Holyrood election firm in new poll shambles
STEWART PATERSON and ROBBIE DINWOODIE
The firm behind last year's
election fiasco has been blamed again after a local council
by-election was thrown into
disarray.
More than 100,000 votes were not counted in last May's debacle but fewer than 3000 were involved in the latest count, which saw the declaration abandoned overnight in South Lanarkshire.
Only 2594 votes were cast in South Lanarkshire Council's Cambuslang East ward on Thursday but candidates had to wait until noon yesterday to find out the result after the system could not process the data once the votes were counted.
It emerged the software that was being used by DRS, the firm used to supply the equipment and staff for the count, did not work because the licence had expired. The same counting software was used for the Cambuslang East count as that used in last May's Holyrood election.
In January, DRS snubbed the parliamentary inquiry into May's voting fiasco by refusing to appear before MSPs to give evidence. The company said at the time it had to "regrettably decline" the request for oral evidence and that the "quantity of information" it provided to a previous inquiry made an appearance at Holyrood unnecessary.
Labour gained the Cambuslang seat from the SNP with 725 first preference votes to 609, boosting their numbers to 31 in the council they run as a minority administration. Yesterday, South Lanarkshire Council said DRS Solutions was responsible for the counting of votes and was unable to confirm the results, prompting the returning officer to adjourn until the next day.
It became clear the company did not have a licence for the software needed to process the votes into final totals for each of the candidates. Yesterday DRS, based in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, claimed it was using the system in partnership with Electoral Reform Services which did not make it aware there was a problem with the licence.
However, Electoral Reform Services said it was unaware DRS was still using the system and had no knowledge of any problem at the South Lanarkshire by-election.
Scotland Central SNP MSP Christina McKelvie condemned the count problems as an "utter shambles". She said: "No lessons have been learned from election night in May. DRS claims the problem was caused because the licence for the software was out of date. That is simply not an acceptable excuse."
Ms McKelvie added: "DRS look completely incapable of performing a simple count in one council ward never mind running a nationwide election.
"I will be taking this up with DRS, South Lanarkshire Council and the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives (Solace) to find out why yet another election was allowed to descend into a complete farce."
A spokesman for the Electoral Commission raised concern about the by-election vote which, as a council election, does not fall under its remit. "Following the 2007 Scottish elections, the Electoral Commission made clear our serious concerns about the future use of electronic counting. We set out the steps that needed to be taken, including measures to ensure transparency,
security and accuracy," he told the BBC.
A South Lanarkshire Council spokeswoman said: "The system counted the votes but was unable to consolidate the data contained in the machine before printing out the result."
After consultation with candidates and agents, Archie Strang, the council chief executive, adjourned proceedings until noon yesterday.
A spokeswoman for DRS said the software it used was "the only approved software that can be used for this calculation and is provided on a sub-contracted basis by Electoral Reform Services (ERS).
"Unfortunately, despite prior agreement with ERS to use this software, the software licence included on the system was out of date and as a result, the E-STV software would not perform the necessary calculation. DRS was not made aware of this limitation."
ERS, however, said yesterday it was unaware that the software was still being used. A spokesman said: "We are not aware this has happened. We supplied the system for the election last year but are not aware they are still using it."
In a solid Labour area, the SNP were able to pick up the third seat in a three-member ward last year but following the death of local stalwart John Higgins it was always going to be difficult for the SNP to replicate that success.
Labour's Richard Tullett gained the seat despite a 22.5% drop in his party's first count vote share - a perverse side-effect of the single transferable vote system introduced for Scottish council elections last year.
The system is meant to achieve a proportional seats share-out but yesterday's result was for only one seat and so leaves Labour with all three of the ward's councillors.
Wendy Alexander, Labour's leader at Holyrood, welcomed her party's victory, saying:
"A seat held by the SNP has gone to Labour.
"It is clear that voters in Cambuslang have not bought the SNP spin and realise it's Labour that best stands up for their interests."
The result gives Labour 31 of South Lanarkshire Council's 67 members. The SNP have 23, Scottish Conservatives eight, independents three and Liberal Democrats two.
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Clare, Lanarkshire on 12:10am Sat 8 Mar 08
How disappointing that the people of Cambuslang allowed Labour to win given the circumstances that led to this by-election. Labour Councillors hounded the previous Councillor, the late John Higgins, after refusing to accept the outcome of an investigation which found him not guilty of breaking the Councillors' Code of Conduct, by refusing to participate in Committee Meetings when he was present and staging walk-outs. Their tactics were despicable. The pressure put on him was disgraceful and undoubtedly led to his death over Hogmanay. I hope the gain of the seat will delight Labour but I wonder how they sleep at night. They destroyed a man who had more respect for ordinary people than all the South Lanarkshire Councillors put together.
How disappointing that the people of Cambuslang allowed Labour to win given the circumstances that led to this by-election. Labour Councillors hounded the previous Councillor, the late John Higgins, after refusing to accept the outcome of an investigation which found him not guilty of breaking the Councillors' Code of Conduct, by refusing to participate in Committee Meetings when he was present and staging walk-outs. Their tactics were despicable. The pressure put on him was disgraceful and undoubtedly led to his death over Hogmanay. I hope the gain of the seat will delight Labour but I wonder how they sleep at night. They destroyed a man who had more respect for ordinary people than all the South Lanarkshire Councillors put together.
Posted by: tris, scotland on 12:15am Sat 8 Mar 08
The softwear didn't work because the licence had expired.
You couldn't make it up.
The winning of a seat by Labour does show that the SNP, whilst winning a lot of people over, can't be complacent about success.
The softwear didn't work because the licence had expired.
You couldn't make it up.
The winning of a seat by Labour does show that the SNP, whilst winning a lot of people over, can't be complacent about success.
Posted by: Steve A, Glasgow on 12:32am Sat 8 Mar 08
Would it be possible for labour to rig the results with this drs lot?Would anybody put it past them after wendygate? I wouldn't!!
Would it be possible for labour to rig the results with this drs lot?Would anybody put it past them after wendygate? I wouldn't!!
