Edinburgh’s count this year will take place over two days at the Royal Highland Centre, Ingliston. It gets underway at 9am this morning.
Throughout the planning process, our elections team has sought guidance from public health experts, consulting extensively with the Director of Public Health, to make sure the event runs as safely and as smoothly as possible.
Today (Friday 7 May) the results for Edinburgh Central, Edinburgh Southern and Edinburgh Western will be announced, while results will be declared for Edinburgh Eastern, Edinburgh Pentlands and Edinburgh Northern and Leith as well as the list/Region vote results tomorrow, Saturday 8 May.
Safety measures in place at the count
Everyone must wear a face covering when moving and circulating within the count venue, unless they are exempt.
Hand sanitising stations will be positioned throughout the venue.
Physical distancing will be in place.
Regular cleaning, including at touch points.
Contact tracing system with all people attending the count.
One-way systems in parts of the building.
Room capacity limits will be in place.
Enhanced ventilation at the venue.
Andrew Kerr, Chief Executive of the City of Edinburgh Council and Returning Officer for the Edinburgh constituencies and the Lothian Region, said: The arrangements for the 2021 Scottish Parliamentary Election feel very different from previous elections.
“Throughout our preparations our elections team has sought guidance from public health experts and we’ve put in place extensive additional Covid-19 health and safety measures to help keep everyone safe, reduce the risk of spreading the virus and of course protect the integrity of the Election.
“We’re taking all the necessary steps to support the COVID-safe operation of the election count at the Highland Hall. In line with Public Health Scotland (PHS) guidance every effort has been made to make sure the centre is well ventilated, hand-sanitising stations are positioned throughout the venue, facemasks are worn whenever people move about the venue and that everyone observes two-metre physical distancing at all times.
“Count assistants will adhere to two-metre distancing but don’t have to wear a face covering when seated on the count floor.
“The safety of everyone working at the count is of utmost importance and measures will be enforced by our marshalls throughout the duration of the event for the health and safety of everyone present. I want to thank the team for their efforts so far and look forward to delivering a robust process in these unprecedented times.”
The results from the count will be tweeted live from @Edinburgh_cc as they are announced by the Returning Officer, with the hashtag #SPE21RESULT.
Because of COVID-19, there will be safety measures in place at polling stations to help you vote safely (for example, a one-way system or restrictions on the number of people allowed in).
If you choose to vote in person, make sure you:
wear a face covering (unless you’re exempt)
bring your own pen or pencil (there will be clean pencils available at the polling station if you forget to bring your own)
use the hand sanitiser provided when entering and leaving the polling station
“all the parties still have something to play for tomorrow”
Ipsos MORI’s final 2021 Scottish Parliament election poll for STV News indicates that the SNP is on course to win significantly more of the vote than any other party at the election on 6th May.
Our headline estimate of voting intention on the constituency vote is:
SNP: 50% (-3 compared with our last poll of 29 March – 4 April)
Scottish Labour: 22% (+4)
Scottish Conservatives: 20% (unchanged)
Scottish Liberal Democrats: 6% (unchanged)
Scottish Green Party: 2% (unchanged)
Other: 1% (unchanged)
Our headline estimate of voting intention on the regional list vote is:
SNP: 39% (+1)
Scottish Conservatives: 23% (+2)
Scottish Labour: 18% (unchanged)
Scottish Green Party: 12% (unchanged)
Scottish Liberal Democrats: 4% (-2)
The Alba Party: 2% (-1)
Other: 2% (unchanged)
These findings confirm that the SNP is going into Thursday’s election in a very strong position. However, it is not possible to predict with confidence on the basis of these results whether the SNP will definitely win an outright majority of seats in the Scottish Parliament.
This is both because specific local circumstances will play a role and because all polls are subject to a margin of error, which could easily be the difference between the SNP gaining an outright majority and falling short of this.
When it comes to the contest for second place, Labour and the Conservatives look to be going into the constituency vote contest neck and neck. The Conservatives look slightly more comfortably ahead on regional list voting intention (23%, compared with 18% for Labour).
The Greens, on 12%, look set to increase their share of the regional vote on the 6% they achieved in 2016. As in 2016, they look likely to finish ahead of the Liberal Democrats in share of regional list votes.
The Alba Party, on just 2%, may struggle to gain enough votes to return any MSPs (although this is, of course, dependent on whether they secure a higher level than this in specific regions).
Among likely voters, 12% say they may still change their mind before they cast their constituency vote.
This rises to 21% of Labour supporters who may change their mind, while SNP and Conservative supporters are more likely to say that they have definitely decided to vote for their party (91% and 90%).
Similarly, 14% say they may still change their mind before they cast their regional list vote.
15% of Labour supporters, 11% of Conservative supporters and 9% of SNP supporters say they may change their mind on the list vote
Three quarters (74%) of SNP constituency voters say they will vote ‘both votes SNP’ by casting their regional list vote for the party as well.
The remaining 26% are most likely to say they will cast their list vote for the Scottish Green Party (18% of SNP constituency voters say this), with a small minority saying they will vote for The Alba Party (4%) or Scottish Labour (3%) on the regional list.
