Vote Green in Glasgow Kelvin

No final figures confirmed (something like 96% verified).. but it looks like Pauline McNeil will retake Kelvin as I would predict. SNP are behind by a fairly unbridgeable gap.

Greens are coming THIRD - but the margin is very very tight with us ahead of LibDem. Both are ahead of Tories...

I'd better write a speech...

Martin

No final figures confirmed (something like 96% verified).. but it looks like Pauline McNeil will retake Kelvin as I would predict. SNP are behind by a fairly unbridgeable gap.

Greens are coming THIRD - but the margin is very very tight with us ahead of LibDem. Both are ahead of Tories...

I'd better write a speech...

Martin

It's been a long day. I was up and out of my flat, roughly 7:15am, voted at my local polling station and headed down the road by bike to Hyndland Secondary. I wasn't the first one there... Labour had arrived, SNP were there.. and even, at one point, Rev Hargreaves himself - the intolerant candidate incarnate - appeared. A variety of Scottish Christian Party folk were there, including at least one English supporter who clearly had no idea about the levels of representation of the Greens in Scotland but was happy to badmouth us. Oh well. Numbers of representatives and numbers of voters waxed and waned throughout the day. The day itself started at fridge temperature, turned into a solar frying pan and then as shade descended became a pleasant medium.

Most of the Kelvin candidates spent at least some time there - I saw Pauline McNeil, Katy Gordon, Sandra White (briefly), Brian Cooklin and briefly Niall Walker (though mostly his mother and a friend held that station). Other parties represented for some period were SSP and Solidarity. The Libdems in the form of the dynamic Jamie (the closest the LibDems have to a Green!) and his friend Ali(?-sorry if I've miss remembered), did a good job... (though I persuaded a good few greens back to Green). Many people came certain of their voting intentions (LibDem, Labour, Tory, SNP).

The reception which the Green message received was generally cordial. Where people were waverers a discussion frequently tipped them towards a principled positive vote (Green). How good our result will be is any body's guess. The paper ballots are being scanned as I type this...

OK, so I'm a little late in writing this.. I've had my feet up watching Newsnight Scotland (I've been too tired the last three weeks to spend much time on TV so this was a luxury).

The last three weeks: the weather has been good, the public have been friendly and receptive and the campaigning has been (fairly) clean.

There have been some scandalous events - I've seen Labour party material sent out in Scottish Parliament stationery, Labour party elected representatives writing to me (unprompted) for the first time in 4 years on flimsy pretexts (using public money) to let me know how wonderful they were/things are. I've seen what I regard as being grossly misleading material from the SNP. Let's not talk about grossly inappropriate third party interference.

There have been some comic elements - at one hustings an MSP candidate described herself as "an empty vessel.." which "needs filling with ideas" (one of my hosts stifled a laugh as we exchanged equally disbelieving glances with each other). Another candidate's flier advertised her as interested in "gourmet cooking and having just taken up skiing and golf" - something not out of place in a dating column but surely not vital for whether you are fit as a law maker.

There have been some traditional campaigning moments - I watched Gorgeous George and Tommy in action at Glasgow Uni (and the SSP member who came to challenge Tommy). I've watched an SNP car, bedecked in balloons and blaring out bagpipes accompanied by words from Alex Salmond and Sandra White caught in congestion.

Each election campaign comes to an end and the voting public decides. They - YOU - will make a decision using some unknowable formula based on what they feel safe with, what they are used to, what they feel matters, what they know about the parties and what they think will make a difference. In succeeding elections we manage to improve each element a little more - but it takes time.

Everywhere I've been - outside university libraries, inside a Hindu temple, on the underground, on a bus, on the street, in the park, beside the pedestrian crossing; I've heard the phrase - "you've got my vote". But for all those people there will have been many others I haven't spoken to, haven't seen.

