Hello there! Sorry I haven’t made the promised changes. I can’t get out of the annoying habit of being busy I’m afraid. Still, this week’s roundup is here as scheduled.

Many will remember Jamie Stone’s comment during the election campaign, suggesting that nationalists were xenophobic. Labour MP Anne Moffat has gone a whole step further, comparing the SNP to the Nazis. She blamed proportional representation for Nazism and likened the SNP’s election victory to this supposed process. Well, at least the Scottish Parliament doesn’t let people into power on the support of 20-odd percent of the electorate.

Anyway, Will P reminds us of Godwin’s Law. Meanwhile, this was not in the letters page. And Bellgrove Bell reminds us that Alex Salmond was elected under First Past the Post anyway.

But there is at least one thing that the BNP and the SNP have in common. You might recall a few weeks ago bloggers were discussing whether the SNP were on the left or the right. This week, agentmancuso has written a post asking whether the BNP are on the left or the right.

But a lot of bloggers have been looking at Labour and noting a certain resemblance to the BNP, particularly in the wake of Margaret Hodge’s comments last week that, “established British families should be given priority over economic migrants for council housing.” Blackadder at The Spoilt Ballot says this:

So gone is the leftist principle of “from each according to their ability to each according to their need” and in with “Britain for the Brits”.

Meanwhile, Alan at The Art of the Possible says that it would take us back to the dark days of the 1950s.

…all Mrs Hodge is doing is pandering to far-right elements in her own constituency. It was her blunder that legitimised the BNP candidates standing in her constituency in 2006, which led to them winning enough seats to make them the second largest party on the council. And now, instead of standing up to these people she is pandering to those who preach hatred and advocate discrimination.

In yet another example of the Labour government’s war on liberty, Shuggy has this on the suggestion that people ought to inform the police about anyone who might have the potential to commit a crime. (Is that everyone?)

I find the whole idea that we have a automatic civic duty to grass – even when our neighbours actually do something illegal – creepy, offensive, and the very antithesis of civility.

Reactionary Snob added his thoughts here.

And just to go one step further, this week also saw the announcement of flying CCTV cameras, presumably to catch us not telling on each other or something. Reactionary Snob had this, and Kevin Williamson had this.

Meanwhile, amid the neverending talk about Asbos these days, the word at the barricades is, what is wrong with young people being young people, eh?

Bishop Hill has this smart, short post on the five ages of political life.

The Scottish Parliament is not quite as fusty as Westminster, certainly when it comes to some of the latter’s odder traditions. But Holyrood Watcher is not sure that the right balance has been struck. How should MSPs address each other?

Bookdrunk is once again concerned about the future of the Freedom of Information act. Ann Widdecombe’s defence of the proposed watering-down is dissected.

Meanwhile, Mr Eugenides has taken a look at Alistair Darling’s comments on the basis that they could well be the regurgitated opinions of Gordon Brown.

Richard Havers thinks he has detected a change in Jim Mather’s approach towards nuclear power. In the comments, Richard Thomson disagrees. On his own blog he has this.

Kevin Williamson asks, where now for Solidarity and the SSP? He concludes that they did not campaign enough for independence, and this is what cost them their votes.

Should Scotland enter its own separate team in the Olympics? Jeff at SNP Tactical Voting thinks it’s a race not worth running. Grant Thoms, on the other hand, thinks Scotland should go for it. After all, it already competes separately in the Commonwealth Games.

Here is the side of Alex Salmond you might not know about. An account from a 16-year-old Not the Record. A couple of weeks old, I know, but I only just found out about it and couldn’t resist including this great post.

Louise calls Tony Blair’s failure to phone Alex Salmond an “unforgivable discourtesy”.

Over at Witterings & Wanderings, Cursed Tea has discovered Scots Wikipedia, but isn’t too happy.