The Scottish public are evenly split on independence.Among those likely to vote in an independence referendum, 50% say they would vote Yes while 50% would vote No.
Emily Gray, Managing Director of Ipsos MORI Scotland, commented: “Whether there will be a SNP majority or not hangs in the balance.
“The election result may come down to how the parties perform in a small number of key marginal seats, as well as in the regional vote, which is likely to prove particularly important in determining which party is in second place.
“With a relatively high percentage of voters still saying they’ve not definitely decided, all the parties still have something to play for tomorrow.”
IT’S been the dullest election I can remember. Yes, you can blame COVID, but pandemic aside, it’s hardly been riveting, has it?
Even the return of Alex Salmond – mair comebacks than Frank Sinatrawifie said – did little to raise excitement levels to anything above ‘mildly interesting’. The one memorable moment of the campaign for me was not Anas Sarwar’s dad dancing, it was ‘Gorgeous George’ Galloway’s party election broadcast. I haven’t a clue what it was all about, but it was unforgettable nonetheless.
The Leader Debates were dominated by middle class blokes in ties (occasionally during they were slightly risqué and removed the neckwear to show that they are ordinary blokes just like us). The ties – like the rosettes – are a different colour, but they are still ties. The uniform. All in this together? You bet they are, mired in identikit neo-liberal politics that will change little for the most disadvantaged.
The debates looked like the sort of middle-management meeting that might take place in any big bank or insurance company.
And the women must also play the game. First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, serious, statesmanlike (should that be statespersonlike?), looking to be given the opportunity to ‘get on with the job’. No tie, but the smart business suits are a model of conservatism. More of the same, we’re promised. There’s more to do, we’re told. Trust me, she appeals.
There’s every indication that the public do indeed trust Nicola Sturgeon. The unpleasant uncertainties of the Salmond affair have barely left a mark, and confident daily press briefings throughout the pandemic – much as she would say it is the last thing she would have wanted – has given Ms Sturgeon a platform other politicians would dream of.
She has undoubtedly come out of the worst of the pandemic with her reputation enhanced; seen as a safe and steady pair of hands throughout the crisis while Prime Minister Boris Johnson bumbled and blundered from one self-inflicted crisis to another.
Scots voters will deliver their verdict tomorrow but it seems inevitable that a grateful nation will reward Ms Sturgeon’s apparent competence with a further five year term. True, the government’s rhetoric was seldom matched by concrete achievements over the last five years, but many voters will see this as a time for continuity as we plan our way back to some semblance of normality. Conservative with a small ‘c’. And anyway, what’s the alternative?
New Labour (in both senses) leader Anas Sarwar unilaterally declared a new kind of politics. A break from the past, just as Sarwar is a break from the recent socialist past of Jeremy Corbyn and Ricard Leonard. Let’s put the politics of division behind us, he appealed. We must focus on Scotland’s National Recovery, he said. Trouble is, so did everyone else, including Nicola Sturgeon. Indeed, is there anyone in the land who would argue with that?
Certainly not Lib Dem leader, he of the famous photoshoot stunts but not a lot else, Willie Rennie. Or Patrick Harvie. Or Douglas Ross. All agree – the national recovery must be paramount, they sing from the same hymn-sheet.
And maybe that’s the problem: there’s nothing new here. Nothing radical. Nothing different. Nothing to fire up passion and nothing that will shake voters from their apathy.
Opposition parties should have started the election campaign on the front foot, but right from the start of the election campaign, just days after a weakened Nicola Sturgeon survived accusations of misleading parliament during the Salmond Affair, it was back to business as usual – and the opposition parties retreated into their deferential, subservient roles.
Quickly out of the starting blocks, Labour proclaimed: ‘We want to be the official opposition!’ Hardly the sparkiest motivator for the troops out on the streets delivering leaflets, is it? ‘Vote for us – we’re nearly second best!’ Honestly, who wants to be Number Two? Well, Labour does. That is the limit of their ambitions – to defeat the Tories and finish second. Even a distant second would do.
For present-day Labour – a party that dominated Scottish politics for generations – second place would be seen, and spun, as progress. Opinion polls suggest that even that target has proved beyond them this time round, however. And they can’t even blame Corbyn.
The Tories know that their best hope of progress – finishing second again, that is (even the most loyal true-blue zealots dismiss the idea that they could do any better than that!) – lies in the top-up lists whereby MSPs gain seats, almost through the back door, in Holyrood’s hybrid proportional representation voting system.
While the SNP government’s shortcomings have been increasingly documented – education, drug deaths, starving local government of adequate funding, to name but three – the Tories decided instead to concentrate their fire on another independence referendum!
It’s their tried and tested strategy: only by voting for us can you stop a ‘damaging referendum’, they claim. They can’t – it’s uncertain now that their London bosses would even try – but the argument seems to be a compelling one for unionists in Scotland: no matter how bad the SNP government is in Holyrood, they have the comforting certainty of remaining part of the UK.
Turning the election into a straight Independence vs Union choice suits the Tories down to the ground: the Conservative and Unionist Party is surely the party anxious voters will turn to again in the fight to preserve the union? The clue’s in the name!
