91热爆

bbc.co.uk Navigation

Scottish Parliament election

Election 07 graphic

Sleep on it

  • Brian Taylor
  • 7 May 07, 06:43 PM

Seems as if the talks between the SNP and the Greens went well.

Doesn't look at this stage as if they will conclude in a formal coalition.

Two reasons for that. Even if they strike a full deal, the Greens only bring two MSPs to the table. More to the point, the Greens seem happier with something short of a full pact.

Robin Harper emerged from the talks at St Andrews House indicating that he would prefer a deal that's known as "confidence and supply".

The confidence bit means they would resist attempts to bring down the government in a confidence vote. The supply bit means that the Greens would vote for the SNP administration's budget.

But the Greens will now consult overnight before re-entering talks tomorrow.

There are still sticking points, not least over transport policy where the Greens are decidedly sceptical about new roads projects - such as dualling the A9. Think there will be a deal, though, of some species.

Which still leaves the question - can the Liberal Democrats be brought into negotiations?

At this stage, I think not. Alex Salmond won't rule out his independence referendum in advance of negotiations. (See earlier blog)

More to the point, the LibDems simply aren't over-keen on considering coalition at this stage.

They're licking their electoral wounds - and, to be blunt, they're not hugely trusting towards the SNP.

That could change - but not, I suspect, in the short term. Stand by for minority government with one A. Salmond as First Minister.

PS: Anybody want to be Presiding Officer at Holyrood? Alex Fergusson of the Tories was the hot tip - followed swiftly by an equally hot denial from the man himself.

Two problems. Firstly, given the hung Parliament, every party needs all the seats they've got - they can't afford to lose one of their number to the neutrality of the chair. Secondly, who wants a job which carries its own redundancy at the end of the term? The PO has to quit his/her own party to take the post.

That means they have no party machine to help them get re-elected in four years time. Most folk thought George Reid deserved a second term - but the parties wouldn't stand aside to let him stay in Ochil.

Is it time for Holyrood to follow the Westminster convention which allows the Speaker to be uncontested in his/her constituency?

Comments   Post your comment

  • 1.
  • At 11:06 PM on 07 May 2007,
  • Dave wrote:

On different ballots, and in different preferences (and yes I understood the ballot papers so they all counted) I voted a mixture of SNP, Lib-Dem, Labour and Independent - for parties/individuals that I thought had a contribution to make to Scotland's progress.

That may have been my last Lib-Dem vote, especially if it turns out that they are following a Westminster agenda of Lib-Dems hoping to get a share of UK power to prop up Brown (whom I had a lot of time for, until he apparently said he wouldn't work with an SNP led government in Scotland), rather than concentrating on what is best for Scotland.

Having spent 40 years working with young people to encourage them to behave responsibly, it's discouraging to see the Lib-Dems behaving like weans.

  • 2.
  • At 11:34 PM on 07 May 2007,
  • Iain wrote:

BrianThey're licking their electoral wounds - and, to be blunt, they're not hugely trusting towards the SNP.

I am not hugely trusting towards the Lib/Dems. Get their chance to further their claim to wanting more powers for the Scottish Parliament, then don't take it. Even when it seems that a majority of the Scottish Electorate agree with this and the prospect of a question being included in the referendum. Still they back off. I wonder?

There's nothing in the Scotland Act so far as I'm aware that would prevent a Presiding Officer from retaining their party membership. I think David Steel remained as a member of his party during his stint, and arguably the only reason George Reid did otherwise was because the other parties would only accept a nationalist as PO if they agreed to cut all remaining ties to the SNP.

Both Steel and Reid intended to stand down from Parliament at the end of their respective terms as PO anyway. Even if my earlier reading of things is incorrect, there would still be nothing to stop someone leaving their party temporarily, serving a term as PO, standing for re-election as a member of their chosen party, then seeking re-election by MSPs as the PO if that's what they wanted to do.

  • 4.
  • At 10:21 AM on 08 May 2007,
  • Stephen from Hamilton wrote:

This is abysmal from the Liberal "Democrats".

They won't even enter a room with the SNP without preconditions! Do they actually care about good government, or would they rather try to thwart everything the SNP do in order to try to damage them? Such action could only be interpreted as putting selfish party political gain above the good of Scotland. Practically all their policies agree apart from the independence referendum! Surely that's a basis for coalition talks to at least begin! What a pathetic bunch.

  • 5.
  • At 12:11 PM on 08 May 2007,
  • Martin Johnston wrote:

There is one obvious choice as Presiding Officer - certainly one that could be rather amusing if Salmond does become First Minister - step forward Margo MacDonald - that would make for interesting viewing!!

  • 6.
  • At 01:50 PM on 08 May 2007,
  • Peter wrote:

As the days pass, I find myself relieved by the situation that has emerged. I voted Labour in 2 out of 3 options, but I'm happy for them to lose power by a small margin. I think the result is by and large a reflection of Scottish opinion, though to me the loss of smaller parties is a blow.

The strands of politics that are important to most will hopefully reach the fore as the SNP tries to show its ability to govern - particularly education. Jack McConnell has laid a solid foundation for the SNP to build on, and hopefully this will not be forgotten. While he won't be first minister, I hope Mr McConnell keeps his promise to stand up for education.

  • 7.
  • At 08:22 PM on 08 May 2007,
  • Christian Schmidt wrote:

Can anyone tell me why the Presiding Officer can't vote and has to resign her/his party? The Presidents of the German, Durch, Belgium, Swedish, Danish, Finnish, French, Spanish, Italian, Czeck, polish, Swiss, etc, etc parliaments all keep their vote and stay a member of their party...

I definitely do not want Holyrood to adopt the agreement not to stand in the Speaker/Presiding Officer's constituency. Instead I favour a change to the system that has the role filled by a non-constituency MSP. The neutral requirement of the Speaker's job all but removes the right of representation of the members of their constituency. I say this as a resident of Michael Martin's Westminster seat, a politician who doesn't even answer letters from the people he supposedly represents.

Post a comment

Please note Name and E-mail are required.

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the author has approved them.

Required
Required (not displayed)
 
    

The 91热爆 is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

91热爆.co.uk