and maturity in its coverage of constitutional affairs."

    I hope you are planning along life mrb!

    I noticed the author of this "article" was informing us yet again that "under a third of Scottish voters backing independence". I'd like to know what they (he) backs this claim up with. Truth is, since the 6th no-one knows.

    I also questioned the claim that westminster would have to consent to Scotland's independence. "Mr Moore will not guarantee that if Scotland does vote yes to independence the Westminster government will consent to its breaking away from the UK."

  • Comment number 85.

    Re the Dyce Election Result:
    Many congrats to Neil, and what a victory margin!

    That will give Rennie, and others, something else to digest!

  • Comment number 86.


    Councillor switches to SNP

    “ An independent councillor this week sensationally joined the SNP group.

    Former Labour group leader Douglas Campbell jumped ship, insisting he’s impressed by his one time political opponents.

    His decision is a massive coup for the SNP group, which, the Post believes, is set to snare a second Independent councillor within weeks.

    Councillor Campbell said the Labour Party he once knew ‘has ceased to exist’ “

    The NuLabour rot continues!

  • Comment number 87.

    Don't worry Roll-On, soon you'll have your one party state with El Presidente at the helm!

  • Comment number 88.

    86.At 13:46 20th May 2011, Roll_On_2011 wrote:

    "Councillor switches to SNP
    The NuLabour rot continues!"

    There cannot be many left on the unionist side - except the beeb the MSM and ex-westminster failures like darling!

    Maybe they too will eventually get the message.


  • Comment number 89.

    # 85.Saltire Won
    Doesn't this make the SNP the largest single party, although without overall control?
    Doesn't this change chairmanships of committees?

  • Comment number 90.

    @84 X_Sticks
    "I hope you are planning along life mrb!"

    Sounds good to me! :)

    As to the article - poorly informed, or FUD, or both?
    The beeb really have to start getting to grips with constitutional affairs - I think that soon everyone is going to start noticing that the BBC look like idiots or lackeys (depending on your level of cynicism).

  • Comment number 91.

    Aberdeen City Council's Dyce/Buckburn/Danestone ward is a four-member one and elected two L-D, one SNP and one Lab councillors in 2007, but the profile of their next ward to hold a by-election, Airyhall/Broomhill/Garthdee (on 23 June 2011) is rather different. It's a three-member ward, and picked one Con and two L-Ds in 2007, with the by-election caused by one of the L-Ds - Scott Cassie - becoming a different sort of con yesterday.

    In 2007, the first preference percentages went:

    	L-D	37.6
    Con 27.4
    SNP 17.3
    Lab 12.8
    Ind 4.8

    If the swings are anything like those in Dyce/Buckburn/Danestone, the SNP could well come from third place to take it, or perhaps red unionist second preferences will bolster up the blue unionists to retain the seat for the union. The ward is in the Aberdeen Central plurality seat, where the notional SNP plurality of 1.4% "only" increased to 2.5%, with the L-D's losing 17.6% of the vote apparently fairly evenly shared between the SNP and the red unionists.

  • Comment number 92.

    #87 In moderation

    With reference to one of your previous posts. You don’t have much choice doon sooth, you have:

    • The Blue Tories.
    • The Red Tories.
    • The Yellow Tories.

    Or a mixture of two, as is the current case.

  • Comment number 93.

    I don't think dividing debts/assets based solely on population is fair. Simple yes, but not fair.

    I would argue that the democratic deficit suffered by Scots throughout the period of the union has led to policy making from Westminster that has caused population growth - mainly in the south of England - but has caused depopulation in Scotland. Lack of skilled work and opportunity within Scotland has led to many of our people leaving our shores to find it in England - or Australia, Canada or the United States.

    Scotland's population in 1707 was one million. It is only now above five million thanks to the active 'recruitment' of immigrants - mainly from Poland. England, in 1707 had a population of roughly five million. It is now roughly 52 million. So we can see that whilst Scotland's population in the past three hundred years or so has grown five times what it was, England's has grown ten times what it was.

    It would be a double whammy for Scotland to be further (and permanently) disadvantaged because we were historically disadvantaged by our more powerful neighbour throughout the period of union.

  • Comment number 94.

    86

    And there's more to that story...

    Councillor Campbell held on to his Labour Party membership, despite becoming an Independent councillor.

    And earlier this year he twice wrote to Labour leader Ed Milliband by recorded delivery.

    He was seeking a party investigation into the forged signature incident.

    But Mr Milliband did not reply. And Councillor Campbell said: “For a national political party to condone and collude with, what people would generally regard as, fraud is to my mind wholly unacceptable.

    “It is a sad day when you cannot trust your colleagues who are elected to represent the families and communities of South Ayrshire.

    “Even today the remaining members of the Labour Group believe that fraudulently signing my name on an official council document is something that any reasonable person would have done.”

  • Comment number 95.

    91.At 14:41 20th May 2011, Barbazenzero wrote:
    "If the swings are anything like those in Dyce/Buckburn/Danestone, the SNP could well come from third place to take it"

    This will be an interesting one right enough! If the SNP take this as well it will really set bums squeaking in Aberdeen. Pity the local SNP here aren't exactly top of the class when it comes to local affairs!

  • Comment number 96.

    Thing is Roll-on what is the SNP now other than Nationalist party? Once it gets independance - what will it be then? Maybe a Scottish 'catch them all' party!

  • Comment number 97.

    #96, No... it will still be the Scottish National Party,

    "The SNP is a centre-left, social-democratic political party. The party's stated aim is "to create a just, caring and enterprising society by releasing Scotland's full potential as a sovereign state in the mainstream of modern Europe."

    So what would change post independence? ...apart from hopefully the attitudes of the unionists of course!

  • Comment number 98.

    @93 IRN - Tax doesnt have to be taxing
    "I don't think dividing debts/assets based solely on population is fair. Simple yes, but not fair."

    Perhaps you're right IRN, but off the top off my head I'd prefer a non-optimal but (relatively) quick and straightforward redistribution over a highly optimised but difficult (and slow) to arrive at solution.

    That's not to say that I don't take your point, just that I want a solution that can be got to fairly quickly and amicably.

  • Comment number 99.

    The First Minister completes the team...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-13468304

    Mr Salmond said: "This is an excellent team to take Scotland forward. While the overall number of ministers is unchanged, it blends the tried and trusted team which received such strong public endorsement at the election with significant new talent."

  • Comment number 100.

    @96 In moderation
    "what will it be then? Maybe a Scottish 'catch them all' party!"

    Do you mean a party that seeks to engage with the whole of the nation and tries to represent the whole of the nation?
    I like the sound of that!

    You seem less keen, which is a shame, bad pokemon experience?!

 

Page 1 of 2

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.