The Scottish Politics Thread

[inactionman]

Well over 1000 sex offenders in Glasgow, one of the cities biggest football clubs has a proven track record of a paedophile ring, the leading party in GCC is a party that has lessened prison sentences for rapists under 25 to rehabilitate them and GCC have chosen this case to score points on when DW was under 25 when he was found to "probably" have raped the girl.

Goodwillie has been proven to "probably" be a rapist. I am not keen to see him employed in a football club but GCC have made a howling mess of this. There is zero chance the football club hasn't taken legal advice on this.

Using "probably" as there is a difference between civil and law court.

The club's statement is spot on and really put the council in a corner. These pricks love a pile on without a care in the world for the welfare of the person on the receiving end.

Have you got a link to the statement?

I've struggled to find an actual statement, I can only locate references and quotes, so god only knows if they've been selectively sampled. Suspect it might have been a spoken statement, given lack of primary source, but will stand to be corrected on that.

Mind you, from the statements attributed to Glasgow FC, they appear notably unequivocal:

David Goodwillie has never been charged for this offence.

"He has no criminal record and has never appeared on any offenders' register.

"How can he show contrite or remorse for something he staunchly claims he did not do.

............

We do a lot of work in our community helping those in need and this is only an extension of that work.

"We could easily walk away from this like every other club before us but we won't.

"We are supporting David with his mental health and will continue to do so.

"This witch hunt has gone on for far too long and the use of any person's life as a political football is unacceptable

https://news.sky.com/story/david-goodwi ... r-12926624

[Big D]

Well over 1000 sex offenders in Glasgow, one of the cities biggest football clubs has a proven track record of a paedophile ring, the leading party in GCC is a party that has lessened prison sentences for rapists under 25 to rehabilitate them and GCC have chosen this case to score points on when DW was under 25 when he was found to "probably" have raped the girl.

Goodwillie has been proven to "probably" be a rapist. I am not keen to see him employed in a football club but GCC have made a howling mess of this. There is zero chance the football club hasn't taken legal advice on this.

Using "probably" as there is a difference between civil and law court.

The club's statement is spot on and really put the council in a corner. These pricks love a pile on without a care in the world for the welfare of the person on the receiving end.

Have you got a link to the statement?

Was a spokesperson: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-66290174

This is a really tricky situation as there was not enough evidence to attempt to prove beyond reasonable doubt he raped the poor woman but the judge decided in civil court that on balance of probabilities they raped her. So based on a less onerous threshold they have been branded rapists.

Which they might be, and in fact probably are, but it has created a two tier system where someone without a criminal record is being treated like a criminal. Possibly deservedly so but it is problematic. Especially as they both played for a long period after the case.

[Tichtheid]

This is from Rape Crisis Scotland

"Only 51% of rape and attempted rape trials result in a conviction, compared to a 91% overall conviction rate. In 2020-21 there were 2,176 rapes and attempted rapes reported to the police, but only 152 prosecutions and just 78 convictions."

Given that many/most sexual assaults and rapes happen within the person's own home (again, RC Scotland), it begs the question as to how many assaults and rapes go un-reported?

It's notoriously difficult to get a criminal prosecution for rape, in the past I've read that is why many survivors do not go to the police, that and victim blaming.

From the 2020-21 numbers, if my sums are correct, 3.58% of rapes and attempted rapes reported to the police resulted in a conviction

[weegie01]

Long, long ago I was involved in a rape charity. I left because of the 'all men are rapists' attitude of many of the other volunteers.

Rape is staggering hard to prove for many reasons. One being that it is so often one person's word against the other, another being 'what is rape?.

If I remember correctly, some 75% of rape victimes are on the spectrum from offering no resisitance, to actually co-operating with the rapist. This is a survival mechanism, as in, it is going to happen so how do I get out with least harm. This is especially true where there is a power imbalance of any kind.

It is very common to hear women say things like 'I just froze', or 'I did not resist hard enough'. One result is that many men genuinely believe they did not commit rape as lack of resistance, or ceasing resistance, is taken as assent. Another is that few rapes look or soundlike like what people expect. Lack of shouting or screaming or physical resistance for the reasons given above is seen as evidence it was not rape, or at the very least gives grounds for doubt.

[Sandstorm]

Long, long ago I was involved in a rape charity. I left because of the 'all men are rapists' attitude of many of the other volunteers.

Rape is staggering hard to prove for many reasons. One being that it is so often one person's word against the other, another being 'what is rape?.

If I remember correctly, some 75% of rape victimes are on the spectrum from offering no resisitance, to actually co-operating with the rapist. This is a survival mechanism, as in, it is going to happen so how do I get out with least harm. This is especially true where there is a power imbalance of any kind.

It is very common to hear women say things like 'I just froze', or 'I did not resist hard enough'. One result is that many men genuinely believe they did not commit rape as lack of resistance, or ceasing resistance, is taken as assent. Another is that few rapes look or soundlike like what people expect. Lack of shouting or screaming or physical resistance for the reasons given above is seen as evidence it was not rape, or at the very least gives grounds for doubt.