And you don’t even have the inconvenience of having to come up with policies to address the nitty-gritty of domestic politics. So ‘Stop The Referendum’ is the simple Tory message – and this despite some frustrated nationalists arguing that there seems to be little appetite among the SNP leadership for an early referendum anyway!
So while we know that the SNP will almost certainly be the biggest party following tomorrow’s elections, there are some things we do not know. Most importantly, will the SNP gain an overall majority?
Scotland will elect 129 MSPs tomorrow. 73 of these are constituency MSPs who are elected using the traditional ‘First Past the Post’ method.
The other 56 are ‘List’ MSPs who are elected through the Additional Member system of proportional representation. Scotland is split into eight regions, each of which will elect seven list MSPs.
To form a majority government a party must win at least 65 seats. The SNP won 63 seats in the 2016 elections and formed a minority administration with the support of the independence-supporting Scottish Greens. So near but yet so far – can the SNP reach that magic number this time round?
Other issues of interest: Will Alex Salmond’s Alba party win any seats? And, if so, will the SNP hold their noses and do a deal with them to advance the case for another referendum should they need to do so?
Alba has argued, with some justification, that a vote for the SNP on the peach ballot paper is effectively a wasted vote as the SNP is expected to hoover up the vast majority of constituencies so will gain few list seats. Will nationalist voters take heed to ensure a ‘supermajority’ or take their chances with an SNP1, 2?
One thing is certain. There will be a lot of new faces in the new Holyrood Parliament. No fewer than 33 MSPs have stood down and will not contest tomorrow’s election. That’s a lot of experience to lose as the new parliament attempts to formulate a strategy for post-pandemic recovery.
Among the best known are Jeane Freeman, Aileen Campbell and Mike Russell of the SNP, Tories Ruth Davidson and Margaret Mitchell, Labour’s Neil Findlay and Iain Gray, Green John Finnie and Lib Dem Mike Rumbles. Presiding Officer Ken Mackintosh also steps down.
Also leaving at last are ‘Independent’ MSPs Derek Mackay and Mark McDonald, former SNP Ministers who left office in disgrace but doggedly held on to their Holyrood seats – and £64,470 annual salaries – until the bitter end.
Here’s hoping the new parliament can agree cross-party legislation to ensure that democratic disgraces like these will not be allowed to happen again.
So good luck to all the candidates as they deliver their final leaflets this evening. None will sleep too well tonight, whether you have the biggest majority in Scotland or you are standing for the very first time in an ‘unwinnable’ seat. It’s the adrenaline!
They will all be up at the crack of dawn to get their A-boards out at the polling stations, hoping for decent weather – we had some snow and hail flurries in Edinburgh today – to encourage a good voter turnout. It will be a long day – and then there’s the long wait until Friday’s count, so a second night of troubled sleep ahead!
Locally, it’s hard to see any shock results, but Edinburgh Central – Ruth Davidson’s seat before she left for that lucrative, unelected retirement home, the House of Lords – will be interesting. Can the Tories hold on to this SNP target seat?
Other seats to keep an eye on are East Lothian (Labour seat; SNP target), Airdrie & Shotts (SNP held; Labour target), Moray (SNP seat; Tory target), Dumbarton (Labour; SNP target) and Perthshire North (SNP; Tory target).
ENRG platforms will carry interviews, analysis and results
A group of students from Edinburgh Napier’s Journalism department are to provide live coverage of the Scottish election results.
And they have already gained an exclusive interview with First Minister Nicola Sturgeon.
Third year Journalism BA student Steven Brown is editor for the event, which will be staged on Friday, May 7 as the results from the previous day’s election are revealed.
Around 20 students will take part in the Merchiston campus event, which will feature eight hours of live broadcasting on the Radio ENRG platform plus online support on the ENRG Debrief website.
Steven said: “We are really looking forward to the event. We have secured a number of interviews already, with virtually all of the party leaders in Scotland agreeing to talk to us. We aim to provide expert analysis too as the results happen.
“It will be a great experience. Radio ENRG and the Debrief website have established real credibility and are treated pretty much like other professional media.”
The event follows the hugely successful live coverage of the US elections back in November.
That ambitious enterprise caught the attention of the BBC’s North America Editor Jon Sopel, who tweeted his support, saying: “Have a great night. When I was a journalism student, it was me and Steve Richards (another well-known UK print and broadcast journalist) commenting on the Peckham by-election (of 1982). Glad to see you guys starting with the most consequential presidential election in decades.”
This time round, another top BBC journalist will be involved. Edinburgh Napier journalism graduate Nick Eardley, one of the corporation’s leading political commentators, will give his thoughts on the elections in an exclusive interview with ENRG.
Steven said: “It was fantastic to get support from Jon Sopel last time. It’s great to know that people like him started out in exactly the same way we are. And this time Nick Eardley will be helping us out. Just ten years ago he was himself a student in these same classrooms.”
Hours and hours of preparation – agreeing the broadcast and online schedules, sourcing story ideas, sorting out interviewees – will be done before even an article is published on the website or any audio hits the airwaves.
The live coverage itself will begin at 10am on Friday (May 7) on Radio ENRG and run through to 6pm, while the ENRG Debrief website has already begun publishing content.