Posted by: Thyme Kelpie on 12:34am Sat 8 Mar 08
What on earth were they doing using this stuff at a 'mini by-election' when there were so many problems last May?
Are they incapable of a manual count?
Other by elections have used a manual count quite successfully and had the results out in 3 hours afte the polls closed.
What on earth were they doing using this stuff at a 'mini by-election' when there were so many problems last May?
Are they incapable of a manual count?
Other by elections have used a manual count quite successfully and had the results out in 3 hours afte the polls closed.
Posted by: Steve A, Glasgow on 12:40am Sat 8 Mar 08
Thyme Kelpie
I refer you to my previous proposition
Thyme Kelpie
I refer you to my previous proposition
Posted by: yawn yawn, Falkirk on 12:53am Sat 8 Mar 08
Labour took 725 votes. The rest they won legitimately.
Labour took 725 votes. The rest they won legitimately.
Posted by: Joe Shmo, Glasgow on 1:05am Sat 8 Mar 08
Cambuslangs a dump and yet these people still vote labour. You couldn't make this up!!
Cambuslangs a dump and yet these people still vote labour. You couldn't make this up!!
Posted by: Steve A, glasgow on 1:06am Sat 8 Mar 08
I dont know !There just seems something very wrong with this labour party !
I dont know !There just seems something very wrong with this labour party !
Posted by: gurugordon, US on 1:20am Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Joe Shmo[/bold] wrote:
Cambuslangs a dump and yet these people still vote labour. You couldn't make this up!![/quote] But . . . Labour's vote share in the first count fell by 22.5% - hardly the stuff of electoral recovery, no matter what spin Bendy Wendy and her latest spin doctor may put on it. Repeated throughout the West of Scotland, such a swing would result in virtual anihilation of these chancers and comic singers.
Joe Shmo wrote:
Cambuslangs a dump and yet these people still vote labour. You couldn't make this up!!
But . . . Labour's vote share in the first count fell by 22.5% - hardly the stuff of electoral recovery, no matter what spin Bendy Wendy and her latest spin doctor may put on it. Repeated throughout the West of Scotland, such a swing would result in virtual anihilation of these chancers and comic singers.
Posted by: Brian D Finch, Brigadoon on 1:22am Sat 8 Mar 08
Clare: [quote]How disappointing that the people of Cambuslang allowed Labour to win...[/quote] Was it the people that allowed them to win, or was it DRS?
Clare:
How disappointing that the people of Cambuslang allowed Labour to win...
Was it the people that allowed them to win, or was it DRS?
Posted by: Steve A, glasgow on 1:39am Sat 8 Mar 08
DRS=Dodgy Results in Scotland!
DRS=Dodgy Results in Scotland!
Posted by: subrosa on 1:39am Sat 8 Mar 08
This electronic voting system should be stopped. Let's get back to the human touch. These machines are no good.
This electronic voting system should be stopped. Let's get back to the human touch. These machines are no good.
Posted by: Clare, Lanarkshire on 1:46am Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Joe Shmo[/bold] wrote:
Cambuslangs a dump and yet these people still vote labour. You couldn't make this up!![/quote] Cambuslang is NOT a dump! Cambuslang was once a bustling place with lots of heavy industry jobs and healthy incomes for families that was brought to its knees during the Thatcher years. It had a busy main street and shops that lost their customers to huge supermarkets arriving on the scene. Do you know how many people Clydebridge Steel Works employed Joe Shmo? Or Redpath's? Or the Hoover? It was a busy, vibrant working community. Speaking of the Hoover and Clydebridge, the only ones to come out of there flush were the former shop stewards of the place who went on to become the local MP (McAvoy) and the others local Councillors (all Labour of course).
Joe Shmo wrote:
Cambuslangs a dump and yet these people still vote labour. You couldn't make this up!!
Cambuslang is NOT a dump! Cambuslang was once a bustling place with lots of heavy industry jobs and healthy incomes for families that was brought to its knees during the Thatcher years. It had a busy main street and shops that lost their customers to huge supermarkets arriving on the scene. Do you know how many people Clydebridge Steel Works employed Joe Shmo? Or Redpath's? Or the Hoover? It was a busy, vibrant working community. Speaking of the Hoover and Clydebridge, the only ones to come out of there flush were the former shop stewards of the place who went on to become the local MP (McAvoy) and the others local Councillors (all Labour of course).
Posted by: Clare, Lanarkshire on 1:46am Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Steve A[/bold] wrote:
DRS=Dodgy Results in Scotland![/quote] LOL
Steve A wrote:
DRS=Dodgy Results in Scotland!
LOL
Posted by: Mike, Edinburgh on 1:52am Sat 8 Mar 08
I feel very sorry for the folk of Cambuslang. I realise that there are many decent Scots in the area who vote for Labour out of tradition. Its a pity they do not wake up and smell the roses. How much proof do they need, to realise the London New Labour Party are no longer the voice of the People of Scotland. They are the reason there is so much poverty in Scotland. They are the ones who created a Scottish Youth that feels the need to join a local gang and get involved with drugs and alcohol abuse. No one else was in power when this problem started, they are the ones who failed to create the job opportunities for the young folk, so they could concentrate on success rather than the downward spiral.
I feel very sorry for the folk of Cambuslang. I realise that there are many decent Scots in the area who vote for Labour out of tradition. Its a pity they do not wake up and smell the roses. How much proof do they need, to realise the London New Labour Party are no longer the voice of the People of Scotland. They are the reason there is so much poverty in Scotland. They are the ones who created a Scottish Youth that feels the need to join a local gang and get involved with drugs and alcohol abuse. No one else was in power when this problem started, they are the ones who failed to create the job opportunities for the young folk, so they could concentrate on success rather than the downward spiral.
Posted by: Frances on 2:08am Sat 8 Mar 08
As far as I can see, this is one of the most dramatic swings from Labour to the SNP in a local by-election for years, and yet somehow for Wendy it constitutes proof "that voters in Cambuslang have not bought the SNP spin".