Plus there's usually alcohol involved and a man's capacity to underrated anything goes out the window.

[Big D]

We need to be careful not to mix two issues here.

Issue one and most important - People, clearly mostly women, who are raped do not get the justice they deserve often enough. That is crystal clear to most sane people and not in doubt. I have no issues with rapists being treated harshly, they should be.

Issue two - This statement in nothing more than an attempt at point scoring by GCC and they've made an arse of it.

Glasgow City Council have waded into this story for a bit of PR over a man who hasn't been found guilty in a criminal court indicating they would bar the club from training at a council facility when they have literally 100s of convicted sex offenders in their area who will be accessing the same facilities, a few of them will be playing for sports teams without a peep. No comment when a large football club in the council area has employed and reemployed paedophiles (300 known victims and 9 coaches convicted so far). All the while the same party has lowered jail terms for rapists <25 to allow "rehabilitation" and steadfastly refused a national enquiry into child abuse in sport. It is problematic when the GCC will speak out against a "probable" rapist when worth point scoring but not care about the 1000+ sex offenders accessing their facilities or football club that covered child abuse that has been proven in court.

[Blackmac]

This is from Rape Crisis Scotland

"Only 51% of rape and attempted rape trials result in a conviction, compared to a 91% overall conviction rate. In 2020-21 there were 2,176 rapes and attempted rapes reported to the police, but only 152 prosecutions and just 78 convictions."

Given that many/most sexual assaults and rapes happen within the person's own home (again, RC Scotland), it begs the question as to how many assaults and rapes go un-reported?

It's notoriously difficult to get a criminal prosecution for rape, in the past I've read that is why many survivors do not go to the police, that and victim blaming.

From the 2020-21 numbers, if my sums are correct, 3.58% of rapes and attempted rapes reported to the police resulted in a conviction

I'm struggling a wee bit with those conviction rates quoted by RCS, they seem surprisingly high in both cases.

I've been involved in many rape investigations and yes they are incredibly hard to prove. Its really the only crime on the books which involves an issue of consent and inevitably there is likely to be little or no corroboration or additional circumstantial evidence.

In my time, if it purely boiled down to an issue of consent, and the suspect had a reasonably claim to thinking he had consent, the police would not charge. That changed a couple of years before I retired, and often in those circumstances the police would charge the suspect in what appeared to be a misguided attempt to appear to be grasping the situation and improving their figures. I remember reading reports and being gobsmacked that suspects were being charged, given what appeared to be an obvious lack of evidence. This inevitably led to a rash of poorly prepared cases going to COPFS which lowered the conviction rates even more. I don't know if that is still the case.

I will go out on a limb here, and whilst out and out malicious reports are rare, there are a huge amount of highly dubious allegations, usually stemming from alcohol, drug, capacity and mental health issues. I remember discussing this a number of years ago with a very eminent police surgeon/pathologist who said to me that most of the time we were dealing with what he termed "disfunctional intercourse" rather than rape, where one or both parties didn't have the intelligence, maturity or capacity to cope with the emotional issues involved in having sex. I'm not sure anyone who wasn't involved with what we were dealing with will understand that, but inevitably it made it difficult for the genuine cases not to be affected by this.

[Tichtheid]

This is from Rape Crisis Scotland

"Only 51% of rape and attempted rape trials result in a conviction, compared to a 91% overall conviction rate. In 2020-21 there were 2,176 rapes and attempted rapes reported to the police, but only 152 prosecutions and just 78 convictions."

Given that many/most sexual assaults and rapes happen within the person's own home (again, RC Scotland), it begs the question as to how many assaults and rapes go un-reported?

It's notoriously difficult to get a criminal prosecution for rape, in the past I've read that is why many survivors do not go to the police, that and victim blaming.

From the 2020-21 numbers, if my sums are correct, 3.58% of rapes and attempted rapes reported to the police resulted in a conviction

I'm struggling a wee bit with those conviction rates quoted by RCS, they seem surprisingly high in both cases.

According to Scot Gov

The conviction rate for all crimes and offences has remained relatively stable over the last decade, fluctuating between 86% and 91% in each year. Conviction rates are highest for motor vehicle offences, with 95% of people proceeded against being convicted in 2020-21

As far as the convictions for rape and attempted rape go, the actual number is 78 convictions from 2, 176 reports to the police, in terms of a percentage of those the PF* thought there was a case, the conviction case is almost half that of other offences.

*I might be wrong, is it the procurator fiscal's office which decides to go ahead with a prosecution?

[Blackmac]

This is from Rape Crisis Scotland

"Only 51% of rape and attempted rape trials result in a conviction, compared to a 91% overall conviction rate. In 2020-21 there were 2,176 rapes and attempted rapes reported to the police, but only 152 prosecutions and just 78 convictions."

Given that many/most sexual assaults and rapes happen within the person's own home (again, RC Scotland), it begs the question as to how many assaults and rapes go un-reported?

It's notoriously difficult to get a criminal prosecution for rape, in the past I've read that is why many survivors do not go to the police, that and victim blaming.