Steven added: “These events are incredibly inspiring to work on and offer students a unique and invaluable opportunity to learn and gain knowledge and understanding of what it’s like to work as a journalist on huge events.
“To be able to publish our coverage in two mediums, on the radio and online, will give the event a true industry-like feel. It’s going to be an amazing experience.”
Students taking part come from all four years of the Journalism BA plus the Masters programme.
Radio ENRG is a student-led broadcasting platform, organised from Napier’s journalism department. Since its launch in 2014, it has gone from strength to strength, winning numerous national awards for the quality of its content.
Over the years, the ENRG family has grown to include three websites – Debrief, Sport, and Music & Arts – all of which are led by student editors and publish new content most days. More sites are due to come online in the next few months,
Tune in to Radio ENRG from 10am on Friday, May 7 to hear the live coverage at:
Alex Salmond: ‘BBC are an affront to Scottish democracy’
ALBA has returned to Ofcom with new evidence of BBC bias in the election campaign.
In a further complaint to the broadcasting regulator (below) ALBA detail the different criteria to debates and coverage being applied by BBC Wales where the Abolish the Welsh Assembly Party were accorded full participation in the debates programme.
ALBA leader Alex Salmond said: “The BBC are an affront to Scottish democracy. There have now been no less than seven opinion polls in this campaign showing an ALBA parliamentary breakthrough.
“The new evidence from Wales leaves them without a leg to stand on in terms of their biased Scottish coverage. But BBC bosses continue to ban us from the debates.
“The BBC also continue to refuse fair coverage on the flimsiest of grounds.
“Yesterday (Sunday) for example in one of the most important statements of the campaign ALBA women candidates rallied outside the Parliament in the declaration in support of protected sex based rights.
“The BBC claimed they couldn’t send a camera a few hundred yards because it was a Bank holiday weekend! They then interviewed Willie Rennie in the same area up a hill on his puff saying precisely zilch.
“Of course BBC presenters continue to talk about ALBA, often in disparaging terms. They just don’t allow us on to answer back just as the BBC hierarchy have kept us out of the leaders debates.
“In the last few days of the election the ALBA street and community initiatives will gain further ground and the BBC attempt to silence ALBA will fail.
“However as our letter to Ofcom makes clear the regulator should step in right now and put the BBC house in order.”
LETTER TO OFCOM
Dear Ms. Rose,
Our clients have considered the terms of the Election Committee’s decision of 28 April. We write to invite the Committee to reconsider that decision and to review matters urgently.
Our clients consider that the evidence of a structural bias within the BBC against them grows stronger as the campaign progresses and reaches its conclusion and further examples have occurred since the Committee’s decision.
The treatment by the BBC of other parties is simply inconsistent with its treatment of our clients. On Thursday of last week, the day after the Committee’s decision, the BBC broadcast the equivalent Leaders Debate as part of its coverage of the elections to the Welsh Senedd. Representatives of the Labour, Conservative, Plaid Cymru, Liberal Democrats and Abolish the Welsh Assembly parties participated in the first hour of that programme and those of Reform UK, the Green Party and UKIP in the second, half-hour part (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-56915347).
The Liberals currently have one seat in the Senedd and are averaging around 4% in current polling. The Greens have no seats and are averaging around the same. UKIP support in Wales is so low that it has not even registered on the last two polls. The AWAP is currently predicted to take two seats in the Senedd. Reform UK is averaging 1% in the polls and is predicted to take no seats
We set out an extract from the BBC’s 2021 Guidelines, applicable to Wales, in the undernote below, highlighting sections relating to “larger” and “smaller” parties. We would submit that our clients’ polling performance, and the developing political context in Scotland, is such that it would be simply perverse to exclude them from the upcoming BBC Leaders Debate.
A decision to do so would be simply illogical, entirely inconsistent with the treatment afforded to other parties elsewhere across the BBC’s output and simply inexplicable other than by animus towards our clients. What other possible explanation can be proffered for such an entirely inconsistent approach? No single example of that animus is going to be conclusive and any single example can be explained away but we would submit that that does not mean that each example can simply be ignored.
Some regard must be had to the pattern provided by the totality of each single example. An emblematic example of the BBC’s attitude towards our clients occurred yesterday. A number of our clients’ women candidates met outside the Holyrood Parliament building to publicise our clients’ policies on women’s rights. Our clients spoke in advance to the BBC about coverage of that event. The BBC explained that it would not be able to cover it as it did not have a camera in the area yet it managed, our clients later noted, to give coverage, in the same location, of the Liberals’ Willie Rennie.
We would submit that the behaviour of the BBC shows quite clearly that it is ignoring, and suggests that without intervention it will continue to ignore, the very clear exhortation in the Committee’s decision that it (the BBC) must, in short, keep matters under review to ensure that in determining the level and nature of the coverage which it gives our clients it gives proper weight and consideration to the developing political context in Scotland.
In addition to the matters outlined above, however, our clients are dissatisfied with certain aspects of the decision itself. They have obtained the opinion of Counsel on matters.