I can't even imagine what the result would have been like if people [italic]had[/italic] 'bought the SNP's spin'. I would say that Wendy is suffering from classic 'final days in the bunker' delusions, but she's not even in power (or does she even realise that?)
As far as I can see, this is one of the most dramatic swings from Labour to the SNP in a local by-election for years, and yet somehow for Wendy it constitutes proof "that voters in Cambuslang have not bought the SNP spin".
I can't even imagine what the result would have been like if people
had 'bought the SNP's spin'. I would say that Wendy is suffering from classic 'final days in the bunker' delusions, but she's not even in power (or does she even realise that?)
Posted by: Scunnert, Travelling in Nihlon on 2:12am Sat 8 Mar 08
Robert F. Kenedy Jr. writing in Roling Stone about the 2004 Ohio Presidential elections in an article entitled
Was the 2004 Election Stolen?
writes:
[quote]'Chris Hood remembers the day in August 2002 that he began to question what was really going on in Georgia... "It was an unauthorized patch, and they were trying to keep it secret from the state," Hood told me. "We were told not to talk to county personnel about it. I received instructions directly from [president of Diebold election unit Bob] Urosevich...' According to Hood, Diebold employees altered software in some 5,000 machines in DeKalb and Fulton counties, the state's largest Democratic strongholds. The tally in Georgia that November surprised even the most seasoned political observers.[/quote]
In 2004 the US Department of Homeland Security warns:
[quote]National Cyber Alert System
Cyber Security Bulletin SB04-252
Summary of Security Items from September 1 through September 7, 2004
Diebold
GEMS Central Tabulator 1.17.7, 1.18
A vulnerability exists due to an undocumented backdoor account, which could a local or remote authenticated malicious user modify votes.
No workaround or patch available at time of publishing.
We are not aware of any exploits for this vulnerability.[/quote]
Published on Wednesday, February 25, 2004 by the Free Press, Columbus, Ohiio
[quote]Diebold, Electronic Voting and the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy
Johns Hopkins researchers at the Information Security Institute issued a report declaring that Diebold’s electronic voting software contained “stunning flaws.” The researchers concluded that vote totals could be altered at the voting machines and by remote access.[/quote]
There can only be one conclusion regarding the continued use of e-voting machines and that is to control the outcome.
As Stalin said: "What matters is not who votes but who counts the votes.
Robert F. Kenedy Jr. writing in Roling Stone about the 2004 Ohio Presidential elections in an article entitled
Was the 2004 Election Stolen?
writes:
'Chris Hood remembers the day in August 2002 that he began to question what was really going on in Georgia... "It was an unauthorized patch, and they were trying to keep it secret from the state," Hood told me. "We were told not to talk to county personnel about it. I received instructions directly from Urosevich...' According to Hood, Diebold employees altered software in some 5,000 machines in DeKalb and Fulton counties, the state's largest Democratic strongholds. The tally in Georgia that November surprised even the most seasoned political observers.
In 2004 the US Department of Homeland Security warns:
National Cyber Alert System
Cyber Security Bulletin SB04-252
Summary of Security Items from September 1 through September 7, 2004
Diebold
GEMS Central Tabulator 1.17.7, 1.18
A vulnerability exists due to an undocumented backdoor account, which could a local or remote authenticated malicious user modify votes.
No workaround or patch available at time of publishing.
We are not aware of any exploits for this vulnerability.
Published on Wednesday, February 25, 2004 by the Free Press, Columbus, Ohiio
Diebold, Electronic Voting and the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy
Johns Hopkins researchers at the Information Security Institute issued a report declaring that Diebold’s electronic voting software contained “stunning flaws.” The researchers concluded that vote totals could be altered at the voting machines and by remote access.
There can only be one conclusion regarding the continued use of e-voting machines and that is to control the outcome.
As Stalin said: "What matters is not who votes but who counts the votes.
Posted by: Lobeydosser, Woodlands Road on 4:15am Sat 8 Mar 08
HI Claire, thanks for the post, Cambuslang along with the East End of Glasgow were bustling places in the past and were not dumps by any stretch of the imagination. I agree that most of the shop steward numpties are in positions of power, but the thing is the whole area has gone down hill (not quite got to dump level yet) and people still vote labour there; do the voters there not want change or do they like living in the style that they have been accostomed?
Apart from that, the e-voting system was a sham; for the numbers involved surely a hand count would have been easier.
It looks as if the Soviet Republic of South Lanarkshire may survive.....unfortun
ately.
HI Claire, thanks for the post, Cambuslang along with the East End of Glasgow were bustling places in the past and were not dumps by any stretch of the imagination. I agree that most of the shop steward numpties are in positions of power, but the thing is the whole area has gone down hill (not quite got to dump level yet) and people still vote labour there; do the voters there not want change or do they like living in the style that they have been accostomed?
Apart from that, the e-voting system was a sham; for the numbers involved surely a hand count would have been easier.
It looks as if the Soviet Republic of South Lanarkshire may survive.....unfortun
ately.
Posted by: Nezavisimaya Schotlandia, Perth on 4:17am Sat 8 Mar 08
22.5% drop in Labour vote in a heartland like Cambuslang. Labour must be **** themselves!
22.5% drop in Labour vote in a heartland like Cambuslang. Labour must be **** themselves!
Posted by: PaulW, Borders on 8:06am Sat 8 Mar 08
I am amazed the SNP came as close to winning this as they did, given that the Labour party had two out of three seats. Quite unbelievable that Wendy Alexander thinks that this is a good result for her party. Part of me hopes that it is not spin on her part and that she genuinely believes it. It is obvious that we are seeing the death throws of the Labour Party in the West Central Belt and not before time. They may have three councillors now, due to this quirk of the PR system, but they will be out of office in S Lanarkshire 2012 if that swing were replicated then.
Let's hope so, as Lanarkshire has serious problems and Labour domination for the last half century has done b****r all for them.
DRS should [bold]never[/bold] be let near another Scottish election, either local or national. Leaving aside the design of the ballot paper, I wonder whether Labour would have been quite as close to the SNP in 2007 if there had been a manual count of the votes where you could see how they stacked up......modern day rotten burghs indeed......