From the 2020-21 numbers, if my sums are correct, 3.58% of rapes and attempted rapes reported to the police resulted in a conviction

I'm struggling a wee bit with those conviction rates quoted by RCS, they seem surprisingly high in both cases.

According to Scot Gov

The conviction rate for all crimes and offences has remained relatively stable over the last decade, fluctuating between 86% and 91% in each year. Conviction rates are highest for motor vehicle offences, with 95% of people proceeded against being convicted in 2020-21

As far as the convictions for rape and attempted rape go, the actual number is 78 convictions from 2, 176 reports to the police, in terms of a percentage of those the PF* thought there was a case, the conviction case is almost half that of other offences.

*I might be wrong, is it the procurator fiscal's office which decides to go ahead with a prosecution?

I really am genuinely shocked at that. It's not a figure I've ever really looked at but presumed it would be a lot lower, especially as Scotland requires such a high level of corroboration.

[Plim]

I'm struggling a wee bit with those conviction rates quoted by RCS, they seem surprisingly high in both cases.

According to Scot Gov

The conviction rate for all crimes and offences has remained relatively stable over the last decade, fluctuating between 86% and 91% in each year. Conviction rates are highest for motor vehicle offences, with 95% of people proceeded against being convicted in 2020-21

As far as the convictions for rape and attempted rape go, the actual number is 78 convictions from 2, 176 reports to the police, in terms of a percentage of those the PF* thought there was a case, the conviction case is almost half that of other offences.

*I might be wrong, is it the procurator fiscal's office which decides to go ahead with a prosecution?

I really am genuinely shocked at that. It's not a figure I've ever really looked at but presumed it would be a lot lower, especially as Scotland requires such a high level of corroboration.

These figures look very doubtful to me.

This article from the Guardian explains how “low conviction’” rates for rape are misguided. It’s attrition rate that is at issue.

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... tion-rates

I believe the article is about conviction etc rates in E&W rather than Scotland, and is 11 years old; but I find it very difficult to believe either that the most current figures are much different and, more significantly, that Scotland’s overall conviction and attrition rates are so massively out of line with E&W.

I suspect that the figures quoted above are ‘convictions’ including cautions, road traffic pleas by post etc. I’d be very interested in the Scottish figures for conviction in jury trials.

If I’m wrong, I’m wrong, and I’ll concede. But that IMO would make the Scottish system very, very strange: as if only a v small number of prosecutions are brought that aren’t slam dunks or nearly so.

[Tichtheid]

According to Scot Gov


As far as the convictions for rape and attempted rape go, the actual number is 78 convictions from 2, 176 reports to the police, in terms of a percentage of those the PF* thought there was a case, the conviction case is almost half that of other offences.

*I might be wrong, is it the procurator fiscal's office which decides to go ahead with a prosecution?

I really am genuinely shocked at that. It's not a figure I've ever really looked at but presumed it would be a lot lower, especially as Scotland requires such a high level of corroboration.

These figures look very doubtful to me.

This article from the Guardian explains how “low conviction’” rates for rape are misguided. It’s attrition rate that is at issue.

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... tion-rates

I believe the article is about conviction etc rates in E&W rather than Scotland, and is 11 years old; but I find it very difficult to believe either that the most current figures are much different and, more significantly, that Scotland’s overall conviction and attrition rates are so massively out of line with E&W.

I suspect that the figures quoted above are ‘convictions’ including cautions, road traffic pleas by post etc. I’d be very interested in the Scottish figures for conviction in jury trials.

If I’m wrong, I’m wrong, and I’ll concede. But that IMO would make the Scottish system very, very strange: as if only a v small number of prosecutions are brought that aren’t slam dunks or nearly so.

clicking the below text will link to the document

Conviction rates are calculated by dividing the number of people convicted by the number of people proceeded against. Care should be taken when interpreting data on conviction rates. Conviction rates are dependent on a number of factors, including the strength of evidence available; and the complexity of the case. However, all convictions are wholly dependent upon the decision of the court. A high conviction rate could indicate that cases brought to court are evidentially strong or straightforward (for example road traffic offences), but it could also indicate that cases which are evidentially weak, for instance, lacking sufficient admissible evidence are not reaching court. Conversely, a low conviction rate could indicate that the highly complex or evidentially difficult cases are brought to Court, but, the judge or jury is unwilling to accept the evidence provided by the prosecutor and thereafter unable to convict the accused.

Ninety-one per cent of people proceeded against in court in 2020-21 were convicted after being found guilty of at least one charge (46,497 people). This is four percentage points higher than 2019-20. The conviction rate for all crimes and offences has remained relatively stable over the last decade, fluctuating between 86% and 91% in each year.

Conviction rates are highest for motor vehicle offences, with 95% of people proceeded against being convicted in 2020-21. In particular, speeding offences had a conviction rate of 99%. Apart from motor vehicle offences, the highest conviction rates for crimes was 96% for ‘other crime’ and 94% for shoplifting, whilst the lowest rate was for rape and attempted rape (51%). The conviction rate for rape and attempted rape has been the lowest of all crimes in each of the last ten years. Further detail of acquittals with respect to rape and attempted rape can be seen in Section 3.