I don't know how much progress we will make (if any). What I do know is that we have campaigned better than ever before and more people will vote Green. I know that our messages are sinking in: voting matters and voting Green is the positive vote for all our futures.

In Glasgow Kelvin voters can now choose to Just Vote Green. I hope that you will be one of them.

Best wishes,

Martin

The last few days have been energising and yet all too short.. I'm going to write a quick blog about it all tonight and post it at 11pm.. still don't have time.. must dash..

Fantastic video at www.transformscotland.org.uk/campaigns/hit.html

I'd embed it here but it would take you away from their worthwhile message.

They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery... looks like the colour green is getting popular too.. we first put them out like this in 2003..

Cheeky besoms! There wasn't enough length of pole for their zip-tie to hold their placard onto the same pole - so they just placarded over us. I don't mind some reasonable adjustment of position to make space for placards (we all have to get along), but if you can't do it without obstructing another party you shouldn't do it!

I've said before my chances of winning are slim - the New-Labour banner will probably fly again as traditional Labour voters turn out again to put their 'x' beside Labour, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth voting Green. Votes are the great levellers in politics - it doesn't matter which party, how much money, or how high your office; votes are not ours, they're yours and you can choose to do with them what you will.

Now, I generally suggest to people that they should vote for what they want rather than just tactically - if you don't vote for what you want you'll never get it. There are times however when voters, look at the big picture and with the first past the post system decide that their chance to influence is in the voting system. Sometimes they feel the need to make a difference by voting for another party even if they don't agree with the whole platform of that party.

Well, I don't propose to answer that conundrum for you but I think it is worth thinking about what might make this election different and what effects the tactical voter could consider.

• In each successive election more people realise more the importance of taking green issues seriously.
• In the Kelvin constituency election this time there is no SSP or Solidarity candidate.
• In the Kelvin constituency this time there is an independent who formerly represented LibDems
• Of the main parties, the Greens are the ones who have worked most co-operatively with other parties and the ones who have been respected for this.

Now, look again at the graph of the last election counted in the Kelvin area. (See my previous blog posting).

If this is the starting point of dedicated voters for their preferences where might they jump if voting tactically?

Who will benefit from the SSP's lost constituency voters? Let's review the tactical possibilities.

Will people tactically vote SNP? After all, Sandra White (SNP), has come second twice...

Now let's inject some realism here:

• are we really expecting SSP voters will get into bed with SNP's big business influenced agenda...? (see also 2003 cash for access) even if they did they'd need more votes on top to beat Labour...

• are Green-minded voters going to suddenly take the SNP (who support the M74 extension) seriously on the environment...? (no smirking at the back..)

• are LibDem voters aren't going to switch to a nationalist party whose core raison d'etre is whatever it takes to split the union? they might find the Greens' principled localism with open minded self-determination - a more palatable route to 'independence' if the Scottish people determine it - some would argue it's a more Liberal position even than their own party's.

• Tories - well now that Annabel Goldie is clearly coming out for the union it would take a lot of personal capital for them to go for Sandra White as their potential constituency representative.

Tactically vote LibDem? It didn't work at Westminster elections...

• SNP voters won't be switching to LibDem whose leadership are opposed to any sort of referendum ever of any kind see (No, No, No!)

• SSP/Solidarity voters will probably find LibDems too woolly.. too abstract from the concerns of every class.. too much interested in tinkering around the edges when more vision is required.

• Tories might switch to LibDem I suppose, depending on what they think of Katy Gordon, if they find her compelling enough.

Tactically vote Green?

• ex-Labour supporters (the most influential group of voters) don't fear that a Green MSP will just be about "independence" or will side uncritically with the Alex Salmond; they know that a local Green MSP will fundamentally share their concerns for local health service provision, their concerns about Trident and indeed stand up for principles unfettered by internal Labour party politicking; good chance of a few votes then (we've certainly gained a few members from Labour)

• free-thinking LibDem supporters may find a Green both liberal and environmentally conscious enough to be palatable (indeed some ex LibDems are joining our ranks having become sick of their party)

• moderate/greener SNP supporters, those who believe in independence but are not so wedded to the SNP's business agenda and who are concerned its shifting positions (and lack of priority for climate change concerns) may find it palatable to vote for a pro-localist, pro-referendum party candidate.

