The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Sub-topical analysis

Posted on May 30, 2017 by

Apologies in advance about this, folks, but it’s driving us mad. We got into a Twitter argument with some Tory balloon last night and this morning, and to cut a long story short it got us looking at the 1951 UK general election result.

History records it as a Tory majority, securing just over half of the Parliamentary seats (321 of 625) and forming the government under Winston Churchill despite narrowly losing the popular vote to Labour (48% to 48.8%).

But if you examine the result in the House Of Commons Library the numbers don’t add up, and we can’t figure out why.

The top-line summary agrees with the one on Wikipedia:

The problem arises when you look at the breakdown for the four UK nations.

In England and Scotland the election was basically a dead heat both in terms of vote share and MPs elected, and Labour had a landslide in Wales that was far bigger than the Tory win in Northern Ireland, so how come Churchill ended up PM?

(In Northern Ireland, the footnotes say that “NAT” means “Nationalist/Anti-Partitionist”, which is presumably whatever the 1951 Parliamentary equivalent of Sinn Fein was.)

Because alert readers will have noticed that if you sum the above figures you get this:

CON: 302 (252 England, 35 Scotland, 6 Wales, 9 NI)
LAB: 313 (251 England, 35 Scotland, 27 Wales, 0 NI)
OTHERS: 9 (6 Liberal, 2 Nat and 1 “Irish Labour”.)

TOTAL: 624

So for a start we’ve lost one MP entirely, which seems a little careless. (We thought it might be the Speaker, who gets elected for a party but then becomes a neutral, but since the UK table adds up to 625 that doesn’t make sense.)

[EDIT 12.11pm: one such alert reader helpfully advises that “The Barnsley Socialist candidate died during the GE campaign. The seat was contested later.”]

But more to the point, how have 302 Tory MPs become 321 and formed a majority government? No matter what you do with the nine Liberals, two Irish nationalists and one Irish Labour MP (and it would appear unlikely that the latter three in particular would ever form any kind of alliance with the Tories), Labour has an absolute majority – 313 is, by the narrowest possible margin, more than half of 625.

Nothing in the notes offers any explanation for where 11 Labour MPs have gone:

According to Wikipedia the Tory 321 is made up of a coalition between the 302 actual Tories plus 19 MPs from the weird “National Liberal” splinter party that was around between 1931 and 1968.

But the HOCL tables say – in footnote 2 – that they’re already including National Liberals in the Tory figures that add up to 302. (And indeed they must be, because there are only nine other MPs in total.)

We’ve written to the HOCL to see if they can shed any light on the matter. But if anyone could explain it to us in the meantime we’d be most grateful.

Print Friendly

    1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

    1. 30 05 17 12:56

      Sub-topical analysis | speymouth

    137 to “Sub-topical analysis”

    1. bobajock says:

      I suspect a deal was done for a ‘strong and stable’ government in times of great change.

      Thereafter – the victors rewrote history .. they do that y’know.

      The way Labour capitulated to the Tory EU ejection is reminiscent.

    2. W. Habib Steele says:

      Curious! I find myself thinkg and feeling suspicious. Do I just have a bad mind?

    3. Spikethdee says: gives these results:

      625 seats:
      Con 321¹ (+23); Lab 295 (-20); Lib 6 (-); Others 3 (-)
      ¹ Includes 9 Ulster Unionists, 2 Conservative & National Liberal, 7 National Liberal & Conservative, 2 Conservative & Liberal, 7 Liberal & Conservative, and 1 National Liberal
      A Conservative majority of: 17 (no sitting Speaker contested the election, subsequently a Conservative was elected Speaker)

      So that looks like the 302 is the Tories and the Ulster Unionists only. My guess is that Wikipedia is wrong (yeah, I know that’s sooo unlikely) and they haven’t included the National/Liberal/Conservative pick ‘n mix parties in their totals.

    4. Andy Anderson says:

      Years ago my Dad told me there was probably some sort of fiddle done in that election. He could not understand why the post war Labour party government lost so badly when they had brought in the NHS etc. etc.

      Until the last seven years of his life he was a die hard Labour supporter and followed the party events. Ended up supporting Indy and the SNP as he ended up hating all things Westminster.

    5. James says:

      I think the numbers for the 1950 and 1951 elections in England have been transposed in that table. If you switch them around, then the totals agree.