One explanation could be the Procurator Fiscal's Office doesn't take a case to court unless it is pretty sure they have it watertight.

See the number of rapes and attempted rapes reported to Scottish police in the one year (well over two thousand) compared to the number taken to court ( a hundred and fifty two), resulting in just seventy eight convictions.

[Plim]

It looks to me like “proceeded against in court” means “charged with an offence at any level of court in any manner”. If that’s right it would be nothing like the same as “convicted after jury trial”. Any contested rape charge in E&W would be heard in front of a jury, being an indictable-only offence. I assume the Scottish system would operate in basically the same way.

But I don’t know the Scottish system well. I just find it very hard to believe that 80-90% of jury trials in Scotland end in conviction.

BTW, the attrition rate of 78 convictions from 2176 reports of rape is 3.6%. That seems low compared to the E&W historical attrition figure for rape (12%).

[Plim]

And 78 convictions out of 152 cases is a conviction rate of 51% ( v E&W historically of 58%), which makes me think the Scottish figures are broadly in line with E&W.

[Tichtheid]

It looks to me like “proceeded against in court” means “charged with an offence at any level of court in any manner”. If that’s right it would be nothing like the same as “convicted after jury trial”. Any contested rape charge in E&W would be heard in front of a jury, being an indictable-only offence. I assume the Scottish system would operate in basically the same way.

But I don’t know the Scottish system well. I just find it very hard to believe that 80-90% of jury trials in Scotland end in conviction.

BTW, the attrition rate of 78 convictions from 2176 reports of rape is 3.6%. That seems low compared to the E&W historical attrition figure for rape (12%).

This has been interesting as I'd forgotten the term "Solemn Proceedings" which is used for serious criminal cases prosecuted in the High Court before a judge and jury. Lesser offences would be heard in the Sheriff Court, though seemingly some of those cases can involve a jury - Blackmac would be able to tell you more. There is another level of court too, I think.

Unfortunately I can't find prosecution rates for the High Court, just outright numbers

[weegie01]

Conviction rates are calculated by dividing the number of people convicted by the number of people proceeded against. Care should be taken when interpreting data on conviction rates. Conviction rates are dependent on a number of factors, including the strength of evidence available; and the complexity of the case. However, all convictions are wholly dependent upon the decision of the court. A high conviction rate could indicate that cases brought to court are evidentially strong or straightforward (for example road traffic offences), but it could also indicate that cases which are evidentially weak, for instance, lacking sufficient admissible evidence are not reaching court. Conversely, a low conviction rate could indicate that the highly complex or evidentially difficult cases are brought to Court, but, the judge or jury is unwilling to accept the evidence provided by the prosecutor and thereafter unable to convict the accused.

Ninety-one per cent of people proceeded against in court in 2020-21 were convicted after being found guilty of at least one charge (46,497 people). This is four percentage points higher than 2019-20. The conviction rate for all crimes and offences has remained relatively stable over the last decade, fluctuating between 86% and 91% in each year.

Conviction rates are highest for motor vehicle offences, with 95% of people proceeded against being convicted in 2020-21. In particular, speeding offences had a conviction rate of 99%. Apart from motor vehicle offences, the highest conviction rates for crimes was 96% for ‘other crime’ and 94% for shoplifting, whilst the lowest rate was for rape and attempted rape (51%). The conviction rate for rape and attempted rape has been the lowest of all crimes in each of the last ten years. Further detail of acquittals with respect to rape and attempted rape can be seen in Section 3.

One explanation could be the Procurator Fiscal's Office doesn't take a case to court unless it is pretty sure they have it watertight.

See the number of rapes and attempted rapes reported to Scottish police in the one year (well over two thousand) compared to the number taken to court ( a hundred and fifty two), resulting in just seventy eight convictions.

I was involved in case a few years back as the main prosecution witness. It took a long time to get to court, but the police officers involved told me that one of the reasons for this is that only cases with a very high probability of success will proceed to court, so a long time is spent gathering evidence and preparing the case.

Then I turned up to give evidence on the appointed day to be told the case was not proceeding.

[Blackmac]

It looks to me like “proceeded against in court” means “charged with an offence at any level of court in any manner”. If that’s right it would be nothing like the same as “convicted after jury trial”. Any contested rape charge in E&W would be heard in front of a jury, being an indictable-only offence. I assume the Scottish system would operate in basically the same way.

But I don’t know the Scottish system well. I just find it very hard to believe that 80-90% of jury trials in Scotland end in conviction.

BTW, the attrition rate of 78 convictions from 2176 reports of rape is 3.6%. That seems low compared to the E&W historical attrition figure for rape (12%).

This has been interesting as I'd forgotten the term "Solemn Proceedings" which is used for serious criminal cases prosecuted in the High Court before a judge and jury. Lesser offences would be heard in the Sheriff Court, though seemingly some of those cases can involve a jury - Blackmac would be able to tell you more. There is another level of court too, I think.

Unfortunately I can't find prosecution rates for the High Court, just outright numbers

Yeah you are right. There are Sheriff and Jury trials as well which are also considered "Solemn Proceedings". They have limited sentencing powers so a rape trial would be very unlikely to be held in those courts.