• greener or socially concerned pragmatic Conservatives - of whom there are more than a few in Kelvin, may trust a medically qualified professional who is committed to standing for a constituency to be more thoughtful and responsive to their concerns than the alternatives.

Hmm... perhaps Green isn't such an unreasonable tactical vote. Of course, there's a good bet that no amount of tactical voting (much of which may be attracted by a huge SNP media machine or LibDem glossy leaflets) will unseat a Labour vote, marshalled by fearful stories of independence..

Oh, well. I know why I'll be voting Green - it's just the right thing to do. (If I didn't think so, I wouldn't be the candidate.)

One of the weekend papers had a photo of Alex Salmond stepping out of a helicopter (not a particularly flattering shot - somewhat at odds with all the carefully crafted materials the SNP publicity-machine has been putting out). It reminded me of just the sort of David and Goliath battle, we Greens have to face.

Let me tell you a wee bit of inside information - sshhh!! don't mention it to anyone else, it's just our secret on this blog. Let me tell you roughly how much money we (Scottish Green Party) are going to have spent on our total election campaign nationally. It will be public when the final electoral returns are published and I don't have an exact figure... but the last I heard it was in the ballpark of £85,000. Now it might go up by a few thousand before polling day, but it's unlikely to top £100,000 . Let's get that in perspective - that's about a fifth of a single donation to the SNP from Brian Souter.

Too many things to try and catch up on so, excuse me if I arm-wave a little.

Yesterday, Patrick Harvie, Rosemary Burnett and I joined Friends of the Earth Scotland (I didn't see any other parties there) supporting them beside their giant white elephant representing nuclear power. It's just a technological distraction - that's commercial nuclear fission power generating reactors I mean... though in a wind the inflatable looming down with its tusks was also somewhat distracting!

It's an odd thing but there seems to be a view that nuclear might be green and rejecting nuclear would somehow guarantee blackouts. This disappoints me: it's really short-sighted (nuclear wont last forever) and misunderstands the opportunities which exist while we are relatively energy rich to tackle our energy wasting culture. What Greens want is to change direction: quickly, to something much better. Nuclear is a distraction from where we should be heading.

I'm not a luddite, I try and keep up with all the arguments and think through the issues. I don't treat nuclear as a simple subject and I know I'm not the only one. Let me tell you a story from 2005, as the Green candidate at a renewable energy hustings I recall teasing the audience by suggesting that I would support nuclear...(pause)... if someone could fix problems a, b, c, d, e and f... If renewables was just an industry populated with fanatics I'd have been boo'ed off. I wasn't. I got nods of agreement from the audience. My point is that there are a lot of people, including engineers and scientists, who take our country's power generation seriously. They realise that the momentous challenge of our time is to find a way to sustainably manage our energy needs and minimise impact on our global environment. These people realise that moving to a low-carbon, energy thrifty, high quality of life, sustainable society is a worthwhile focus of their working lives. A lot of them work in renewables and they need our support. Some are in politics - they need your votes.

So, some images to break up the monotony of my text..

an enthusiastic Green activist has clearly been trying to make a point...

Just two of a selection of LibDem placards (first outside Hillhead Underground, second on Ashton Road.. there's another just off Great Western Rd, Cecil Street?) which seem to have slipped over the Green placard. As loose with their zipties as with their policies..? Come on Katy/Jamie - couldn't you pop over and sort them out? We would, only if people see us handling your placards they'll assume we're tampering...

