News: SNP Result and Winning Speach

The Scottish National Party has pulled off a stunning by-election victory by winning Glasgow East by 365 votes.

This represents an outstanding swing of 22.54% towards the SNP in what was until now one of the Labour Party's safest seats.

The result was:

John Mason (SNP) - 11,277
Margaret Curran (Lab) - 10,912

Davena Rankin (Cons) - 1,639
Ian Robertson (LD) - 915
Frances Curran (SSP) - 555
Tricia McLeish (Solidarity)- 512
Dr Eileen Duke (Scottish Greens) - 232
Chris Creighton (Ind) - 67
Hamish Howitt (Freedom 4 Choice)- 65
Read new MP John Mason's winning speech here:

I would like to thank you, your staff both at the count and the polling stations and everyone who has worked so hard to make this by-election run as it has.

I would also like to thank my campaign team, who have worked so hard and all those people from across Glasgow and across the country who have come to campaign and to show support.

Above all I would like to thank the people of Glasgow East who have welcomed the chance to have their voice heard with such enthusiasm.

It has been a huge honour to be a candidate in this constituency - it is an enormous privilege to be elected to represent Glasgow East at Westminster.

People in this constituency have shown the world why the East End matters. You have shown that the East End must never be taken for granted again.

Tonight is not only a victory for the SNP, it is a victory for Glasgow East. This is a new start for the East End.

Three weeks ago the SNP predicted a political earthquake. This SNP victory/vote is off the Richter scale and the tremors are being felt all the way to Downing Street.

The SNP called on the people of Glasgow East to send a message. To send a message to Gordon Brown and the Labour Government that they are out of touch and that the SNP is on your side.

That message is clear. It’s time for change –change to the policies that are taking our country in the wrong direction.

It’s time for action to help hard-pressed families with the soaring costs of food and fuel.

Tonight’s vote is a vote of confidence in Scotland, in the Scottish Government and the progress the SNP is making.

The SNP’s victory last May brought a breath of fresh air to Scotland. The Scottish Government and the SNP will continue to work hard to earn the trust and support of people in the East End and across Scotland.

We will do all we can to make Scotland the successful country we all know it can be. And based upon this record of competence, success and ambition we will trust the people of Scotland to decide the best future for our nation.

Tonight we have removed the dead hand of Labour control. We can claim a new era of opportunity for Glasgow East and for Scotland. That is a message we will take with confidence to the people of Scotland in the weeks and months ahead.

In October Alex Salmond predicted the SNP would send 20 MPs to Westminster. Tonight the people of Glasgow East have delivered the first of those 20. Labour MP’s across Scotland will be quaking in their boots.

The East End has sent a powerful message – a message that is, right now, resonating in Downing Street.

It’s time for the East end to get the recognition it deserves. It’s time for Scotland to stand up and be heard.

[Rep]

Still 10,912 idiots who voted Labour though - old habits die hard....

[Rep]

welcome back to the forum keystage 2

[Rep]

_____________________

Did anyone hear that Tory toff who won the Crewe By-election declare:"It’s time for England to stand up and be heard"?

Not bl**dy likely! Because it's the same old same old!

Pass the parcel Gordie!

_______________________________________

[Rep]

Originally Posted by cassie:
_____________________

Did anyone hear that Tory toff who won the Crewe By-election declare:"It’s time for England to stand up and be heard"?

Not bl**dy likely! Because it's the same old same old!

Pass the parcel Gordie!

_______________________________________

I suspect you're spot on.

So are you thinking DD is using it as a publicity stunt to boost the Tories popularity ? Or something else ?

What's your take ?

[Rep]

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
I suspect you're spot on.

So are you thinking DD is using it as a publicity stunt to boost the Tories popularity ? Or something else ?

What's your take ?

Who is DD?

My take is quite simply that MPs of any of the big three Brit parties occupying Parliamentary Constituencies in England do NOT represent either their constituents or, more importantly, England . . . only their party. One has only to make the comparison I've just made - the winning speech in a Constituency in England captured by another party compared with that of a Constituency in Scotland captured by another party!

How many times have you heard MPs from seats in Scotland in PMQs utter phrases such as 'the people of Scotland'? I've heard that on a number of occasions, but NEVER about 'the people of England' even though the number of seats in England is some nine times greater!

This difference is something English nat parties should use in THEIR campaigning! By golly, you'd start to see a change then, which is what we want! It would be a win-win situation for the English.

_______________________

[Rep]

Originally Posted by cassie:
Who is DD?