[Slick]

Recall petition is a thing

[Tichtheid]

Labour regain Rutherglen and Hamilton from SNP.

It's difficult to know what to make of it, Labour won with the fewest votes the party has had in the constituency since it was brought into being at the 2005 election, fewer than when it has come second.
Whatever the case, it's a big loss for the SNP, even in this seat which would until very recently be considered a safe Labour stronghold

[tc27]

Labour regain Rutherglen and Hamilton from SNP.

It's difficult to know what to make of it, Labour won with the fewest votes the party has had in the constituency since it was brought into being at the 2005 election, fewer than when it has come second.
Whatever the case, it's a big loss for the SNP, even in this seat which would until very recently be considered a safe Labour stronghold

By elections typically have very low turnouts.

However it does indicate Labour are well on the road to recovery in Scotland and it makes their path to a UK majority much more certain. They only need about half this swing in the GE to win alot of seats from the SNP.

I expect the SNP to try and shore up its core vote which means more constitutional huffing and puffing. From what I have read they may even effectively pull out efforts from the riskest seats which will piss of MPs and strain relationships with the Holyrood leadership.

[Big D]

The turn out is so low I am not sure it is representative. Also voting for a party in a by-election is one thing but will voters stay away or Conservative/Lib Dem supporters back Labour in a GE? Not so sure.

[Slick]

The turn out is so low I am not sure it is representative. Also voting for a party in a by-election is one thing but will voters stay away or Conservative/Lib Dem supporters back Labour in a GE? Not so sure.

Is one way to look at it, I suppose. Although it's fairly typical for a by-election. The worry I guess for the SNP is that in such a well publicised election, with the party really needing a boost and having such a well oiled party machine they couldn't get anyone arsed to go out and support them.

I don't expect the margins to be so massive in a GE but it definitely has the feel of change and social media is pretty muted and full of resignation.

[Tichtheid]

In contrast, Yes to indy has taken a lead for the first time since June, polling carried out between 5th - 14th of September saw 45% in favour, 41 against with 9% undecided.

If there really was a huge momentum swing to Labour as is being claimed, you might think this would be reflected in the Indy poll, even taking into account Indy doesn't go down strict party lines.

That said and done, it was good to see the Tories lose their deposit yesterday.

[Big D]

The turn out is so low I am not sure it is representative. Also voting for a party in a by-election is one thing but will voters stay away or Conservative/Lib Dem supporters back Labour in a GE? Not so sure.

Is one way to look at it, I suppose. Although it's fairly typical for a by-election. The worry I guess for the SNP is that in such a well publicised election, with the party really needing a boost and having such a well oiled party machine they couldn't get anyone arsed to go out and support them.

I don't expect the margins to be so massive in a GE but it definitely has the feel of change and social media is pretty muted and full of resignation.

Maybe, but it while the SNP still hold the vast majority of independence supporter votes, the union favouring parties have each other to fight for the share of votes. Might be a difference in the GE where SNP voters leak to Labour to oust the Conservatives but for Holyrood we are unlikely to see any meaningful change IMO.

[Tichtheid]

The turn out is so low I am not sure it is representative. Also voting for a party in a by-election is one thing but will voters stay away or Conservative/Lib Dem supporters back Labour in a GE? Not so sure.

Is one way to look at it, I suppose. Although it's fairly typical for a by-election. The worry I guess for the SNP is that in such a well publicised election, with the party really needing a boost and having such a well oiled party machine they couldn't get anyone arsed to go out and support them.

I don't expect the margins to be so massive in a GE but it definitely has the feel of change and social media is pretty muted and full of resignation.

Maybe, but it while the SNP still hold the vast majority of independence supporter votes, the union favouring parties have each other to fight for the share of votes. Might be a difference in the GE where SNP voters leak to Labour to oust the Conservatives but for Holyrood we are unlikely to see any meaningful change IMO.

I think you might be right, as things stand just now, Big D

Voting intentions in Scotland for next Holyrood Parliament - 5th to 14th Sept
SNP 42%
LAB 26%
CON 20%
The trend is for the SNP lead to be increasing



Voting Intentions in Scotland for next Westminster Parliament 5th to 14th Sept
SNP 37%
LAB 28%
CON 18%

The trend is for the SNP's lead to be increasing here too.

There will be a Westminster election before there will be a Holyrood one, much in Scotland will depend on who wins in Westminster and how well Labour are doing if it's them. I can only see an increase in popularity for the SNP if England votes the Tories in again.

[tc27]

The turn out is so low I am not sure it is representative. Also voting for a party in a by-election is one thing but will voters stay away or Conservative/Lib Dem supporters back Labour in a GE? Not so sure.

Is one way to look at it, I suppose. Although it's fairly typical for a by-election. The worry I guess for the SNP is that in such a well publicised election, with the party really needing a boost and having such a well oiled party machine they couldn't get anyone arsed to go out and support them.

I don't expect the margins to be so massive in a GE but it definitely has the feel of change and social media is pretty muted and full of resignation.