Our clients (and we) were surprised that the BBC, having decided not to take up the Committee’s invitation to be present at the substantive hearing, and to make oral representations at the same time and in the same forum as our clients, were nevertheless provided with details of Mr. Salmond’s extemporaneous submission and given a chance to comment, extensively, on it and to submit further material to the Committee.
Over and above that, Counsel’s advice is that the Committee’s decision is in error and susceptible to judicial review. His view is that the terms of paragraphs 3.20 and 3.21 are clearly erroneous and that the terms of the latter are self-contradictory. The 2017 changes expressly abandoned not just the list of larger parties but the whole concept of larger parties and the whole concept of having a list of them. The BBC in its own submissions supported that abandonment of these concepts. None of that makes any sense if the point was, as the second sentence of paragraph 3.21 asserts, simply to allow broadcasters to come up with their own definitions of “larger parties” and make their own lists of them.
If that had been the intention or purpose, there would have been no mention of concept, rather than the constant repetition of it which in fact features as part of the 2017 document. All that would have been needed was a simple statement that Ofcom would no longer be deciding who the “larger parties” were or providing a list of them and that it would be up to individual broadcasters to do so if they wanted to continue to use the concept.
It may be true, as asserted at paragraph 3.21, that the BBC using concepts which have been specifically discontinued by Ofcom (supported by the BBC) does not in itself contradict the Code, although in Counsel’s view even that is arguable.
What is undoubtedly true, in his opinion, is that in the specific case of the Alba Party the use of those discontinued and disapproved concepts by the BBC has caused a view to be taken of the appropriate coverage to be given which would not have been taken had those disapproved concepts not been applied.
Counsel does not accept that the approach taken by the BBC can be separated from what is required directly by the Code as easily as the Committee decision asserts. In fact, in his view, it cannot be separated at all. His view is that this flawed approach taints the whole Committee process and makes the outcome of it unfair.
Counsel also believes that Ofcom should not have gone back to the BBC after Mr. Salmond’s oral submission as the BBC had already indicated that their participation in the process was concluded.
He also points out that Ofcom selected a day at random and then based little or nothing in its decision on what actually happened on that day. The selection of a random day was a method of approaching things proposed by Ofcom and yet the results produced were then ignored or explained away as unrepresentative.
This is completely illogical. To ignore the fact that our clients did not feature at all on this random day in effect breaches the process which the Committee itself prescribed, negates its whole point and fails to recognise that the coverage on this random day in fact wholly vindicates our clients’ basic argument that they are unfairly treated by use of the disapproved concepts of “larger” and “smaller” parties rather direct application of the present Ofcom Code.
Counsel feels that the BBC’s admission of the AWAP, a party which he feels is comparable by analogy to our clients, into the equivalent debate in Wales is significant. Appendix 3 of the BBC guidance says in terms that AWAP can be given coverage “proportionate” to the four “larger parties” in Wales under certain circumstances but the BBC has failed to take a similar view of Alba. As a result, Counsel feels that even in terms of their own flawed guidance the BBC has acted inconsistently.
As we say, in light of all this, our clients are dissatisfied at the BBC’s continuing decision to exclude them from the upcoming Leaders Debate and we would ask that the Committee urgently reconsiders matters in light of the new material which we present and of the submissions made in this letter. Failing that, we will require to take our clients’ urgent instructions o the options for judicial review which Counsel advises are open to them.
On 6 May voters across Scotland will be called to elect 129 members of the devolved Scottish Parliament for the sixth time in its history (writes Electoral Reform Society’s FEDERICO SCHOLARI).
The Scottish Parliament passes laws on crucial areas of local government, including health, education and transport- as well as some influence on tax and welfare benefits.
Anyone with a Scottish address, registered to vote and aged 16 and over is eligible to vote.
In 2015, Scotland championed the votes at 16 campaign by lowering the voting age to 16 to extend the franchise, allowing more than 100,000 young people to have their say in both parliamentary and local council elections.
73 constituency MSPs are elected from the Westminster-style FPTP ballot paper. The candidate with most votes is elected for each constituency, irrespective of vote share.
56 ‘list’ MSPs (the so-called additional members) are then added from a second ballot paper that includes a list of parties. Additional members are added based on the number of seats a party has won in the first ballot versus their overall vote share, in order to make parliament more proportional and match how voters preferences.
A proportional compromise?
The second ballot paper ensures greater representation, which compensates for the ailments of FPTP. The proportional element is intended to override any disproportionality created by the majoritarian nature of the constituency seats, providing a more proportional parliament while also keeping a single local MSP.
General Elections 2019 (FPTP) vs. Scottish Parliament Elections 2016 (AMS)
Our 2019 report on General Elections shone a light on those voters left voiceless due to disproportionate voting systems- with Scotland delivering some of the most disproportionate results across the UK for Westminster elections.
Under pure FPTP, the Scottish National Party performance was highly disproportionate, with a 22 percentage point increase in seats for an eight-point increase in votes. Some precarious victories occurred, with slim majorities in seats where more than two parties had substantial support.
Contrarily, the 2016 parliamentary elections saw the most proportional results to date under the AMS, which is a substantial improvement over pure FPTP. If the Scottish Parliament elections were conducted under FPTP we’d see one-party domination across Scotland with supporters of the other parties losing out.