I am amazed the SNP came as close to winning this as they did, given that the Labour party had two out of three seats. Quite unbelievable that Wendy Alexander thinks that this is a good result for her party. Part of me hopes that it is not spin on her part and that she genuinely believes it. It is obvious that we are seeing the death throws of the Labour Party in the West Central Belt and not before time. They may have three councillors now, due to this quirk of the PR system, but they will be out of office in S Lanarkshire 2012 if that swing were replicated then.
Let's hope so, as Lanarkshire has serious problems and Labour domination for the last half century has done b****r all for them.
DRS should
never be let near another Scottish election, either local or national. Leaving aside the design of the ballot paper, I wonder whether Labour would have been quite as close to the SNP in 2007 if there had been a manual count of the votes where you could see how they stacked up......modern day rotten burghs indeed......
Posted by: jomellon, Lodève, France on 9:33am Sat 8 Mar 08
Dear voters of Cambuslang: take a look at our neighbours - Ireland, Norway, Holland. Look at the prosperity and quality of life these countries offer.
Look at the state of your town.
Work it out.
Dear voters of Cambuslang: take a look at our neighbours - Ireland, Norway, Holland. Look at the prosperity and quality of life these countries offer.
Look at the state of your town.
Work it out.
Posted by: Cynicus, Scotland on 9:40am Sat 8 Mar 08
Does anybody have the full result -after transfers?
Does anybody have the full result -after transfers?
Posted by: searcher, central on 9:42am Sat 8 Mar 08
Follow the money trail ! Who owns the software the the machines used and who wrote it? Is there a tie-up somewhere to diebold in the States?
There are too many things going wrong with this system for it to be simple local stupidity. The article hints at things not being talked about!
Follow the money trail ! Who owns the software the the machines used and who wrote it? Is there a tie-up somewhere to diebold in the States?
There are too many things going wrong with this system for it to be simple local stupidity. The article hints at things not being talked about!
Posted by: jazzdrum, glasgow on 9:44am Sat 8 Mar 08
why use the same firm again after last time ?
why use the same firm again after last time ?
Posted by: Charles McGrory, Glasgow on 9:49am Sat 8 Mar 08
As I understand the reports, Neil Kinnock is a director of the vote counting company that bungled the May 07 elections despite that firm only having one prior election to its name - somewhere in Africa. And now they bungle further by trying to use proprietary software they no longer have paid the licence fee to use!
David Blunkett is on the board of the company which is to provide the ID Card technology where everything about our bodies’ DNA, retina scans, biometrics as required; our tax records, bank details, medical records, credit cards can be linked at the next stage by the push of a button, our vehicles are tracked to be transponder tracked and filmed by the yard, and we now have terror suspect status if we are seen to carry two mobile phones… I have three….
These characters sit in our legislature and are allowed directorships in commercial vested interests, conceal hidden donations while immune from prosecution even when making public confessions of guilt and all the while have blatant commercial conflicts of interest while milking their parliamentary expense accounts for the benefit of their real estate and their relatives.
How easy is it to mildly adjust the software to skew the vote Liebour’s way… answer Dead Easy! Job Done!
Think they would not tweak the software? No WMD in Iraq? Simple – change the words in the dossiers.
All Scots elections should have international monitors, and use manual vote counting; these crooks will stop at nothing to maintain their power and cash flow. This is serious.
As I understand the reports, Neil Kinnock is a director of the vote counting company that bungled the May 07 elections despite that firm only having one prior election to its name - somewhere in Africa. And now they bungle further by trying to use proprietary software they no longer have paid the licence fee to use!
David Blunkett is on the board of the company which is to provide the ID Card technology where everything about our bodies’ DNA, retina scans, biometrics as required; our tax records, bank details, medical records, credit cards can be linked at the next stage by the push of a button, our vehicles are tracked to be transponder tracked and filmed by the yard, and we now have terror suspect status if we are seen to carry two mobile phones… I have three….
These characters sit in our legislature and are allowed directorships in commercial vested interests, conceal hidden donations while immune from prosecution even when making public confessions of guilt and all the while have blatant commercial conflicts of interest while milking their parliamentary expense accounts for the benefit of their real estate and their relatives.
How easy is it to mildly adjust the software to skew the vote Liebour’s way… answer Dead Easy! Job Done!
Think they would not tweak the software? No WMD in Iraq? Simple – change the words in the dossiers.
All Scots elections should have international monitors, and use manual vote counting; these crooks will stop at nothing to maintain their power and cash flow. This is serious.
Posted by: Peter Thomson, Desperate Wendy..... on 9:59am Sat 8 Mar 08
Only a 22% drop in the vote share for Labour, Wendy, aye that'll be a recovery then?
Slobby Dum Brownovitch is wheeching the rug from under yer feet, Wendy, as we speak with his comments recorded in yesterday's Torygraph on the need to realign the Barnett settlement.
He is not interested in Scotland Wendy; even he has worked out that Labour in Scosova will not keep his butt in number 10 so he needs to play to English fears and blame the SNP for the rising anti Union sentiment across the UK, instead of dealing with the root cause - Labour's own daft save the Union policies and attempts at democratic subversion through the failure of the Westminster Political Establishment to be accountable to the Laws of the Land and the clearly stated wishes of the people.
The reality is we have one more year maximum of this Stalinist from the Manse, Brownovotch is a dead man walking.
Only a 22% drop in the vote share for Labour, Wendy, aye that'll be a recovery then?
Slobby Dum Brownovitch is wheeching the rug from under yer feet, Wendy, as we speak with his comments recorded in yesterday's Torygraph on the need to realign the Barnett settlement.
He is not interested in Scotland Wendy; even he has worked out that Labour in Scosova will not keep his butt in number 10 so he needs to play to English fears and blame the SNP for the rising anti Union sentiment across the UK, instead of dealing with the root cause - Labour's own daft save the Union policies and attempts at democratic subversion through the failure of the Westminster Political Establishment to be accountable to the Laws of the Land and the clearly stated wishes of the people.