Scottish Conservatives - seem often to be found located next to Green placards... (have you noticed how much green colour they have on their materials? their PEB had the text plates white with green background) We've already heard about their zero-rated environmental policies and now it seems they haven't quite got the hang of localism (their placards being printed in North Tyne Industrial Estate, NE12 9SZ)

Finally, for any placard spotters amongst you, a rarity.. the lesser hammer and sickled red Communist Party Placard sharing a pole with the Scottish Christian Party.. from Govan underground station precinct.

It was pleasing to hear from people that our Royal Mail leaflet drop has gone through many doors - it's pretty much the only way we can get the message across to voter across the whole of Kelvin that we are standing here.

Quite a few people seemed to be aware of the fact we were standing here in the constituency but not elsewhere. They seemed pleased. They also seemed to indicate that voting Green was the main thing now, not just an add-on to another vote. Good news this.

I've had several comments on stalls at the weekend from members of the public who for some reason seem to think that the Green party is intent on the abolition of "Catholic schools" and seem to think that the Scottish Green Party is somehow anti-religion. Well, we're not wanting to abolish any schools and we're not anti-Catholic. There seems to be a lot of misinformation circulating so here's what our Co-leader wrote to the Catholic Observer in reply to an earlier article from them:

Robin Harper

Co-Convener, Scottish Green Party

"Our key priorities in this election and for the next four years are

to tackle climate change, deliver world-class public transport,

provide warm, energy efficient homes, ensure public services are

retained under public control and give more support to young people

and local economies. We do support integration of faith schools into

secular education but clearly the issue needs to be debated maturely

and sensitively. Some moves at integration of education are already

happening in some areas of Scotland with shared campuses and we

support that.

"Greens oppose separate education precisely because of the negative

effect we believe such division has on young people growing up in

Scotland. It literally divides communities and divides young people,

isolating young Catholics from young non-Catholics, and vice versa. We

believe young people learn from each other far more effectively when

they learn together.

"We believe young people have a right to an education which enables

them to learn about all strands of religious and philosophical thought

in a comparative way, an education which encourages them to think

critically for themselves and reach their own view in their own

time. This kind of opportunity is, we believe, best provided through

high-quality religious and moral education, taught in schools which do

not explicitly promote one perspective over another.

"In 2006, Scottish Executive research showed that sectarianism was

Scotland's top hate crime, with Catholics about twice as more likely

to be the victims than Protestants (1). Greens believe young people

educated together, irrespective of their faith, are more likely to

grow up holding positive attitudes about each other, irrespective of

their religion. As long as a minority of society is educated

separately, that minority remains at greater risk of discrimination

and worse.

"The National Centre for Social Research found in 2002 that 59% of

Scots Catholics wanted to see separate faith schools phased out (2).

The Scottish Green Party supports those calls from the Catholic

community for non-denominational education, which we believe is in the

best interests of Scots of all faiths and none."

Notes:

1. Executive research into religiously aggravated reported crime.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2006/11/24133659/4

2. NatCen reference here: http://education.guardian.co.uk/faithschools/story/0,,1134643,00.html

The Scottish Greens stand

• for separation of Church and State and for support of secular state institutions; not money for particular religions/groups. Why? Because a secular framework guarantees freedom of diverse spiritual belief - or none - and equity of treatment of citizens in ways which a institutionalised/state funded religion does not.
• for true breadth of teaching of religious moral and philosophical studies and the independence of curriculum from doctrinal/theological pressure; not Church veto'd teachers and doctrine influenced curriculum. Why? Because not all Churches are always perfect at unbiased discussion of material which conflicts with their theological perspective
• for a publicly funded education system which provides pupils a high quality local school where friends who play in the street can learn together and learn to live together. Why? you don't need me to spell that one out!
• for all this to be achieved by integration of State-funded denominational schools (some of which are already on the same campus as non-denominational schools) into State funded non-denominational education.