Maybe, but it while the SNP still hold the vast majority of independence supporter votes, the union favouring parties have each other to fight for the share of votes. Might be a difference in the GE where SNP voters leak to Labour to oust the Conservatives but for Holyrood we are unlikely to see any meaningful change IMO.

There is a cohort of voters who could be described as 'soft' yes or no voters who switched to the SNP in the 2010s. They are definitely in play again now.

The SNP can bank the vote of the 36% ish who for Indy is the most important voting issue (despite Salmonds efforts) but if they can't also win the cohort I just mentioned they will struggle to dominate as before.

Lots of central belt seats are in play for Labour even if they lag the SNP in overall support. If they can win a modest amount of seats back in Scotland combined with London and English cities they have a pretty solid majority.

[Slick]

The turn out is so low I am not sure it is representative. Also voting for a party in a by-election is one thing but will voters stay away or Conservative/Lib Dem supporters back Labour in a GE? Not so sure.

Is one way to look at it, I suppose. Although it's fairly typical for a by-election. The worry I guess for the SNP is that in such a well publicised election, with the party really needing a boost and having such a well oiled party machine they couldn't get anyone arsed to go out and support them.

I don't expect the margins to be so massive in a GE but it definitely has the feel of change and social media is pretty muted and full of resignation.

Maybe, but it while the SNP still hold the vast majority of independence supporter votes, the union favouring parties have each other to fight for the share of votes. Might be a difference in the GE where SNP voters leak to Labour to oust the Conservatives but for Holyrood we are unlikely to see any meaningful change IMO.

Yeah, the Holyrood one much tougher to call as despite the SNP being utterly shite at running the country there is definitely a feeling of at least they are our shite amongst a lot of folk.

I do think this result shows that it’s only the real diehard Tory’s that are going to support them in the GE. I think we all just want them out and people from all parties, including those SNP tc mentions, will hold their nose and vote Labour

Edit: I don’t remember enough about the conditions around Blair coming to power, but I’ve never known a feeling of such contempt for a U.K. government as we have at the moment

[inactionman]

Is one way to look at it, I suppose. Although it's fairly typical for a by-election. The worry I guess for the SNP is that in such a well publicised election, with the party really needing a boost and having such a well oiled party machine they couldn't get anyone arsed to go out and support them.

I don't expect the margins to be so massive in a GE but it definitely has the feel of change and social media is pretty muted and full of resignation.

Maybe, but it while the SNP still hold the vast majority of independence supporter votes, the union favouring parties have each other to fight for the share of votes. Might be a difference in the GE where SNP voters leak to Labour to oust the Conservatives but for Holyrood we are unlikely to see any meaningful change IMO.

Yeah, the Holyrood one much tougher to call as despite the SNP being utterly shite at running the country there is definitely a feeling of at least they are our shite amongst a lot of folk.

I do think this result shows that it’s only the real diehard Tory’s that are going to support them in the GE. I think we all just want them out and people from all parties, including those SNP tc mentions, will hold their nose and vote Labour

Edit: I don’t remember enough about the conditions around Blair coming to power, but I’ve never known a feeling of such contempt for a U.K. government as we have at the moment

I've never known a government to have as much contempt for the public as we have at the moment.

Anyone who could inflict Trussterfuck and Kamikwazi upon the Nation deserve our utter contempt.

[tc27]

The Major goverment has some geniune political heavyweights like Clark, Rifkind etc. The Tory sleeze scandals of the time look almost quainte nowdays.

They also left an economy that was booming.

[Tichtheid]

Edit: I don’t remember enough about the conditions around Blair coming to power, but I’ve never known a feeling of such contempt for a U.K. government as we have at the moment

It was nothing like this, there was the usual Tory corruption, cash for questions etc, the usual hypocrisy, Back to Basics whilst Major was shagging Edwina Curry, the Eurosceptics were "Bastards" but not a potent force. The lunatic fringe was just that, a fringe, now that lunatic fringe are the holders of the highest offices. This crop of Tories aren't really Tories, they have overseen the death of shame in public office, you can lie and brazen it out, you can award your friends massively lucrative contracts, you can invent policies that don't exist and rail against them.

Thatcher was hated in many quarters, but she did win elections so it wasn't across the board. Major was a bit of nonentity who just happened to be this little gray man who was PM at the rump end of a long run of power, where parties usually have run out of ideas and talented individuals. I remember the jubilation when Blair got in, I think this time it might just be relief and "Thank fuck they've gone"

[David in Gwent]

Edit: I don’t remember enough about the conditions around Blair coming to power, but I’ve never known a feeling of such contempt for a U.K. government as we have at the moment

It was nothing like this, there was the usual Tory corruption, cash for questions etc, the usual hypocrisy, Back to Basics whilst Major was shagging Edwina Curry, the Eurosceptics were "Bastards" but not a potent force. The lunatic fringe was just that, a fringe, now that lunatic fringe are the holders of the highest offices. This crop of Tories aren't really Tories, they have overseen the death of shame in public office, you can lie and brazen it out, you can award your friends massively lucrative contracts, you can invent policies that don't exist and rail against them.