      271 + 6 + 35 + 9 = 321 Tories

      233 + 27 + 35 + 0 = 295 Labour

      2 + 3 + 1 + 0 = 6 Liberals

    6. paul c says:

      The Barnsley Socialist candidate died during the election campaign so the seat was not contested until after the GE. I’ve downloaded the full results by constituency into my dropbox folder:

    7. Robert Black says:

      I suspect that the figures for “Conservative” included candidates elected as “National Liberal and Conservative” (as note 2 states) but did not include candidates elected as simply “National Liberal”.

    8. Colin West says:

      For the Missing MP, who’s the “Other” MP in England for that Election?

    9. Sam Addison says:

      A small point, but I think you’ve miscounted on the LD + NAT + others. Unless I’ve misread something, they do add up to 10. (6 LD, 2NAT, 2 Other).

    10. stewartb says:

      Sorry don’t have time to check in right now, but does this source with its detailed breakdown help clarify? I find it a useful source on historic GE data.

    11. Arbroath1320 says:


      So now it all becomes clear(er)!

      Now we all know where scaredy McScaredy gets the idea that the SNP did NOT win last year’s Holyrood election from. She’s been reading up on this election where the Tories appear to have “stolen” the election from Labour! 😀

    12. gus1940 says:

      My God – she’s good.

      What a performance by Nicola at the manifesto launch one of her best ever speeches.

      What a contrast with Woffling May and the verbal diaorrhea excreted by shouty UnTruth and Dugdale.

      She was totally in control, spoke directly with no woffling or ambiguity and showed a great senses of humour managing a few good funnies in the Q&A with the press.

      And that’s without mentioning the sheer quality and wisdom of the manifesto content.

      Scots should be proud to have a politician of her quality and integrity – people out with Scotland must wish that they had a leader like Nicola and policies like The SNP to vote for.

    13. Chas says:

      History is written by the victors.

    14. Angus McLellan says:

      The Wikipedia 1951 UK election numbers add up to 625 and show:
      Labour – 295
      Tory – 302
      National Liberal – 19
      Liberal – 6
      Independent Nationalist – 2
      Irish Labour – 1

      The Government parties were Tory & National Liberal with a combined total of 321 seats. National Labour mark one had wound up in 1945, so they weren’t relevant in 1951. The Independent (Irish) Nationalists of this time were not abstentionists and voted just like everyone else.,_1951

    15. Desimond says:

      I think theres one easy way to solve this, call Diane Abbot

    16. dakk says:

      The British Establishment are always good at appearing to give the people a choice.

      Last night’s Sky debate was classic as Corbyn’s? rhetoric told us what he stood for but that we would get what the Establishment Labour Party decided anyway.That’s democracy said he.

      So we can still have Red Tory New Labour but with a faux socialist figurehead to comfort the gullible Great British internationalist lefties.

    17. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “I suspect that the figures for “Conservative” included candidates elected as “National Liberal and Conservative” (as note 2 states) but did not include candidates elected as simply “National Liberal”.”

      No, because as the post says, there are only nine other MPs, not 19.

    18. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “The Government parties were Tory & National Liberal with a combined total of 321 seats.”

      Um, yes, I point all that out in the article.

    19. Hoss Mackintosh says:

      I wonder if the BBC were counting the seats and then adjusted them for “boundary changes”.

      Of course 302 is larger than 313 when you take that into account?

    20. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      “A small point, but I think you’ve miscounted on the LD + NAT + others. Unless I’ve misread something, they do add up to 10. (6 LD, 2NAT, 2 Other).”

      *I* haven’t miscounted them. The HOCL lists them as nine in the UK total, and 10 in the breakdowns.

    21. galamcennalath says:

      Table 1e for England has

      Con 252
      Lab 251

      which is totally different from stewartb’s data, which has

      Con 271
      Lab 233

      Table 1e may be bollocks.

    22. Effijy says:

      This looks easy!

      Kezia and Diane Abbot must have done the arithmetic at the time.

      How corrupt can Westminster be with such basics on something as
      important as a general election hanging in fresh air?

      Did the person in charge of counting retire soon after on a massive pension?

    23. Roger Mexico says:

      There were four uncontested seats in Northern Ireland:

      All Conservative-held, which would presumably have boosted their vote totals (but not Labour’s) if they had been fought.

    24. David C says:

      Looking at

      If these are right, it looks like the table you have for England mixes up 1950 and 1951 results.

    25. Frank Wright says:

      Could MPs standing for the “Scottish Unionist Party” (1912-1965) help explain?