Voting Intentions
The most recent polls show the SNP -currently in power- boasting a considerable lead over both Conservatives and Labour. The only notable change from the 2016 elections results sees the Greens gaining some ground over Lib Dems.
Differing areas of political debate include the potential for a new referendum for Scottish independence, post-pandemic economic recovery, climate change policies and more.
The Alba Party
There has been much talk of the launch of Alex Salmond’s pro-independence party, seen by many as an attempt to ‘game’ the AMS system to secure a disproportionate result in favour of pro-independence parties.
Alba, which is only contesting list seats, is pitching itself to pro-independence SNP voters who, due to the SNP’s dominance in the constituency seats, might see their list vote wasted.
But if Alba succeeded in this it’s not because they gamed the system but because enough voters supported them. if a party is popular enough to pick up a decent level of support on the List vote and gain seats, like the Greens did in 2016 and look like doing again, then it isn’t really ‘gaming the system’. The system is designed to provide fair representation for supporters of parties who would not be properly represented under FPTP.
Polls show that it is far from certain that Alba will receive enough support to pick up List seats but ultimately that is a matter for the voters of Scotland to determine, one way or the other.
A more representative system
As Scottish voters prepare to go to the polls in May they can do so knowing that their vote will count and the parliament elected will be representative – a luxury most voters in England don’t have at this election.
And now, after 20 years of PR in Scotland surely it’s time Westminster caught up and ensured that voters in England could vote with the same peace of mind.
Highest ever numbers of registered voters and postal votes
With less than a week to go until the Scottish Parliament Election 2021, Edinburgh is gearing up to play its own part in the vote on 6 May.
Preparations are already well under way across the city’s 140 polling places and at the Royal Highland Centre, where the count will be held over two days (7 and 8 May).
Training is in progress for staff working on the day and the first postal votes are being processed.
More people than ever before are registered to vote in this election Edinburgh (401,321 people) and more than a quarter of these (102,138) have opted to vote by post – the largest number of postal votes of any Scottish local authority and the highest ever for the Capital.
And though registration for the electoral roll is now closed, citizens are still being urged to think carefully about their vote, to ensure they know when, where and how to vote on Thursday, 6 May and to return their postal vote in plenty of time.
Andrew Kerr, Chief Executive of the City of Edinburgh Council and Returning Officer for the Edinburgh constituencies and the Lothian Region, said: “We are entering the final days of preparation for the Scottish Parliament Election and anticipation is clearly beginning to build across the city.
“Running an election in the Capital is no mean feat, and it’s thanks to a great deal of organisation and the hard work of our Elections Team and hundreds of count and polling staff to adapt to the additional restrictions due to the pandemic that things go to plan.
“As we draw nearer to the day, I hope the public are making their own plans for voting, and ensuring they know when, where and how to have their say, remembering to put one cross on each paper on the day.
“On polling day there will be additional hygiene and distancing measures at polling places to keep voters and staff safe. These include a fresh pencil for each voter, protective screens for polling staff, one-way systems in some venues, additional ventilation and limits on the number of voters in polling places at any time.
“This year we’ve got the largest electorate we’ve ever had for an election in Edinburgh (401,321 registered to vote) and more than a quarter of these (102,138 people) have opted for a postal vote – the highest number of postal votes we’ve ever had and more than any other Scottish local authority. If you’re voting this way please make sure you post it in plenty of time – they must be received by 10pm on Thursday 6 May.“
As we count down the final few days until voting day on 6 May, we’re counting up some of the key facts about Edinburgh’s vote:
401,321: the number of people registered to vote in the Scottish Parliament Election 2021 in Edinburgh. Of these 102,138 of these are postal voters. This is the highest electorate and number of postal votes ever for an election in Edinburgh and there are more people registered to vote by post in Edinburgh than in any other Scottish Council area.
There are six constituencies in Edinburgh – Edinburgh Central, Edinburgh Eastern, Edinburgh Northern & Leith, Edinburgh Pentlands, Edinburgh Southern and Edinburgh Western. The Lothian Region also includes the three constituencies Almond Valley, Linlithgow and Midlothian North & Musselburgh.
There are 33 individual candidates standing across Edinburgh’s constituencies. 18 parties and one independent are contesting the seven seats available for the Lothian Region, with a total of 94 candidates involved.
140 buildings will be used as polling places on Thursday, 5 May, housing 352 polling stations. Each station will have two ballot boxes – one for the lilac Constituency paper and one for the peach-coloured Region paper.
This year, the Council will employ over 900 polling staff to assist the public to cast their vote – with one presiding officer and at least one polling assistant in each polling station.
The count will take place over two days (Friday 7 and Saturday 8 May), counting three constituencies on each day. Friday: Edinburgh Central, Edinburgh Southern and Edinburgh Western. Saturday: Edinburgh Eastern, Edinburgh Northern and Leith and Edinburgh Pentlands. The results of the regional list vote will be declared on Saturday 8 May.
Over the two-day count, there will be another 300 staff per day tallying votes.