The reality is we have one more year maximum of this Stalinist from the Manse, Brownovotch is a dead man walking.
Posted by: spagan, heisker, scotland on 10:02am Sat 8 Mar 08
That is so unfair! To blame Baron Kinnochio and Fido Blunkett - and therefore the Labour Party by implication - is just not playing cricket.
You should know that these poor incapacitated pair of public servants couldn't find their way to "F1" on a computer keyboard.
They are only there to take the money and run.
Very unfair to blame them if things go wrong. Directors of companies don't carry the can - they carry the profits.
That is so unfair! To blame Baron Kinnochio and Fido Blunkett - and therefore the Labour Party by implication - is just not playing cricket.
You should know that these poor incapacitated pair of public servants couldn't find their way to "F1" on a computer keyboard.
They are only there to take the money and run.
Very unfair to blame them if things go wrong. Directors of companies don't carry the can - they carry the profits.
Posted by: Mrs I P Knightly, Scotland on 10:16am Sat 8 Mar 08
the vote yesterday
Labour 725
SNP 609
LDem 580
Ind Lab 509
Con 80
Unionists 38
SSP 32
Green 21
Most of the Independent Labour 2nd preferences appear to have gone to the Labour candidate, granting him victory over the SNP. However the final result of Labour 1094 to SNP 962
the vote yesterday
Labour 725
SNP 609
LDem 580
Ind Lab 509
Con 80
Unionists 38
SSP 32
Green 21
Most of the Independent Labour 2nd preferences appear to have gone to the Labour candidate, granting him victory over the SNP. However the final result of Labour 1094 to SNP 962
Posted by: Duns Scotus, The Borders on 10:16am Sat 8 Mar 08
If only we could interview everyone who voted Labour at this by-election and ask them, why? It would not be a difficult task as the 725 votes could represent only 200 people.
For 50 years Labour in Scotland have inflicted a political Munchausen syndrome by proxy on so many communities. Keep them poor and dependent. It is disgusting.
As [bold]jomellon[/bold] says to the people of Cambuslang - look around you, now look me in the eye and tell me you like what Labour have done.
If only we could interview everyone who voted Labour at this by-election and ask them, why? It would not be a difficult task as the 725 votes could represent only 200 people.
For 50 years Labour in Scotland have inflicted a political Munchausen syndrome by proxy on so many communities. Keep them poor and dependent. It is disgusting.
As
jomellon says to the people of Cambuslang - look around you, now look me in the eye and tell me you like what Labour have done.
Posted by: Duns Scotus, The Borders on 10:17am Sat 8 Mar 08
580 Lib Dem votes in Cambuslang! I despair.
580 Lib Dem votes in Cambuslang! I despair.
Posted by: Alex Porter, Madrid on 10:20am Sat 8 Mar 08
Losing the seat was nothing to do with the machines. It was because of the electoral system. In a 3 member ward the SNP won one of the seats out of the 3 the last time because there was no clear winner of the third seat and so second preferences came into play and the SNP picked it up. However in a bi-election, I suppose, in one of the wards the system has to be a simple majority. If this swing against Labour was replicated at the next council elections we would have the seat automatically and possibly even a second but if not many more votes.
This result, a 22.5% in Labour's, in fact shows Labour's vote in its last bastions is in freefall. Wendy is embarrassing herself, her party and her country by putting this spin on this bi-election result. She should leave fantasy spinning to some underlings but there you are.
Onwards Scotland!
Losing the seat was nothing to do with the machines. It was because of the electoral system. In a 3 member ward the SNP won one of the seats out of the 3 the last time because there was no clear winner of the third seat and so second preferences came into play and the SNP picked it up. However in a bi-election, I suppose, in one of the wards the system has to be a simple majority. If this swing against Labour was replicated at the next council elections we would have the seat automatically and possibly even a second but if not many more votes.
This result, a 22.5% in Labour's, in fact shows Labour's vote in its last bastions is in freefall. Wendy is embarrassing herself, her party and her country by putting this spin on this bi-election result. She should leave fantasy spinning to some underlings but there you are.
Onwards Scotland!
Posted by: Rab The Ranter, Ayrshire on 10:28am Sat 8 Mar 08
And we all know who is responsible for Local Elections. I say it again An executive in turmoil, a devalued parliament in a devalued democracy and a country in flames. We cannae even run a local election, we are the laughing stock of the world.
And we all know who is responsible for Local Elections. I say it again An executive in turmoil, a devalued parliament in a devalued democracy and a country in flames. We cannae even run a local election, we are the laughing stock of the world.
Posted by: Mrs I P Knightly, Scotland on 10:29am Sat 8 Mar 08
the Liberals have a history of electoral strength in local elections in Rutherglen and Cambuslang.
the Liberals have a history of electoral strength in local elections in Rutherglen and Cambuslang.
Posted by: Alex Porter, Madrid on 10:31am Sat 8 Mar 08
Duns, there are some well-to-do parts of Cambslang and all the old Tory votes have gone to the Libs. It's possible that many folks believed the Libs were the only chance to unseat Labour. It's a straight head-to-head for the working class vote there and the independent Labour vote would probably evenly split between Labour and SNP leaving the Libs a way behind. I don't think the 22.5% is real but there is a big swing away from Labour there and I think that is going to be uniform in their 'heart-lands'.
One question: Who are the 'Unionists'?
Duns, there are some well-to-do parts of Cambslang and all the old Tory votes have gone to the Libs. It's possible that many folks believed the Libs were the only chance to unseat Labour. It's a straight head-to-head for the working class vote there and the independent Labour vote would probably evenly split between Labour and SNP leaving the Libs a way behind. I don't think the 22.5% is real but there is a big swing away from Labour there and I think that is going to be uniform in their 'heart-lands'.
One question: Who are the 'Unionists'?
Posted by: Politically-incorrec
t Man, Glasgow on 10:32am Sat 8 Mar 08
2603 people voted in this election.
3 questions.
1. How much do DRS get paid for this, is it £12 per voter as in the national election?
2. What is the financial penalty for the failure to produce the result on time?
3. How many people would it take to count and process 2603 papers even allowing for transferable votes?
Answers on a postcard please.