    26. Sam Addison says:

      “*I* haven’t miscounted them. The HOCL lists them as nine in the UK total, and 10 in the breakdowns.”

      Ah, yes. I realised that I had probably misread as soon as I posted that.

    27. Colin says:

      If you add up the number of Conservative votes for England, Scotland, Wales and NI, you get a total of 12.56m, not 13.72m as in the UK table. So where do the additional 1.2 million Conservative voters come from?

      The total number of voters also add up to 28.7m, instead of 28.6m in the UK table.

      Something strange going on.

    28. raineach says:

      This is easy to explain. The missing MP is Gordon Brown

    29. Dr Jim says:

      Maybe the Tories just said there are more of us than you and Labour abstained on counting, coz it’s hard

      We could ask Murdo Fraser he’s standing outside the SNP manifesto launch protesting with his elderly relatives

      SNP out! SNP out! that’ll show them Murdo, fine example of a man! and credit to his party

    30. Robert Graham says:

      would be really nice if Joe would shut her bleedn gub and listen to the answer , it really helps people watching .
      I know it was O/T but there you go ,the current topic was a bit before my time .

    31. Gordon Winter says:

      I think galamcenallath is right and that table is bollocks. Incidentally there do seem to have been 19 National Liberals, but entirely included in the Conservative figures so not responsible for any of the arithmetical confusion.

    32. Iain More says:

      The Brit Nats rewrote history. They do that!

      Meanwhile I have been out this morning going on about Tory and Brit Nat Yoon plans to hammer Pensions. Not to mention aggressive austerity plans.

    33. sensibledave says:

      … But you are forgetting that one vote for a Tory is more valuable in the count than two for a lefty.

      … er, that was a joke – before anyone explodes!

    34. Robert Graham says:

      Re- the SNP Manifesto launch as shown on the BBC , I dont remember any other party’s Manifesto Launch being accompanied by a party political broadcast on behalf of the Unionist Party , i could be wrong , the bbc wouldn’t try to minimise or belittle the governing party in scotlands vision for the future .
      I refer to the Unionist Party as Labour-tory-libdem they appear to be all the same party with their “no second referendum” as their only policy .

    35. Dan Huil says:

      At first I thought it might be due to university constituences but I think they ended in 1950.

      Did they have postal votes in 1951?

    36. Free Scotland says:

      It was Joseph Stalin who said:

      “It is enough that the people know there was an election. The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”

    37. Free Scotland says:

      Given how much time Jim Murphy spent banging on about how the “biggest party gets to form the government,” I wonder what his take would be on this one.

    38. North chiel says:

      Re Gus1940 @1213 .Couldnt help thinking as she addressed the audience
      in her ” social democratic ” red suit that if she was head to head with May
      for the keys to no.10 , we would be looking at an infinitely better future on June 9th for Scotland & RUK .A genuine ” class act” politician.

    39. ronnie anderson says:

      There’s a simple explanation for miscounting , remember its the Bowler Hatted & Brolly Brigade doing the counting and in government offices everything stops for the Tea Trolly Lady .

    40. Thepnr says:

      Rev you can get a full list of all the MP’s elected in 1951 here,_1951

      I stuck them in a spreadsheet and it would appear the HOCL have made a big blunder in Table 1e for the number of seats gained for the Tories and Labour in England.

      They seem to have added the 19 seats won by the Conservative & National Liberal party to the seats won by Labour rather than add them to the Conservative total. Tories alone won 252 seats and Labour only 233, that’s also where your missing elected member has gone.

      Oops LOL

    41. Capella says:

      Hard to believe, I know, but the BBC is STILL pushing its attempt to smear Joanna Cherry about “The Nurse” in today’s report on the SNP manifesto launch:

    42. Proud Cybernat says:


      Haven’t read it yet but there is apparently no mention of Spring 2019 #scotref in SNP manifesto.


    43. Bob Mack says:

      The number of seats available due to boundary changes and voting rule changes was 632.
      The Tories and Nat Liberals in pact created 321. Labour who accepted the boundary changes only got 293 I think.

      The Tories were the largest party 302 so we’re entitled to for a government which they did with the Nat Libs.

    44. Dr Jim says:

      Guy Verhofstadt says there are four constituent parts of the UK but three of them are not being represented in Brexit talks, why is that given that each country has it’s own parliament and democratic process of selection

    45. Ealasaid says:

      I vaguely remember as a child at some family get together, hearing the adults talking about some election and how Churchill should never have been prime minister. Lots of angry raised voices but agreeing with each other – most would be Labour. I was dismissed as a child and told it was before I was born. I was born in 1956, so remembering a controversial election in 1951 is a possibility.