Amongst the equipment used in Edinburgh this May will be:
140 POLLING PLACES
250,000 pencils*
632 bottles of hand gel
140 bottles of anti-bac spray
140 blue rolls
140 boxes of face masks
140 boxes of gloves
280 visors
COUNT VENUE – HIGHLAND HALL, ROYAL HIGHLAND CENTRE
250 bottles of hand gel
36 bottles of anti-bac spray
36 blue rolls
27 cleaning stations
320 clear rubbish bags
3,744 Glacier mints/fruits per day (served in individual cups for each staff member)
660 post-it pads
1068 rubber thimbles
ADDITIONAL FACTS
8526m² – the area of the count venue – Highland Hall at the Royal Highland Centre. This is bigger than the size of a professional football pitch.
At the UK Parliamentary Election in December 2019 turnout in the Capital was high, at an average of 73% across Edinburgh’s five constituencies
Turnout for last Scottish Parliament election in 2016 was approx. 60%
Edinburgh accounts for around 8.7% of Scotland’s electorate – second highest in Scotland after Glasgow.
Three different types of polling booths are used in Edinburgh – aluminium, wood and cardboard.
Polls open at 7am and close at 10pm on 6 May.
*voters are encouraged to bring their own pencil, or can keep the single-use pencils provided at the polling places
Regulation of the construction industry is essential for a safer and more productive future, election hopefuls from Scotland’s main political parties told a special digital hustings hosted by the Construction Industry Coronavirus (CICV) Forum.
The importance of skills and training in the industry also won unanimous cross-party agreement from panellists during the exclusive event held online this week.
Support for reform of procurement practices and a review of VAT on domestic repairs were other positive talking points – supporting the Forum’s own manifesto suggestions for ways to improve the industry.
The hustings, held via webinar on Tuesday 27 April, featured five candidates currently facing election to the Scottish Parliament:
Carole Ford, Scottish Liberal Democrats
Monica Lennon, Scottish Labour
Laura Moodie, Scottish Greens
Alexander Stewart, Scottish Conservative and Unionist
Kevin Stewart, SNP.
Answering questions from senior Forum representatives and members of a selected audience, all panellists agreed that regulation was essential for the future of the construction industry.
Kevin Stewart said: “It should be the aim of all of us to drive up standards and safety and build trust in people doing day to day work. Why is a security guard a regulated professional when a plumber is not?
“We need to have real debate about the regulatory issues, and a consensus about moving forward on regulation. The Grenfell Inquiry highlights the need to have occupations regulated to keep people safe and give public confidence in construction work.”
Ms Ford agreed, saying: “Professional regulation’s primary purpose is to protect the public, maintain high standards and protect qualifications and standards in the sector.
“The cowboys are doing no favours to those who are properly qualified, so we are totally committed to all measures which would support consumers and protect standards and professional qualifications, and totally in support of having a well-regulated, well respected construction industry which has the confidence of the public.”
Also in favour of regulation was Ms Lennon, who said: “It is important that qualified tradespeople are recognised for their experience and their competence, meaning the public will have confidence in who is coming into their homes or workplace.
“It makes sense to give people confidence in their work and that they will work safely and have pride in what they do, so we fully support measures to improve regulation and improve public safety.”
Training and apprenticeships ‘vitally important’
The importance of skills, training and apprenticeships in the sector was another topic on which all panellists were in full agreement.
Alexander Stewart said: “Economic growth is the cornerstone for this recovery, and construction plays a vital role in that. Skills and training apprenticeships are vitally important and we fundamentally believe that there should be more funding put into it.
“We want to bring people back and get more new people into the industry and ensure that women have more opportunity to become more involved. We also want economic growth, which will only come about through investment in training and support mechanisms.”
Ms Lennon concurred: “Jobs are at the top and at the heart of our manifesto and our vision for the next five years is a roadmap to recovery that focuses on skills – up-skilling, re-skilling and how we can support local government to take on apprentices and use a talented workforce in Scotland to retro-fit homes to tackle fuel poverty and create new jobs in construction and manufacturing.”
Procurement ‘a bugbear that needs resolved’
Questions on procurement reform had been raised by several Forum members ahead of the husting – and again, all five panellists were firm in their convictions that change is needed.
Ms Moodie said: “We believe public procurement could be a real growth boost for small, local businesses that are socially and environmentally responsible and we are committed to reforming procurement requirements that could fulfil that.
“We want to make sure Scottish businesses capture more of the supply chain opportunities, especially from the rise in the growing renewable industry and I believe there is a lot of room for improvement in terms of accessibility and use of online procurement tools.
“We would also like to see more support for small businesses so they can compete on a level playing field with bigger companies in terms of bidding for the work.”
Ms Lennon added: “Procurement is quite simply a bugbear that needs resolved and there are huge opportunities around local engagement and low carbon innovation. SMEs are the lifeblood of our economy and we will reorientate procurement to make sure it works for businesses in Scotland.”
Ms Moodie said it was a “burden on businesses” when they were trying to expand and develop, while Ms Lennon said any changes would unlock plenty of opportunities.
Ms Ford agreed, adding: “The current VAT system is regressive and holding back demand for vital energy efficiency improvements and retrofits.”
Kevin Stewart was also in agreement, adding that VAT was not a devolved matter but that he wanted it reduced or abolished for refurbishment repairs and regeneration projects.