Can somebody tell me fit wye they wid hay a hale wikipedia site on Scots an in Scots weeoot ony mention o Doric?? There’s even a post on Aiberdeen weeoot onythin on Doric. Bit they gang an and an aboot Scots Lied and Lawlands Scots. I’m likely aboot tay offend some peer crater but … fa spicks Lawlands ony mair? It smacks o central beltism

That’s it for now! Thanks for reading. I’m not sure whether I will be doing next week’s roundup. I might drag someone else in to do it. Whatever, please send your nominations to scottishroundup@gmail.com. Thanks!

Welcome to this week’s roundup. Over the past seven days we have gained a much fuller picture of how Scotland will be governed over the next four years.

And, if you wish to swallow the nationalists’ line, it’s just been one historic day after another. Will Patterson tots up the firsts.

Alex Salmond is now First Minister. Calum Carr couldn’t be more delighted.

I voted SNP for the first time at the elections two weeks ago primarily because they were the vehicle most likely to turn over Labour. Although my politics lie mostly to the left of Labour I couldn’t vote Labour: I, like many others felt, the need for change was crucial.

Meanwhile, Mr Eugenides feels the hand of history. But…

…the joy of inveterate Tories like me that Labour have been turfed out of office must be tempered by the realisation that socialism has merely been replaced by Nationalist socialism. There’s every chance that the Nats will be every bit as bad – if not worse.

This brings us towards that old chestnut again: are the SNP on the left or the right? Kevin Williamson celebrates the SNP’s ascent to power, saying that the left should rejoice:

Maybe not on its full economic agenda, but on its democratic, social, and internationalist agenda – e.g. national liberation, anti-war, for nuclear disarmament, against nuclear power, for a radical environmental agenda, against the inhumane treatment of asylum seekers, for the abolition of student loans, and for smaller class sizes at schools – this is as leftist as it has got anywhere in Europe in recent times.

Did you see that picture? On that Salmond / Che Guevara mashup t-shirt, David Farrer isn’t rejoicing so much:

If the SNP really wants to encourage a prosperous and free Scotland it’s a bit silly to associate itself with someone who impoverished his own country both economically and in terms of civil liberties.

And in the comments there, Bill Cameron is worried about “populist posturing” from Alex Salmond.

Korakious probably wouldn’t agree with any of the above.

While it maybe true that since, unlike Labour, the SNP doesn’t have deep roots in the working class, its right wing trajectory will definitely lead to its support plummeting, thus opening up space for the left, it might well be the case that SNP will use its minority position as an excuse for not pushing through with its progressive policies…

There has been lots of talk about the SNP’s slimmed-down approach to government. Richard Havers doesn’t know what to make of the new portfolios, asking why the climate change and energy, and transport and tourism haven’t been put together.

Caron wonders if John Swinney will have enough time to manage his portfolio.

Richard Thomson has yet another theory as to why the Lib Dems refused to negotiate. Is there a power struggle inside the Scottish Lib Dems? Any why did they put forward two candidates for Deputy Presiding Officer?

Ah yes, the Presiding Officer. Incredibly, four MSPs managed to spoil their ballot papers. We had better be careful — we will get a reputation for being a nation that can’t even fill in a simple ballot paper without completely bollocksing it up. Holyrood Watcher has this from an anonymous MSP.

And in yet another demonstration of just how tight the election was, and the implications that is having, SNP MSP Angela Constance will be going on maternity leave this year. The SNP and Labour would then be tied in Holyrood. Holyrood Belle notes just how much Labour are desperate for this sort of situation to happen. Almost going as far as wanting an SNP MSP to die?

They might be desperate for any luck they can get anyway, as David Hutchison notes that Labour might have to sharpen up their act. They’re not used to being in opposition, and they’re not used to the workings of the Parliament — because the Civil Service did it all for them in the past.

Bookdrunk laments the resurrection of the proposal to make MPs exempt to the Freedom of Information act. It’s one rule for us, and it’s nearly another for them, as the bill has moved on to the House of Lords.