In the 21st century, I don't think it's unreasonable to move towards a society in which there is clear separation of Church and State. Spiritual life is a personal journey and should be a private matter, not one for State interference. Where particular religions teach their religious practises it is reasonable for that to happen outwith the state-funded school system. If not taught in the home then scripture schools, organised by the particular faith, or division of faith, are a normal way of achieving this.

Spent a few hours today getting absolutely soaked speaking to students outside the Glasgow Uni library. Some nice cake from the student theatre group.. said hi to the Christian Union Stall and chatted to a physicist. Must say it was much drier last Friday when I was last leafleting there. Somewhat disappointingly I haven't heard about any student hustings being held for the constituency this year. Not sure why not - certainly the Students Association have run one in the past.

Quite a few people were stopping and asking for more material - I think generally students are more switched on to politics than other politicians think. In terms of policy positions: student grants, affordable warm housing, adequate public transport (not just the routes which the bus companies make money out of) as well as more global issues (international justice, climate change) we seem to be in tune with them. I was reading the Students Association manifesto and agreed with everything they're covering. The mention of sexual health services reminds me, I've still a pile of emails to work through asking about our views - well, in case you're interested, as a doctor it's hardly surprising I think that good public health prevention work, good sex education, good access to GUM services and good support for treatment are all vital and shouldn't be ignored because of some misplaced moral panic.

Candidate-watch:

Spotted Tommy briefly sweeping past to address a group with old fashioned megaphone politics. Couldn't make out what he was saying where I was - the rain was tipping down - but one of his supporters told me afterwards it was all the usual. He wasn't around for long - perhaps preparing for his big show tomorrow. Pauline McNeill wandered past on her own and incognito. She was on her way to find some local Labour councillors. We had a brief chat. She didn't look hugely relaxed so I told her I thought that she was probably still going to get elected... but that Sandra White had mentioned SNP were targeting Scotstoun. Pauline seemed surprised. We discussed materials coming through doors and then she went on her way.

It wouldn't be an election blog without a graph talking about previous voting patterns - but what figures are valid?

At the 2003 Holyrood election the Scottish Greens didn't stand in any constituencies - so those figures give no idea of how strong we are in the area. (Interestingly, it's the only election that other opposition parties want to talk about). In 2005, the Westminster elections took place in constituencies with very different boundaries - Kelvin was split across different pieces each of which included very strong traditional Labour areas (e.g. Drumchapel for Glasgow North-West; parts of Maryhill and Summerston for Glasgow North). I know from discussions at the polling station that many people planned to vote tactically to try and unseat the Labour incumbents - in the West End that generally meant voting LibDem. “I usually vote for you but this time I need to try and give Tony a message..” was something I heard outside Hyndland Secondary. Sadly the only message that resulted was the LibDems getting the impression that their support was stronger than the reality...

Well it makes some sense to look at the most recent election tabulated in the Glasgow Kelvin boundaries; the last election where voters had to put a single 'x' next to their only choice. The 2004 European election Glasgow Kelvin results fit these criteria. The turnout was relatively low and people were voting about European representation - both things may skew interpretation - but the comparison is more valid than 2003. In its favour many voters probably realised at that election their ballots fed into a Scotland wide proportional system so they probably felt their decision counted more than usual. This means we get an idea of how Kelvin residents dedicated to voting want to vote if they aren't voting tactically.

The graph tells the rest of the story. The Greens are the party who come second behind Labour in Kelvin - when you really examine which party actual voters actually support.

Kelvin has diverse voting interests and has been known to buck the trend. It's the sort of place which could return a Green MSP.

So in Kelvin there's a whole raft of candidates; the usual suspects plus some extra...