Panellists also responded to one audience member’s point that a recent survey revealed that 52 per cent of homes are not wind and watertight, with £3.8bn spent annually on their repair and maintenance.
Ms Ford replied that in the west of Scotland the factoring issue in tenements needs looked at as well as that of owners’ responsibilities, saying: “The Edinburgh solution has its own problems, but owners and the responsibilities of multi-occupancy properties needs reviewed.”
Kevin Stewart spoke of “educating people” about the importance of properties being wind and watertight and the need to be ambitious in helping more, while namesake Alexander added: “Homes need to be fit for purpose and there is a need to invest in the sector.”
Praise for ‘collective expertise’
Finally, there was one more thing all the panellists agreed upon – the excellent work of the CICV Forum.
The unique collective was formed in early March 2020 in response to the urgent COVID-19 threat and now comprises 29 leading construction trade and professional associations.
Alexander Stewart said: “It’s so important that the Forum is at the table as you have boots on the ground and work closely together to get the plans put into place. All the ideas in the CICV Forum manifesto are very good and we would support you in achieving them.”
Ms Ford agreed, saying: “The level of detail in CICV Forum documents is only possible because of your collective expertise. Working together has generated documentation that is a lot better than if carried out by one organisation.”
Kevin Stewart added: “The Forum has been at forefront of promoting working safely and long may it stay at the table with government. In particular I would like to pay tribute to the construction character Campbell who has been used to promote messaging through your clever use of social media.”
Forum actions include lobbying the Scottish Government to influence policy and push for positive action, as well as providing expert advice on important sector issues including commercial, employment, planning, skills, and health and safety.
Hustings ‘a resounding success’
The hustings format was the brainchild of Gordon Nelson, Scotland Director of the Federation of Master Builders, a key member of the Forum.
He said: “From the feedback we have received from the sector, it was clear that the hustings event was a resounding success and generated a wealth of constructive and thought-provoking answers from our panellists.
“It proved also that construction is very much at the heart of Scotland’s recovery, and that all parties are committed to rebuilding together and investing in a safer and fully skilled industry that will benefit the whole nation.”
With the Holyrood Elections next week, 80 disabled people, families and carers came together to grill representatives of the major political parties at an online hustings event on Thursday, April 22nd.
As many as one in five people in Scotland are disabled or have a long-term health condition meaning they are a sizeable portion of the electorate. Despite this, very little time has been given to debating the issues that directly affect disabled people and families as campaigning has gone on.
Last week’s event was organised by a consortium of nine major charities who are trying to rebalance the debate so the voices of disabled people and families are heard and their views considered.
At the hustings disabled people questioned candidates from the five main Scottish political parties on a wide range of issues including social care, the impact of the pandemic, social security, employment as well as rights and access.
The panel was chaired by award-winning freelance journalist and broadcaster Pennie Taylor, who specialises in health and social care issues and covered by STV on Wednesday.
Rob Holland, External Affairs Manager for the National Autistic Society Scotland and one of the organisers of the hustings said: “Around one million people in Scotland have a disability or long-term health condition yet their views are often excluded from the national debate.
“Given the uncertainty about the post-COVID landscape it is more important than ever for political parties to hear from disabled people and families, understand the challenges they face and do something about it.”
The hustings event was organised by ENABLE Scotland, Health and Social Care Scotland (the ALLIANCE), Leonard Cheshire Disability, MS Society Scotland, National Autistic Society Scotland, RNIB Scotland, Scottish Autism, Sense Scotland and Sight Scotland.
QUOTES from disabled people that attended the Hustings:
David Weir, is 30, autistic and from Glasgow. He said: I always vote and encourage other autistic people to vote.
“I feel that many politicians don’t listen – so the more disabled people speaking up the more they will understand the challenges we face and hopefully do something about it.”
Cat Johnson, 34 from Edinburgh, was diagnosed with MS at the age of 21 in 2007. She said: “As someone with MS who has acquired disability rather than being born with one, you see both sides and remember how things were before.
“The way that we view and treat disabled people in society is so far off what is OK and that’s frustrating.
“It’s good to see politicians and their parties engaging at this stage but we need a longer term push for real change to provide better support for disabled people.
“Things like the new Scottish social security system holding on to the 20-metre-rule, which sets a baseless measure for the highest level of mobility support, need to change if we want to build a better, fairer society.”
Kirin Saeed, 52, from Edinburgh is blind. She said: “I as a visually impaired Asian woman believe events like these offer me and others to question the main decision makers, politicians, as well as to create greater awareness in the hope greater change may happen, although we have come a long way there is so much still yet to do.
“COVID19 has shown the importance in investing in the vulnerable of society to benefit all.
“I am a pragmatic optimist and feel the only way we will have greater say is to be at the heart of the legislative process. And having the chance to question and getting a small response is a positive start. It is what happens afterwards that I really look forward towards.”
Representing the main political parties at the event were Jeremy Balfour (Scottish Conservatives), Pam Duncan-Glancy (Scottish Labour), Neil Gray (SNP), Gillian Mackay (Scottish Green Party) and John Waddell (Scottish Liberal Democrats).