Transparency is the parent of accountability, and it’s embarrassing that this bill should still be floating around Parliament like an unflushed turd.

Speaking of brown, Shuggy is annoyed about the PM-in-waiting’s rhetoric.

But what about the current PM? Gus tackles ten popular myths about Tony Blair.

Do you think there are too many quangos in Scotland? Richard Havers’s blog might be one to keep an eye on, as he is starting Quango Watch.

Talking of wasteful quangos, Grant Thoms has a bone to pick with Cosla.

Agentmancuso has made a return to the blogosphere this week, with a couple of posts about nationalism, religion and whether the Irish model is really one that should be followed.

This week, Steve is Angry about the SNP–Green coalition, calling it a “vote for Luddism”. Meanwhile, Neil Craig thinks the SNP are already pandering to the “Green Luddites”.

Alex Salmond has thrown his weight behind a bid for Euro 2016. Max calls it a vanity project. I hope this isn’t a sign of things to come. Vanity projects have been one of the distasteful elements of Blair’s premiership — Millennium Domes, Olympic Games with holes in the budget, etc…

Scientology has been making the news this week, thanks to that Panorama documentary. Reactionary Snob has this take on the affair.

Last weekend, a fine British institution took place: entering a dire song to the Eurovision Song Contest, then blaming everyone else when it gets hardly any points. Inquisitor derided the song by Scooch for its “single entendre “humour” attempts”.

Here is John Kirriemuir’s take on it. I agree about Terry Wogan — he gets worse every year, increasingly just saying offensive stuff without thinking. He probably imagines everyone in Britain laughing with him all the way, but my head was in my hands at points.

The best Eurovision post was by Robert Sharp, who described Brits as boors at the Eurovision party. People in Britain think that Eurovision is “meant” to be camp and cheesy, and think that everyone else in Europe, by taking it seriously, misses the point. Robert Sharp points out that it is probably we who are missing the point. On the winning song by the Serbian entrant:

…the only words Terry [Wogan] could find were to mock the “owl like” lead singer, noticing the contrast between her rather androgynous appearance and the Amazonian femininity of her backing singers. She was baring her soul for the continent, and all Terry could do was chuckle.

The smoking ban is about to take hold south of the border, so Flying Rodent offers a cut-out-and-keep guide for those beleaguered smokers who need to put up with their non-smoking friends.

“Don’t you find that it’s so much nicer coming home from the pub and not stinking like an ashtray?”

Easily dealt with and surprisingly common, all manner of non-smoking acquaintances will engage you with this classic. Simply nip to the gents, buy a pack of three and return toting the Pish Balloon.

Finally, Deacon Barry has visited Second Scotland in Second Life and likes what he sees.

I have a bit more time on my hands at the moment, so I will be getting my toolbox out and doing some work on the site over the next week or so. Don’t be alarmed if it looks different. It will mean that, at last, there will be a really simple way to nominate a post. In the meantime, please continue to nominate posts by emailing us at scottishroundup@gmail.com. Ta!

Hi folks! Once again, the Roundup is at my mercy. It turns out that half a week is a pretty long time in politics as well: Tony Blair has finally set a date for his departure, Gordon Brown’s campaign is underway, the smoke is starting to clear at Holyrood and even Councils have been subject to some intensive bloggery.

So let’s start with an end, just to confuse people: Tony Blair is standing down as Labour Leader (and so Prime Minister), and this has generated a few posts. Jeff is quite charitable to the outgoing PM, but most of the reaction is positive to Blair’s departure rather than Blair’s legacy. Shuggy is sceptical to say the least, while Reactionary Snob is celebrating the end of the Blair era. Mr. Eugenides, on the other hand, writes a parable about the last decade.

Given that the change of a head of government is a pretty big story, Duncan (who is far too modest to recommend his own posts) has been taking a look at stories that everyone else may have missed. Over at Rhetorically Speaking, the cost of ID cards comes under closer scrutiny.