      No TV at the time, only post war BBC propaganda(?) radio and newspapers owned by Conservatives. Have you tried looking in released 30/60 year archives?

    46. thomaspotter says:

      I believe that the next GE will need serious scrutiny as the Tory/WM/Establishment cabal wouldn’t think twice about #electionfraud just like 2010 and 2015.
      They do it with impunity so why not.

    47. Ian McCubbin says:

      This pice of history tells me we don’t need technology to manipulate a mandate to govern. It seems the Tories took it by manipulation of figures and got away with it.
      Most of my life we have had a Tory Goverment even though Scotland voted for a different parties historically Labour and now SNP. Not fair honest politics in UK. Tories love power and will do anything to hold on to it.

    48. gerry parker says:

      Dr Jim at 1:29

      And soon he might dig deeper and realise that the Treaty that created the United Kingdom has only two signatories – and one of these signatories voted to stay in the UK.

    49. joannie says:

      O/T but the Irish Nats who won seats at the 1951 election weren’t the equivalent of SF. They were an offshoot of the old Irish Parliamentary Party founded by Daniel O’Connell in the 1800s. SF were also around in 1951 but they didn’t contest Westminster elections.

    50. sensibledave says:

      O/T To Robert Peffers

      I couple of weeks ago, you took significant umbridge at my suggestion that the sight Of Nicola Sturgeon (First Minister of a Scotland that is heavily reliant on Oil and Gas) and The Greens (who want to ban the burning of fossil fuels) was just as hypocritical as Labour leaders saying vote Tory in some areas.

      You wrote one of your missives lecturing me on the fact, in summary, apparently, that Scotland does not benefit from its oil and gas industry.

      I note this section of the just launched, SNP Manifesto …..


      Scotland’s oil and gas industry is vital to our economy and
      jobs. Yet there has been a lack of action from the Tory
      government at Westminster since the downturn in the sector.

    51. mike d says:

      Nicola what have you done, lots of English pensioner neighbours down here saying your brill and want to move to Scotland. Only problem is,will they vote yes?

    52. North chiel says:

      Thomas potter @ 0135pm , yes Thomas and the ” postal vote” percentages and late additions to the electoral register should be looked at closely , especially in seats such as Moray , where apparently recently there has been military personnel ” flooding in” and with the Tories desperate to unseat AR as his HOC scintillating performances against May during PMQ’s have totally embarrassed the PM
      They are ” gunning” for him on June 8th.

    53. Street Andrew says:

      A simple matter of Lies, Damned Lies and Election Results ?

    54. Clydebuilt says:

      O/T MacWhirter in the Herald

      It’s 9 days to the GE. and once again MacWhirter turns out articles pushing negative prospects for the SNP.

      After the election see how quickly he does a 180 and his positivity for the party returns.

    55. Jack Murphy says:

      Lifted from the Express [England] on the Manifesto launch:-

      “……Ms Sturgeon said: “We will campaign tirelessly against the immoral rape clause … a policy which shames every Tory candidate who supports it.

      “Their manifesto seeks to set young against old.

      The utter chaos that engulfs Theresa May’s plans for a so-called dementia tax makes me prouder than ever that the Scottish parliament introduced free personal and nursing care for our elderly.

      “An assault on pensioners from the dementia tax to the ending of the winter fuel allowance.

      “It is very clear the Tories think they can take the votes of the elderly for granted……”

      Scotland—-welcome to the Ruth Davidson Tory Party.

    56. call me dave says:

      Caught the FM speech in the car on Radio 5 and was very impressed again. Lots darn Sarf will have heard it and they will wonder and wish they had a chance to vote for a decent party too.

      Well done Nicola Sturgeon… really perked me up a bit glass is half full now not half empty.

      Jings! The 1951 election might have been a swizz? Shurley Naw.

      It was all very stiff upper lip then. 🙂

      The election day declared: 1951

      The Pathe News covers the count and the results result: 1951

    57. sensibledave says:

      O/T From the new SNP Manifesto …

      Can anyone tell me what this actually means? ….

      “An immigration policy that works for Scotland
      Our vision of Scotland is one of an open country that looks
      outwards, and encourages the best and brightest from
      Europe, and around the world, to make Scotland their home.
      Scotland needs an immigration policy suited to our specific
      circumstances and needs. Scotland needs people to want
      to work here, in our businesses, our universities and in our
      public services. The current UK one-size-fits-all approach to
      immigration is failing Scotland.”