2603 people voted in this election.
3 questions.
1. How much do DRS get paid for this, is it £12 per voter as in the national election?
2. What is the financial penalty for the failure to produce the result on time?
3. How many people would it take to count and process 2603 papers even allowing for transferable votes?
Answers on a postcard please.
Posted by: Mrs I P Knightly, Scotland on 10:35am Sat 8 Mar 08
the Liberals have a history of electoral strength in local elections in Rutherglen and Cambuslang.
the Liberals have a history of electoral strength in local elections in Rutherglen and Cambuslang.
Posted by: Rab The Ranter, Ayrshire on 10:37am Sat 8 Mar 08
And probably a 0.001% turnout, because nobody could be ars3d going out to vote. A devalued Democracy and the laughing stock of the world.
And probably a 0.001% turnout, because nobody could be ars3d going out to vote. A devalued Democracy and the laughing stock of the world.
Posted by: Mrs I P Knightly, Scotland on 10:45am Sat 8 Mar 08
Posted by: Rab The Ranter, Ayrshire on 10:37am today
And probably a 0.001% turnout,
a little bit higher than that - 25% according to SLC Website
Posted by: Rab The Ranter, Ayrshire on 10:37am today
And probably a 0.001% turnout,
a little bit higher than that - 25% according to SLC Website
Posted by: Brian Blessed, Glasgow on 10:51am Sat 8 Mar 08
Politically incorrect Man:
I can answer number 3. Using a program called OpenSTV, it is possible to manually count the papers and then input the preferences directly into the system. On average, one person could input 120 - 150 papers an hour if most/all people used most of their preferences.
So it all depends how quickly you want the result. 10 counters could do it in about 2 hours, 5 counters in 4 hours etc, plus you have to allow time for the verification count, checking possible spolit papers etc.
Incidentally, OpenSTV is free, open source and downloadable by anyone, so no need for licences, expired or otherwise.
Politically incorrect Man:
I can answer number 3. Using a program called OpenSTV, it is possible to manually count the papers and then input the preferences directly into the system. On average, one person could input 120 - 150 papers an hour if most/all people used most of their preferences.
So it all depends how quickly you want the result. 10 counters could do it in about 2 hours, 5 counters in 4 hours etc, plus you have to allow time for the verification count, checking possible spolit papers etc.
Incidentally, OpenSTV is free, open source and downloadable by anyone, so no need for licences, expired or otherwise.
Posted by: macgilleleabhar, Aberdeenshire on 11:00am Sat 8 Mar 08
I am not up to speed on software licencing however from the article:
"It became clear the company did not have a licence for the software needed to process the votes into final totals for each of the candidates. Yesterday DRS, based in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, claimed it was using the system in partnership with Electoral Reform Services which did not make it aware there was a problem with the licence.
However, Electoral Reform Services said it was unaware DRS was still using the system and had no knowledge of any problem at the South Lanarkshire by-election."
That would suggest to me that DRS were basically using pirated software?
I am not up to speed on software licencing however from the article:
"It became clear the company did not have a licence for the software needed to process the votes into final totals for each of the candidates. Yesterday DRS, based in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, claimed it was using the system in partnership with Electoral Reform Services which did not make it aware there was a problem with the licence.
However, Electoral Reform Services said it was unaware DRS was still using the system and had no knowledge of any problem at the South Lanarkshire by-election."
That would suggest to me that DRS were basically using pirated software?
Posted by: sid the sceptic, renfrewshire on 11:02am Sat 8 Mar 08
morning all : you can all slag cambuslang at the moment but i can garuntee if you all seriously think about it you'll find a "cambuslang " next door to where ever you are. all you need to do is open your eyes!!
we could start with you rab the ranter. no doubt you will tell us it was thatcher that caused all your problems in ayrshire. granted she did her share but if you could take your "rose"tinted glasses off even for a wee while you might actually see it as it is.CLARE- spot on. i was born and bred in cambuslang and as the years went on you could see all this starting.
morning all : you can all slag cambuslang at the moment but i can garuntee if you all seriously think about it you'll find a "cambuslang " next door to where ever you are. all you need to do is open your eyes!!
we could start with you rab the ranter. no doubt you will tell us it was thatcher that caused all your problems in ayrshire. granted she did her share but if you could take your "rose"tinted glasses off even for a wee while you might actually see it as it is.CLARE- spot on. i was born and bred in cambuslang and as the years went on you could see all this starting.
Posted by: The Stig, Motherwell on 11:04am Sat 8 Mar 08
WUNDERFOOL you could not make this up using ILLEGAL 'PIRATED' software that they did not have a licence for OR the 'owners' permission to use.
it became clear the company did not have a licence for the software needed to process the votes into final totals for each of the candidates.
Yesterday DRS, based in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, claimed it was using the system in partnership with Electoral Reform Services which did not make it aware there was a problem with the licence.
However, Electoral Reform Services said it was unaware DRS was still using the system .
WUNDERFOOL you could not make this up using ILLEGAL 'PIRATED' software that they did not have a licence for OR the 'owners' permission to use.
it became clear the company did not have a licence for the software needed to process the votes into final totals for each of the candidates.
Yesterday DRS, based in Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, claimed it was using the system in partnership with Electoral Reform Services which did not make it aware there was a problem with the licence.
However, Electoral Reform Services said it was unaware DRS was still using the system .
Posted by: sid the sceptic, renfrewshire on 11:09am Sat 8 Mar 08
morning all : a couple of qoutes for a saturday;
1 for wendy- "dictators always look good until the last minutes."
[bold]1 for us all:"it's not the voting that's democracy, its the counting."[/bold]
morning all : a couple of qoutes for a saturday;
1 for wendy- "dictators always look good until the last minutes."