Meanwhile, attention is turning to Blair’s likely successor. Will a Gordon Brown Premiership deliver major changes in UK politics? No, say IndyGal, Caron and Julie, who all note that Brown has been in Blair’s government the whole time, and has funded its policies.

But John Reid is still in the picture, and his name has been mentioned in connection with the Leadership… of Scottish Labour! Mr. Eugenides is terrified by the prospect of that. Richard Havers looks at the alternatives from Labour’s MSPs. Of course, it’s worth mentioning that Jack McConnell hasn’t actually resigned, but when people start blogging about your successor, it’s a sign that vultures have started to circle the current First Minister.

Staying with Holyrood, and people are still mulling over the campaign. Osama Saeed looks at the campaign by the Christian parties, and he’s not impressed:

As someone of faith myself, I was seriously turned off by their campaign along with the other Christian parties. I’ve never been taught that the way to win friends to your views is by chastising them. Great faith leaders are those that have provided hope to the people. Railing against homosexuality, abortion and more is going to get you booed, and that is what happened.

However, people are moving on from the campaign and looking at the aftermath. Richard Thomson is celebrating the election of a number of friends and colleagues to Holyrood, while Osama considers the election of Bashir Ahmad as the first Asian MSP, and the Asian community’s involvement in the Scottish political process. Looking at the terminology, Osama wonders if Linda Fabiani’s Italian background (and Italian knighthood) actually makes her the first ethnic minority MSP, and if technically, Tommy Sheridan was the first non-white MSP. Hmmmm…

Anyway, the main chatter is about the possible (probable?) change in government in Scotland and the various approaches to coalitions over the past couple of weeks. Jeff looks at the mechanics of choosing a First Minister, while Holyrood Watcher mulls over what’s awaiting Alex Salmond, assuming that he takes over from Jack McConnell.

The view from Ireland is being reported on at Small Nation, where eyebrows have been raised that Ian Paisley can say ‘yes’ to Coalition with Sinn Fein, but Nicol Stephen is saying ‘no’ to Coalition with the SNP. Staying with the LibDems, and Kezia Dugdale is fairly cynical about the LibDems’ approach, while Grant Thoms reckons that the party will suffer at the next Westminster election. Incidentally, Grant also warns us that the start of the campaign for that election is imminent. Good grief, can we not have a couple of weeks off first?

While the LibDems might not be interested in any kind of formal co-operation with other parties, this week saw the negotiation and completion of an agreement between the SNP and the Greens. Shuggy wonders if the failure to secure LibDem involvement makes the SNP-Green hook-up pointless, while Duncan asks what the Greens actually get out of this.

At local Council, level, however, agreements are being made. Grant Thoms has a run-down of where the SNP are now involved. Concentrating on Edinburgh, where the LibDems have taken control with SNP support and Conservative acquiescence (in return for the Convenership of the Lothian & Borders Police Board). Richard Thomson is positive, as you’d expect; Holyrood Watcher considers the fate of de facto SNP Group Leader Steve Cardownie, who originally defected from Labour; Labour Councillor Andrew Burns is understandably sceptical. In Renfrewshire, Red Mist reports on the new SNP-LibDem Coalition.

And finally, staying with local government in Renfrewshire, I couldn’t write the Roundup without mentioning the latest twist in the saga surrounding Paisley’s most famous (or should that be infamous?) Councillor. It seems he has supporters, but the old saying about ‘friends like these’ might apply. To be honest, though, this blog is worth mentioning if only for its description of one TerryWatch member: “EVIL ANTI LABOUR DEVIL KEEPS SINDY DOLLS IN A KENNEL THEN THROWS THEM AT DEREK HATTON AND PENSIONERS.” Priceless.

Anyway, things should revert to normal next week, so get your nominations in to scottishroundup@gmail.com. I have my ‘Bye-de-bye!’