...interestingly Niall Walker, until recently a local LibDem councillor, is standing as an independent. In some ways I like Niall, his heart's in the right place: he's a keen cyclist and fairly green minded, but he seems rather grim and dour of late when I've seen him. His posters are mostly black - perhaps the colour of mourning of his LibDem affiliation. He doesn't have a hope without a party backing him and I wonder why he's standing except as a spoiler to the LibDem campaign. Perhaps he didn't know there was going to be a Green candidate and wanted there to be an alternative to LibDem greenwash. Have to give him credit for dedication sticking to election rules - he or someone helping appears to have hand written in ballpoint pen the legal information at the bottom of his posters because it was missed when printing. (ouch)

Anyway, a few years ago (autumn 2004?), well before the scandal where the LibDem transport minister buried then ignored a public inquiry, Niall sauntered up to a Partick Farmers Market Green Party stall I was at. He was in his cycle gear and probably thought he was incognito. I must not have had my morning cup of tea that day because I laid into him hard about his party backing of the M74 and of the City Council backing the M74 extension. He told me he didn't know much about it (which admission made me positively froth at the mouth - how can a councillor not know what a huge grey-polluting monstrosity the City Council is backing?) but as I calmed down he took in my points on why it was a bad idea and an even worse use of £500million. It seems he, as many in the LibDems, simply trusted the rhetoric and judgement of their ministers and didn't always engage with their track record.

Funnily enough, not moving in lofty ministerial circles, I haven't yet met a LibDem who knows the arguments and wholeheartedly defends the M74 extension. I've met LibDem activists chatting after hustings in previous elections who are privately embarrassed by it. The SNP are likewise less than enthusiastic behind the scenes though their politicians have stuck to the pro-motorway building line in front of the public. I have my notes somewhere from a 2003 hustings where Sandra White was defending the idea of "the missing link" motorway portion. Shame that people don't pick up the fact that this "missing link" fossil of urban planning dates from the 1960s - when oil seemed never ending and the future held the prospect of everyone zooming around in freely flowing traffic with shiny cars. Even the Evening Times has a blind spot on the idiocy of this piece of motorway building - perhaps their journalists are frustrated about being stuck in congestion and simply don't believe the studies which show new motorways don't help in-town congestion. Well, the M74 extension is not just bad for the local environment, bad for the global environment, it's a HUGE waste of money: for less than half the price (current estimate £130million) you could have Crossrail in Glasgow and have a few bob left over to spend on other public transport projects (or even just repairing the existing road surface rather than building more). Why would you build it? Who would benefit? some Labour donors perhaps? who met the First Minister around the time of negotiations?

I thought I'd take a break from politics on Saturday night and go to see a film. That film turned out to be The Lives of Others at the GFT. Excellent film - subtitled German but don't let that put you off. (official website with Flash trailer).

Well, I didn't get away from politics and I hope Gordon Jackson - spotted in the audience - took away from it some cautionary points to discuss with his Labour colleagues in Westminster who seem wedded to the idea of big ID databases and collecting and keeping DNA on file from people whether or not they are found guilty of anything and possibly sharing it with foreign governments. You see the film is about the Stasi - the East German internal security service, a vast apparatus which spied on the East German population to root out dissent.

Go see it. If, as a politician, you came away from that film not realising how important it is to control a government's use of personal data then you wouldn't deserve to be elected. As a voter, next time you are at a hustings ask the panel members "What is a police state?"; anyone who can't describe it, its problems and the way to avoid it: boo them off stage.

The Greens have a track record of protecting civil liberties. In the Scottish Parliament they actually united Tories, SSP, SNP and a Labour rebel to defeat the Scottish Executive and passed a motion on ID cards (LibDems abstained). (Have a search for "ID cards" on www.scottishgreens.org.uk for more information about our track record.)

If you want to learn more, look at and get involved with No2ID...

Hurried schedule Saturday - leafleting in Partick, a press event to try to get some attention paid to the terrible state of the Clyde cycle tunnel then a wee bit of time with Robin Harper (co-leader of the Greens) and my regional list colleagues Patrick Harvie and Rosemary Burnett, then Robin did a piece for the student-TV. Chance for a quick photo together in Kelvingrove Park before off to a stall on Byres Road.