1 for us all:"it's not the voting that's democracy, its the counting." Posted by: Carmichael, Scotland on 11:17am Sat 8 Mar 08
Listening to Tom Brown on the radio this morning made me think. He said that Scottish Labourites and Scottish Labour politicians have a visceral hatred of nationalists and nationalism. This made me think. And then ask, then, why are these people in the Labour party. Shouldn't their visceral hatred of a nationalism manifest itself, rather, in the creation of a postmodern political movement intent on the eradication of all borders, not only in Europe, but across the world. Shouldn't these guys be campaigning, because so visceral is their hatred, for the abolition of all flags, all identity, all diversity, all signatures of difference and culture.
No, of course not, they are not shy in reminding us of the ties that bind Scotland to a UK and therefore, every time they do so, they assert both Scottish nationalism and a British nationalism. Thus, their visceral hatred is not of nationalism but of Scottish political expression. For me, Scottish nationalism has never been, really, about asserting the Scottish people and Scottish identity as superior to all others, except for in the few dark fringes which exist in all societies, too, remember. That is when nationalism gets bad. For me, Scottish nationalism has been about the recognition of Scotland as a good and different place with a civic society and civic institutions. The logical conclusion, therefore, for the SNP, is to express Scottishness politically on the world-stage in the creation of a Scottish state. The logic for Labourites is to stay steady as she goes. I prefer the former because the latter seems to have an inherent lack of coherence and a double-standard, as I suggested before, that sits uncomfortably.
The Labourites' careers, would have a degree of uncertainty in a new Scottish sovereign state. The line of British nationalism good, Scottish nationalism bad can continue to be asserted but it should be done with an awareness that a civic nationalism is a norm in countries. Travel to Sweden and there is a civic society, Norway, of course, anywhere and everywhere, and you will find a civic society and a civic nationalism because that is the way humans organise themselves. Scotland, undoubtedly has a civic society and civic nationalism, in or out of the union, independence or devolution, there is a civic nationalism and society. The debate therefore should be whether that Scottish civic society should remain in a union or should regain its sovereign status. That is the debate, and there is logic to both, and arguments for both, and facts and figures for both.
I believe in independence for Scotland because that is the natural order of modern human organisation. But, it's not an argument won or lost, it's a debate we're having everyday now and society's all the better for it.
To Rab the Ranter,
Please don't be so hard on wee Scotland. Everyone's just doing their incompetent best and muddling through as usual. Just as what happens in all countries. Muddle through and hope for the best, it's the human condition.
Listening to Tom Brown on the radio this morning made me think. He said that Scottish Labourites and Scottish Labour politicians have a visceral hatred of nationalists and nationalism. This made me think. And then ask, then, why are these people in the Labour party. Shouldn't their visceral hatred of a nationalism manifest itself, rather, in the creation of a postmodern political movement intent on the eradication of all borders, not only in Europe, but across the world. Shouldn't these guys be campaigning, because so visceral is their hatred, for the abolition of all flags, all identity, all diversity, all signatures of difference and culture.
No, of course not, they are not shy in reminding us of the ties that bind Scotland to a UK and therefore, every time they do so, they assert both Scottish nationalism and a British nationalism. Thus, their visceral hatred is not of nationalism but of Scottish political expression. For me, Scottish nationalism has never been, really, about asserting the Scottish people and Scottish identity as superior to all others, except for in the few dark fringes which exist in all societies, too, remember. That is when nationalism gets bad. For me, Scottish nationalism has been about the recognition of Scotland as a good and different place with a civic society and civic institutions. The logical conclusion, therefore, for the SNP, is to express Scottishness politically on the world-stage in the creation of a Scottish state. The logic for Labourites is to stay steady as she goes. I prefer the former because the latter seems to have an inherent lack of coherence and a double-standard, as I suggested before, that sits uncomfortably.
The Labourites' careers, would have a degree of uncertainty in a new Scottish sovereign state. The line of British nationalism good, Scottish nationalism bad can continue to be asserted but it should be done with an awareness that a civic nationalism is a norm in countries. Travel to Sweden and there is a civic society, Norway, of course, anywhere and everywhere, and you will find a civic society and a civic nationalism because that is the way humans organise themselves. Scotland, undoubtedly has a civic society and civic nationalism, in or out of the union, independence or devolution, there is a civic nationalism and society. The debate therefore should be whether that Scottish civic society should remain in a union or should regain its sovereign status. That is the debate, and there is logic to both, and arguments for both, and facts and figures for both.
I believe in independence for Scotland because that is the natural order of modern human organisation. But, it's not an argument won or lost, it's a debate we're having everyday now and society's all the better for it.
To Rab the Ranter,
Please don't be so hard on wee Scotland. Everyone's just doing their incompetent best and muddling through as usual. Just as what happens in all countries. Muddle through and hope for the best, it's the human condition.
Posted by: Politically-incorrec
t Man, Glasgow on 11:33am Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Brian Blessed[/bold] wrote:
Politically incorrect Man:
I can answer number 3. Using a program called OpenSTV, it is possible to manually count the papers and then input the preferences directly into the system. On average, one person could input 120 - 150 papers an hour if most/all people used most of their preferences.
So it all depends how quickly you want the result. 10 counters could do it in about 2 hours, 5 counters in 4 hours etc, plus you have to allow time for the verification count, checking possible spolit papers etc.
Incidentally, OpenSTV is free, open source and downloadable by anyone, so no need for licences, expired or otherwise.[/quote] So if we had 10 workers inputing the data the task would be completed in 2hrs at a cost say of £50 a head for 2hrs work of £500.
Say an hour to verify and settle irregularities, all done and dusted on 3hrs.
One imagines that the council already has access to the limited computer hardware needed to perform the task.
The cost of the facilities etc are not relevant as they would be common to any system.
So for £500 using publicly available software the task could be performed in 3 hrs.
Do you think DRS is getting more than £500?
Brian Blessed wrote:
Politically incorrect Man:
I can answer number 3. Using a program called OpenSTV, it is possible to manually count the papers and then input the preferences directly into the system. On average, one person could input 120 - 150 papers an hour if most/all people used most of their preferences.
So it all depends how quickly you want the result. 10 counters could do it in about 2 hours, 5 counters in 4 hours etc, plus you have to allow time for the verification count, checking possible spolit papers etc.