Hello! So you can see, I decided to go with a Wednesday update after all. Plenty has happened since the last roundup, and you bet the bloggers have been talking about it.

The big story is of course coalition negotiations and who will become First Minister. The Lib Dems have caused a stink by refusing to negotiate with the SNP while an independence referendum is on the table. There are lots of views on this.

Iain MacLaren at Small Nation calls the Lib Dems “neither liberal nor democratic” for refusing to accept a referendum. Meanwhile, David at Island Life has some simple definitions for the Lib Dems (I’d love to know where he got that definition for ‘liberal’ from!). Chris Dillow argues along similar lines.

A different view comes from Shuggy:

Why not, then, hold a referendum to demonstrate to the nationalists once and for all that the majority of Scots, as is repeatedly demonstrated in opinion polls, do not want independence?

The answer is that this is not how referenda are understood by those who advocate them. Would the nationalists accept such a referendum as the final word on the subject?

I doubt it. The historical experience has been that politicians advocate referenda when they think they’ll get the answer they want and oppose them when they think they won’t.

Jeff at SNP Tactical Voting thinks that it would be more pragmatic for the SNP to drop the referendum idea.

So the Lib Dems aren’t going to play ball after all. Fair play to them, it’s not like they didn’t give the SNP sufficient warning. I believe the line was that they wouldn’t even pick up the phone while the referendum issue was still on the table. Personally I don’t know why the nationalists are pushing for a referendum that they quite simply will not win at any point over the next 4 years.

Now from the point of view of a Lib Dem, Caron Lindsay:

I am pretty well disposed to the idea of talking to the SNP. Apart from the obvious disagreement on independence, we do have some similar ideas on policy and could probably form a stable government which would be good for Scotland.

However, having said repeatedly since way before the start of the election that we would not support a referendum on independence, we can’t really go back on that now. To do so would be a betrayal of our commitment to the people who voted for us and would make us look like we had no integrity whatsoever.

Gus at 1820 seems certain that the Lib Dems’ refusal to talk is all down to Gordon Brown.

My views on this whole situation are here (I try to avoid including my own posts in the roundup, but I couldn’t resist this time I’m afraid).

Amid all this tangle surrounding coalitions and who might become First Minister, Holyrood Watcher reckons that Alex Salmond has been the best performer since the election.

Meanwhile, like some Achilles of yore, Mr McConnell sits sulking in his tent, while his Labour Party acolytes consider their legal options for bringing down chaos on whatever kind of administration could be patched up. And Mr Stephen plays Greta Garbo, wanting to be alone. What is either of them contributing to the common weal, in this time of crisis?

Kevin Williamson thinks so too:

So far Alex Salmond hasnt put a foot wrong, and the Scottish people are warming to the idea of him heading the government. But the road ahead is fraught with difficulties. As long as Alex Salmond and the SNP press ahead with their keynote policy – a commitment to publish a Referendum Bill in the first term of office – then they will continue to have the support of the Independence movement.

But they can’t decide who is First Minister without first choosing the Presiding Officer. And with the election result being as tight as it was, nobody from any of the parties is prepared to come forward yet. It seems most likely that a Conservative will fill the seat — but which one? Will Patterson has a look at the possibilities.

Richard Thomson thinks that, despite what Annabel Goldie may believe on the back of a reasonably good performance, it would be best for her party to stand aside and become Presiding Officer.

Meanwhile, David Hutchison ponders on the entire situation, including the dreaded ‘28 Days Later scenario’.

There is still a lot of navel gazing going on about those spoilt ballots. Richard Havers is talking about the closeness of the result, and how it will ultimately lead to four years of constitutional wrangling. But he also mentions one theory as to why there were so many spoilt ballots:

We’re not in Japan, we read from left to right and so in my view logic dictates that that the constituency would go on the left. Apparently failure to mark a constituency vote is what accounted for a vast amount of the spoiled papers. In this case the Executive, the Scotland Office et al have something to answer for.