Thatcher was hated in many quarters, but she did win elections so it wasn't across the board. Major was a bit of nonentity who just happened to be this little gray man who was PM at the rump end of a long run of power, where parties usually have run out of ideas and talented individuals. I remember the jubilation when Blair got in, I think this time it might just be relief and "Thank fuck they've gone"

My memory of those days was one Tory scandal after another. It was definitely a need for change.

One thing that worries me about the days ahead for the UK and Western Europe is the quality of Leadership, there just isn't any, anywhere.

[Tichtheid]

Creative Scotland reveals £56m gap after deadline passes for long-term funding bids

https://archive.ph/XDada#selection-815.0-815.83


The Arts are always an easy target for cuts - why should posho luvvies get funding when there are bairns living out of food banks?

However, the arts draw in way more spending across the communities than the level of funding they get if that is way we want to quantify these things, plus it's a huge industry for all ages.

[Biffer]

Creative Scotland reveals £56m gap after deadline passes for long-term funding bids

https://archive.ph/XDada#selection-815.0-815.83


The Arts are always an easy target for cuts - why should posho luvvies get funding when there are bairns living out of food banks?

However, the arts draw in way more spending across the communities than the level of funding they get if that is way we want to quantify these things, plus it's a huge industry for all ages.

SNP has committed to doubling funding haven't they?

[Tichtheid]

Creative Scotland reveals £56m gap after deadline passes for long-term funding bids

https://archive.ph/XDada#selection-815.0-815.83


The Arts are always an easy target for cuts - why should posho luvvies get funding when there are bairns living out of food banks?

However, the arts draw in way more spending across the communities than the level of funding they get if that is way we want to quantify these things, plus it's a huge industry for all ages.

SNP has committed to doubling funding haven't they?

"More than double" apparently, but as usual the devil is in the detail and we'll wait and see - as I mentioned earlier the Lammermuir Festival had its support from Creative Scotland abruptly withheld this year, despite being assured verbally that everything was okay. That festival pulls in a lot of spending from punters in the towns and villages around East Lothian.

[Slick]

Creative Scotland reveals £56m gap after deadline passes for long-term funding bids

https://archive.ph/XDada#selection-815.0-815.83


The Arts are always an easy target for cuts - why should posho luvvies get funding when there are bairns living out of food banks?

However, the arts draw in way more spending across the communities than the level of funding they get if that is way we want to quantify these things, plus it's a huge industry for all ages.

It's quite difficult to know what is really going on here. SG pulled funding, then reinstated some of it, then pulled that, then made the very ambiguous statement about doubling funding at the conference which no one seems to be able to articulate. At the same time it seems that Creative Scotland have quite a bit of contingency funding through the national Lottery that they are reluctant to spend. I'm also a bit dubious about claims from the Edinburgh Festival/Fringe that they need loads of funding, I think there is a huge amount of mismanagement there.

I 100% agree with you that it is an easy target and few seem interested in the financial realities, it's quite depressing.

I guess you could tie this in quite easily to the report on Sturgeons diaries released yesterday showing that she spend the vast amount of her time on areas that she had no control over, and very little amount of time on things she did.

[Biffer]

Creative Scotland reveals £56m gap after deadline passes for long-term funding bids

https://archive.ph/XDada#selection-815.0-815.83


The Arts are always an easy target for cuts - why should posho luvvies get funding when there are bairns living out of food banks?

However, the arts draw in way more spending across the communities than the level of funding they get if that is way we want to quantify these things, plus it's a huge industry for all ages.

It's quite difficult to know what is really going on here. SG pulled funding, then reinstated some of it, then pulled that, then made the very ambiguous statement about doubling funding at the conference which no one seems to be able to articulate. At the same time it seems that Creative Scotland have quite a bit of contingency funding through the national Lottery that they are reluctant to spend. I'm also a bit dubious about claims from the Edinburgh Festival/Fringe that they need loads of funding, I think there is a huge amount of mismanagement there.

I 100% agree with you that it is an easy target and few seem interested in the financial realities, it's quite depressing.

I guess you could tie this in quite easily to the report on Sturgeons diaries released yesterday showing that she spend the vast amount of her time on areas that she had no control over, and very little amount of time on things she did.

The Edinburgh fringe and festival organisations themselves run on a really tight budget. For the fringe they see a very small amount of money from everything that changes hands, but still have a huge organisational challenge. For the international festival, well, classical music never makes a profit, even the best selling concerts rarely do much more than wipe their own face - when you've got 100 musicians in the orchestra to pay plus a few soloists in excess of £10k plus the conductor at the same or more, before you even start to look at venue costs, rehearsal costs etc, it soon mounts up.

[Biffer]

Creative Scotland reveals £56m gap after deadline passes for long-term funding bids

https://archive.ph/XDada#selection-815.0-815.83


The Arts are always an easy target for cuts - why should posho luvvies get funding when there are bairns living out of food banks?

However, the arts draw in way more spending across the communities than the level of funding they get if that is way we want to quantify these things, plus it's a huge industry for all ages.

SNP has committed to doubling funding haven't they?