Incidentally, OpenSTV is free, open source and downloadable by anyone, so no need for licences, expired or otherwise.
So if we had 10 workers inputing the data the task would be completed in 2hrs at a cost say of £50 a head for 2hrs work of £500.
Say an hour to verify and settle irregularities, all done and dusted on 3hrs.
One imagines that the council already has access to the limited computer hardware needed to perform the task.
The cost of the facilities etc are not relevant as they would be common to any system.
So for £500 using publicly available software the task could be performed in 3 hrs.
Do you think DRS is getting more than £500?
Posted by: maragdubh, lewis on 11:47am Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]BM[/bold] wrote:
So Kinnock &Co have screwed up again. If they gave out the contract on merit, instead of corruptly because Neil Kinnock, their failed leader, is a director, perhaps wee would get better results. It seems that Labour can do nothing without a backhander to a party member. Clare - Lanarkshire people would vote for a donkey in a red rosette, no matter how incompetent or openly corrupt this candidate was. It's a hundred year old tradition. This is not the first time they have hounded a member to death. Remember Gordon McMaster, all but murdered by the party?[/quote] Is not amazing what our politicians have learned from their American cousins, I beleive the word is hegemony. Maybe it is a good thing to ratify this Lisbon tresty after all.
BM wrote:
So Kinnock &Co have screwed up again. If they gave out the contract on merit, instead of corruptly because Neil Kinnock, their failed leader, is a director, perhaps wee would get better results. It seems that Labour can do nothing without a backhander to a party member. Clare - Lanarkshire people would vote for a donkey in a red rosette, no matter how incompetent or openly corrupt this candidate was. It's a hundred year old tradition. This is not the first time they have hounded a member to death. Remember Gordon McMaster, all but murdered by the party?
Is not amazing what our politicians have learned from their American cousins, I beleive the word is hegemony. Maybe it is a good thing to ratify this Lisbon tresty after all.
Posted by: Stewart, Glasgow on 11:57am Sat 8 Mar 08
Yet again, it is proven that DRS have presided over a farce!
[bold]Not only that, but when a recount was demanded, the returning officer said NO![/bold]
It is silly to use STV when only one seat is up for grabs, it should be the simple FPTP.
This seat should be an SNP seat, it's by total chance that labour have win it.
[bold]The results were locked over night in a school gym hall, so based on that alone, surely a recount is not an unreasonable thing to ask for?[/bold]
Yet again, it is proven that DRS have presided over a farce!
Not only that, but when a recount was demanded, the returning officer said NO!
It is silly to use STV when only one seat is up for grabs, it should be the simple FPTP.
This seat should be an SNP seat, it's by total chance that labour have win it.
The results were locked over night in a school gym hall, so based on that alone, surely a recount is not an unreasonable thing to ask for? Posted by: Stewart, Glasgow on 11:58am Sat 8 Mar 08
Yet again, it is proven that DRS have presided over a farce!
[bold]Not only that, but when a recount was demanded, the returning officer said NO![/bold]
It is silly to use STV when only one seat is up for grabs, it should be the simple FPTP.
This seat should be an SNP seat, it's by total chance that labour have win it.
[bold]The results were locked over night in a school gym hall, so based on that alone, surely a recount is not an unreasonable thing to ask for?[/bold]
Yet again, it is proven that DRS have presided over a farce!
Not only that, but when a recount was demanded, the returning officer said NO!
It is silly to use STV when only one seat is up for grabs, it should be the simple FPTP.
This seat should be an SNP seat, it's by total chance that labour have win it.
The results were locked over night in a school gym hall, so based on that alone, surely a recount is not an unreasonable thing to ask for? Posted by: Duns Scotus, The Borders on 12:07pm Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Rab The Ranter[/bold] wrote:
And probably a 0.001% turnout, because nobody could be ars3d going out to vote. A devalued Democracy and the laughing stock of the world.[/quote] You're surely a wind-up merchant. Regardless, your oft-repeated phrase "[italic]laughing stock of the world[/italic] " belongs in the Hall of Fame in the Palace of Political Losers. It sits comfortably beside other classics like "[italic]We're aw doomed[/italic] !" and "[italic]We'll pey fur it, we'll pey fur it![/italic] " (Toujurs le point d'exclamation!)
The fact is Robin, the vast majority of the world's 6 billion people don't know Scotland exists. Most of those who are aware of us are appallingly ignorant. You don't even need to leave the country to realise that.
Until we have that seat between Senegal (a Francophone anagram known in Scotland as Le Senga) & Saudia Arabia at the UN, and the full return of our national sovereignty, we will always be ignored or unknown.
If the country does go up in flames I hope it scorches your ars3 first!
Rab The Ranter wrote:
And probably a 0.001% turnout, because nobody could be ars3d going out to vote. A devalued Democracy and the laughing stock of the world.
You're surely a wind-up merchant. Regardless, your oft-repeated phrase "
laughing stock of the world " belongs in the Hall of Fame in the Palace of Political Losers. It sits comfortably beside other classics like "
We're aw doomed !" and "
We'll pey fur it, we'll pey fur it! " (Toujurs le point d'exclamation!)
The fact is Robin, the vast majority of the world's 6 billion people don't know Scotland exists. Most of those who are aware of us are appallingly ignorant. You don't even need to leave the country to realise that.
Until we have that seat between Senegal (a Francophone anagram known in Scotland as Le Senga) & Saudia Arabia at the UN, and the full return of our national sovereignty, we will always be ignored or unknown.
If the country does go up in flames I hope it scorches your ars3 first!
Posted by: Observer, Glasgow on 12:35pm Sat 8 Mar 08
Why were they using this discrdited electronic system for a council by-election ? that count could be wrapped up manually in a couple of hours. time to go back to the traditional way of doing it at least people would trust the result.
Why were they using this discrdited electronic system for a council by-election ? that count could be wrapped up manually in a couple of hours. time to go back to the traditional way of doing it at least people would trust the result.
Posted by: Clare, Lanarkshire on 12:46pm Sat 8 Mar 08
<
News
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (174)