This seems a bit unclear. I’ve seen a couple of LiveJournalers posting about this as well. rhythmaning and MatGB are both shocked by the idea that not voting for a constituency candidate might have invalidated your regional vote.

If this is true, this will be a change from the last two elections. Because the ballot papers were separate before, there was no way to tell whether or not someone voted in one vote but not the other. But I’m sceptical that it’s true. I’m sure the smaller parties would be kicking up way more of a fuss if it was so (see my comments on MatGB’s post).

Today came news that the number of spoilt papers was not a piffling 100,000 but was 142,000. Yikes! Anastasia Beaumont-Bott argues that this is not entirely down to the stupidity of the electorate.

Silversprite notes that the numbers of spoilt ballots was comparatively low on the island constituencies. He has a number of suggestions as to why — some of them are controversial!

It is worth remembering this: if there is someone to blame for the calamity, it is the Scotland Office, as Tartan Hero points out.

Given that the SNP have benefited greatly from the split in the left, Osama Saeed is amused because effectively that means the News of the World won it for the SNP!

Some guy, Andrew Keen, was on Radio 4 this week trying to say that bloggers are killing the mainstream media (okay, a lot of bloggers kind of want this, but it’s not happening) and runing the economy! What a jackass, as they say over there. Surreptitious Evil dissects.

I think that is all for now! The next roundup will come your way on Sunday, and it will be hosted by Will Patterson. Suggestions please to scottishroundup@gmail.com.

Welcome to the first roundup to be posted since the results of the election have come in. Inevitably, the aftermath of the election is the dominant topic.

On the night itself, a variety of us were liveblogging events as they happened. The star of the night was undoubtedly Mr Eugenides, who clearly had a lot of contacts around the country. In many cases, readers of Mr E’s blog will have had a better notion of how the counts were going than viewers of BBC Scotland.

Grant Thoms was also updating direct from the Glasgow count, and he had a number of scoops too. Readers of Tartan Hero knew that Tommy Sheridan was on his way out long before the mainstream media mentioned it, roughly three hours before the declaration.

However, Clairwil provided me with the biggest laugh in her last missive before hitting the sack:

01:52 Airdrie and Shotts Another Labour win. A big rough lassie in a cheap white jacket. I’ll bet she’s not wearing pants.

And here is the election from the inimitable Flying Rodent’s view.

They, like me, had the wrong idea. Given the problems with the counting, Holyrood Watcher was perhaps right to be liveblogging through the mid-morning and afternoon instead of overnight!

Since election night fizzled out and became protracted election night,-morning-and-afternoon, the bloggers have been getting over the sleep deprivation and gathering their thoughts on the results and the various controversies.

It seemed like it was going to be “one of those nights” from the very start. The first real piece of news after polling places had shut was that a helicopter could not leave to collect ballot boxes from the Western Isles due to fog. Then a boat carrying votes from Arran broke down in the Clyde.

Then came the news that somebody smashed open ballot boxes in Edinburgh and proceeded to rip up ballot papers. But those preliminary problems were just the start of what became little short of a democratic catastrophe.

Immediately, the main story was not the SNP victory, but the number of spoilt ballots. Pat the Chooks observed the elections, and posts various thoughts. There is also a comparison between the ballot paper used on Thursday with the one used in New Zealand under a similar system.

Kevin Williamson has a theory that the design of the Scottish Parliament ballot paper is to blame for the mess and has scuppered the smaller parties in the process. It is a popular theory because the number of spoilt ballots in the local council elections was five times lower!

SSP supporter, Alister Black, is also convinced that the smaller parties have been hit the most. He says it was “a terrible night for democracy.”

Anastasia Beaumont-Bott was actually at a count, and reports on some of the weird and wonderful ways in which ballot papers were spoilt. Apparently, one person had just put a number 4 in one of the boxes, and nothing else!