"More than double" apparently, but as usual the devil is in the detail and we'll wait and see - as I mentioned earlier the Lammermuir Festival had its support from Creative Scotland abruptly withheld this year, despite being assured verbally that everything was okay. That festival pulls in a lot of spending from punters in the towns and villages around East Lothian.

Yeah, if they're including the Scot Gov spending on the new concert hall in Edinburgh it'll take a chunk of it, but if they are that's pretty deceitful given that'd be capital budget.

[Slick]

Creative Scotland reveals £56m gap after deadline passes for long-term funding bids

https://archive.ph/XDada#selection-815.0-815.83


The Arts are always an easy target for cuts - why should posho luvvies get funding when there are bairns living out of food banks?

However, the arts draw in way more spending across the communities than the level of funding they get if that is way we want to quantify these things, plus it's a huge industry for all ages.

It's quite difficult to know what is really going on here. SG pulled funding, then reinstated some of it, then pulled that, then made the very ambiguous statement about doubling funding at the conference which no one seems to be able to articulate. At the same time it seems that Creative Scotland have quite a bit of contingency funding through the national Lottery that they are reluctant to spend. I'm also a bit dubious about claims from the Edinburgh Festival/Fringe that they need loads of funding, I think there is a huge amount of mismanagement there.

I 100% agree with you that it is an easy target and few seem interested in the financial realities, it's quite depressing.

I guess you could tie this in quite easily to the report on Sturgeons diaries released yesterday showing that she spend the vast amount of her time on areas that she had no control over, and very little amount of time on things she did.

The Edinburgh fringe and festival organisations themselves run on a really tight budget. For the fringe they see a very small amount of money from everything that changes hands, but still have a huge organisational challenge. For the international festival, well, classical music never makes a profit, even the best selling concerts rarely do much more than wipe their own face - when you've got 100 musicians in the orchestra to pay plus a few soloists in excess of £10k plus the conductor at the same or more, before you even start to look at venue costs, rehearsal costs etc, it soon mounts up.

Thanks, that's helpful. Have I just made up the mismanagement bit (serious question, being a smartarse)? I thought there were some serious questions about the ex CEO and her handling of the finances.

[Biffer]

It's quite difficult to know what is really going on here. SG pulled funding, then reinstated some of it, then pulled that, then made the very ambiguous statement about doubling funding at the conference which no one seems to be able to articulate. At the same time it seems that Creative Scotland have quite a bit of contingency funding through the national Lottery that they are reluctant to spend. I'm also a bit dubious about claims from the Edinburgh Festival/Fringe that they need loads of funding, I think there is a huge amount of mismanagement there.

I 100% agree with you that it is an easy target and few seem interested in the financial realities, it's quite depressing.

I guess you could tie this in quite easily to the report on Sturgeons diaries released yesterday showing that she spend the vast amount of her time on areas that she had no control over, and very little amount of time on things she did.

The Edinburgh fringe and festival organisations themselves run on a really tight budget. For the fringe they see a very small amount of money from everything that changes hands, but still have a huge organisational challenge. For the international festival, well, classical music never makes a profit, even the best selling concerts rarely do much more than wipe their own face - when you've got 100 musicians in the orchestra to pay plus a few soloists in excess of £10k plus the conductor at the same or more, before you even start to look at venue costs, rehearsal costs etc, it soon mounts up.

Thanks, that's helpful. Have I just made up the mismanagement bit (serious question, being a smartarse)? I thought there were some serious questions about the ex CEO and her handling of the finances.

There may have been but there's always a lot of bitching in the Arts, things not getting funded that other people think should be etc.

The answer for the Edinburgh festivals though is a hotel tax in Edinburgh. Part of that money should be used to support them - after all hotels are one of the primary beneficiaries of all those visitors.

[Slick]

The Edinburgh fringe and festival organisations themselves run on a really tight budget. For the fringe they see a very small amount of money from everything that changes hands, but still have a huge organisational challenge. For the international festival, well, classical music never makes a profit, even the best selling concerts rarely do much more than wipe their own face - when you've got 100 musicians in the orchestra to pay plus a few soloists in excess of £10k plus the conductor at the same or more, before you even start to look at venue costs, rehearsal costs etc, it soon mounts up.

Thanks, that's helpful. Have I just made up the mismanagement bit (serious question, being a smartarse)? I thought there were some serious questions about the ex CEO and her handling of the finances.

There may have been but there's always a lot of bitching in the Arts, things not getting funded that other people think should be etc.

The answer for the Edinburgh festivals though is a hotel tax in Edinburgh. Part of that money should be used to support them - after all hotels are one of the primary beneficiaries of all those visitors.

Totally agree, I can't for the life of me understand why that is a such a divisive issue. Literally no one is going to call off their holiday to Edinburgh for a £5/6 local tax.

[Tichtheid]

Totally agree, I can't for the life of me understand why that is a such a divisive issue. Literally no one is going to call off their holiday to Edinburgh for a £5/6 local tax.

A quick Google tells me that up to 3 million people come to Edinburgh for the festival, for a fiver that would bring in £15M to start with. The Old Town is back to being hoaching all year round now, by the looks of things, charging a fiver per stay over the course of a year would go a very long way.