My take is quite simply that MPs of any of the big three Brit parties occupying Parliamentary Constituencies in England do NOT represent either their constituents or, more importantly, England . . . only their party. One has only to make the comparison I've just made - the winning speech in a Constituency in England captured by another party compared with that of a Constituency in Scotland captured by another party!

How many times have you heard MPs from seats in Scotland in PMQs utter phrases such as 'the people of Scotland'? I've heard that on a number of occasions, but NEVER about 'the people of England' even though the number of seats in England is some nine times greater!

This difference is something English nat parties should use in THEIR campaigning! By golly, you'd start to see a change then, which is what we want! It would be a win-win situation for the English.

_______________________

Sorry I was thinking of David Davis but I got it wrong - he won the by-election somewhere in Yorkshire.

Anyway, I agree with you but would go further and say the big 3 represent the power of the EU and the more widely the interests of the international banking elite e.g. the privately owned Bank Of England and all the corporate institutions related to it.

This obviously does not represent the people.

I agree with your sentiment about campaigning for English interests, but more commonly they should campaign for the rights and wishes of their constituents (and not coporate interests in the form of a New World Order which has and is leading us down the path of a lot of individual hurt.)

Do you believe the big 3 are batting for the same team ?

If not then I think you should as they all have the same global agenda and the same policies which reflect it.

Obviously individual MP's are not part of any conspiracy and want to be in power, but when you consider members of all 3 parties have attended the secretive Bilderberg meetings then it is clear they are following the same destructive path towards federalization, the EU, one world government and have the same phoney policies relating to war, terror, climate change, etc etc.

Anyway, good point you make - it's what in is the people of England's interests that matters, (and Scotland, Wales and Ireland can obviously rule for themselves too)

[Rep]

It would be somewhat ironic if the Tory party won the next General Election on account of the SNP taking seats off Labour.

[Rep]

Originally Posted by youcanhandlethetruth:
Sorry I was thinking of David Davis but I got it wrong - he won the by-election somewhere in Yorkshire.

Anyway, I agree with you but would go further and say the big 3 represent the power of the EU and the more widely the interests of the international banking elite e.g. the privately owned Bank Of England and all the corporate institutions related to it.

This obviously does not represent the people.

I agree with your sentiment about campaigning for English interests, but more commonly they should campaign for the rights and wishes of their constituents (and not cooperate interests in the form of a New World Order which has and is leading us down the path of a lot of individual hurt.)

Do you believe the big 3 are batting for the same team ?

If not then I think you should as they all have the same global agenda and the same policies which reflect it.

Obviously individual MP's are not part of any conspiracy and want to be in power, but when you consider members of all 3 parties have attended the secretive Bilderberg meetings then it is clear they are following the same destructive path towards federalization, the EU, one world government and have the same phoney policies relating to war, terror, climate change, etc etc.

Anyway, good point you make - it's what in is the people of England's interests that matters, (and Scotland, Wales and Ireland can obviously rule for themselves too)

Yes, I do believe that the power groups in all three parties have the same agenda, and I agree largely with what you say!

I also believe that the common factor here is Scottish. THEY largely influence if not entirely control the three main Brit parties, which have aggregate membership of less than 1% of voters but account for 95% of MPs. The parties are relaxed about who votes [or how often], but rigidly control their candidates. Mention of England is avoided as much as possible because it is part of the plan to eliminate England as a national entity.

Your mention of Bilderberg brings one to the 'globalised' economy and that secretive group's unseen, unaccountable influence in that context. The view that we should think in 'global' terms about international economics emphasises the huge hypocrisy of treating the much greater global numbers of immigrant stock in England as 'minorities' and the English as the 'majority' in their own land and undermining English society! This process is underpinned by the Race [Ethnicity & Nationality] Relations Act 1976 and the Human Rights Act 1998.

In 1997, referendums were held in Scotland and Wales which excluded the 85% of the UK's voters in England, despite the relevant proposals being intended to effect significant changes to the UK's constitution. What kind of 'united kingdom' excludes the vast majority of its voters from the processes resulting in significant constitutional changes? Whatever it is, it is neither united nor democratic!

Did all those supposedly very clever and intelligent people exercising power in 1997 and since to bring about these changes know what they were doing? Were they aware that they were not treating the British state as a unified whole, but as a number of components consciously being treated differently? Are we to believe that they had no idea of what would be the consequences of their actions?

Finally, is there any evidence that either the Conservative or the Lib Dem parties are seriously considering measures which will put England on a similar footing to Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales ie an England Parliament with devolved powers, ring fenced funding and its own executive? Many here are expressing pleasure at the result in Scotland, but I have my reservations. Beware of the law of unintended consequences!

_______________________________

[Rep]