Akatsuki had sympathised with the Scottish electorate, until she actually saw the ballot papers. Should have been simple enough, in her view. Liam Murray is also shocked at how people couldn’t understand the system.

Rob Mack is also critical of those who are blaming the system. But here, Billythekid reveals how he almost spoilt his ballot.

Niall at The Mushkush Miscellany has a simple two-step solution to avoiding voter confusion in the future. Surely, when we have reached the stage where we have four different systems for four different elections, it is time to settle on one form of PR then leave well alone.

Here is a BBC Have Your Say discussion. There is a clear split. One group of people think the spoilt papers are down to the stupidity of voters. Another group found the system complicated and anyone who thinks the problems are down to stupidity is being snooty.

That debate will no doubt rage on. But it is impossible to think that there won’t be changes made next time round. Let’s just hope they’re the right changes.

On to the other major problem — the e-counting systems. Surreptitious Evil called the situation, with counts being postponed, a pathetic farce.

Fitaloon has been warning about the e-counting systems for a while, and here are his thoughts on the fact that the fears became true! He’s not the only person to suggest that lawyers will be rubbing their hands.

Reluctant Hero at Our Scotland looks at the problems with postal votes and e-counting as well as the spoilt ballots:

People have got to decide what they want. Do they want council elections turnout to be 20 odd percent? If so let’s have it on a separate day. Do they want proportional representation where every vote counts, or do they want first past the post?

Somewhere along the line people have got to take responsibility for themselves. Despite numerous advertisements in the press and media, despite clear instructions on the ballot paper, despite Labour guys handing out “sample” voting papers, there was still something like 10% of the ballot papers not counted because they were filled in wrong.

Time to put that controversy to the side and reflect on the actual result. Will Patterson notes the SNP’s historic achievement.

Here are Richard Leyton’s thoughts. Boorach is glad to see the back of Labour.

Demea at The Select Society is glad that the predicted result, an SNP–Lib Dem coalition, can’t come about. James Graham always has a thing or two to say about the SNP, but he seems to be stumped over this election result.

Reactionary Snob reminds us that, whoever you vote for, the government always gets in.

Well, it looks as if the bastards are out and have been replaced by another shower of bastards.

But now that the results are in, it’s time to turn our attention to messy coalition talks. And the Lib Dems have to decide which of those bastards he is going to team up, or indeed if he is going to team up with any at all. Holyrood Watcher asks, What would you do?

Richard Havers says that the Tories should team up with Labour and the Lib Dems. Also worth reading are his thoughts on the list results.

Spare a thought for Neil Craig, whose 9% Growth Party came last in the Glasgow region.

The controversy over this election never ends, and the latest news is that at least one Labour candidate is considering legal action over the result. Richard Thomson says, produce the evidence of how the result was flawed.

John Kirriemuir assesses the map of constituencies, and the yellow–orange mass in the north is striking. All-in-all, though, the constituency map doesn’t look all that different (the change in Stirling is probably the most striking). And John notes,

Despite the biggest political shift in exactly 300 years and two days the sun still rose this morning, the tide has come in, and then out, there’s nothing worth watching on TV, the lambs are jumping around outside and there’s coffee brewing inside.

There is life apart from elections, so let’s talk about something else instead. Politics! And Colin Will at Sunny Dunny reflects on ten years of Labour rule.

Craig Murray asks, is Dundee University a tool for New Labour?

And that is the roundup! I’ve not decided yet whether the next one will be on Wednesday or Sunday. It depends on how quickly the news moves. But whatever, please send your nominations in to scottishroundup@gmail.com.

I will work on a really simple way to nominate blogs and blog posts very soon, but I am a little bit snowed under at the moment (ha! And I’ve been spending half of this week blogging!), so it will have to wait a couple of weeks. Please do email or leave a comment if you have any suggestions though.