      That doesn’t sound like “free Movement” as defined by the EU for EU members.

      Is there a change in SNP policy that I have missed?

    58. Dan Huil says:

      @Clydebuilt 2:19pm

      Aye, MacWhirter is not to be trusted. He’s a political coward. Part of the reason I don’t buy the Herald.

    59. Thepnr says:


      MacWhirter and McKenna also don’t care about what they write. They literally would write anything asked of them as long as the payments for their articles go in the bank at the end of the month.

      I really have no problem with that, worth keeping in mind though if reading an article of theirs.

    60. Dan Huil says:

      Britnat arrogance and ignorance towards Scotland shows no sign of abating. Thankfully Scotland has friends in Europe. Brexit will see an end to the so-called united kingdom.

    61. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Interesting to observe the reaction btl to this quandary:

      + A few swivel-eyed conspiracy theorists make their customary appearance.

      + Some more-grounded individuals get to work on the known facts.

      + And find out that someone in WM got their sums wrong.

      + sensible makes his usual appearance on an entirely different subject of his own choosing.

      And looking up some of the references, it seems that in those earlier hard times, the Liberals believed in free trade but fell apart over it, Conservatives were committed to trade protectionism, and Labour were ambivalent.

      Plus ça change, en fait!

    62. Col says:

      Is it not a stranger thing these days when the numbers actually do add up? Were the BBC doing the counting?

    63. sensibledave says:

      Robert J SUtherland

      … with the greatest respect Robert, I indicated it was Off Topic and it was specifically about the new SNP Manifesto launched today and, I thought, an interesting and serious question.

      Whoever wrote those words is obviously departing from the historical norm I would have thought. Nothing wrong with that – it just seems to be different to what the EU Free Movement rules are (if they are the “one size fits all” being referenced in the comment).

    64. Del says:

      Proud Cybernat says:
      30 May, 2017 at 1:21 pm
      Haven’t read it yet but there is apparently no mention of Spring 2019 #scotref in SNP manifesto.

      This is how they phrased it.
      “This election won’t decide whether or not Scotland will be
      independent. But a vote for the SNP is a vote to reinforce the
      Scottish Parliament’s right to decide when an independence
      referendum should happen.
      “At the end of the Brexit process, when the final terms of the
      deal are known, it is right that Scotland should have a real
      choice about our future.”
      i.e. Brexit is an omnishambles and who knows when Brexit will conclude. It could be pretty much tomorrow 🙂

    65. Proud Cybernat says:

      How’s yer wife, Risible?

      [nudge, nudge, wink, wink]

    66. sensibledave says:

      Proud Cybie

      …. beautiful, sweet and very lucky and blessed to be married to me she tells me.

      Its no good Cybie, no amount of your somewhat childish and hollow innuendos are going to end up with me being single and on the market. You need to get over me and try and move on. But don’t give up on love completely Cybie there is someone out there for even the most unattractive person, you just need to keep looking.

    67. Proud Cybernat says:

      Oi Risible

      “…. blessed to be married to me she tells me.”

      I’m sure she does.


    68. Socrates MacSporran says:

      That fully-paid-up member of the Berkley Hunt, known to himself as sensibledave is trying really hard today, indeed, he is perhpas being even more-trying than normal.

      I urge every other Winger – ignore the troll.

    69. Johnny says:

      I think Del has it right.

      Indyref 2 is not mentioned alongside ‘spring 2019’ in the manifesto as the Tories could well (as is heavily rumoured) strop out of EU negotiations in October this year.

      Then where would we be? The FM has to leave herself room for movement all the time as who knows what sneaky trick the Tories will pull next? They’d then be saying ‘ah, but you said spring 2019 so it doesn’t matter that we in fact wrecked EU negotiations 18 months earlier than that!’.

      Of course, the paper spin tomorrow is going to be that ‘spring 2019’ isn’t in there because the FM means to put it off till 2070.

    70. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Socrates MacSporran @ 15:25,

      He obviously cares about us so enormously that he’s even read the SNP manifesto cover-to-cover before most of us have read a word. It’s quite touching really.

      (And unworthy of cheap jibes about his other half, PC, which is notably beneath your usual standards. And boring.)

    71. Reluctant Nationalist says:

      O/T Just seen the SNP manifesto launch and questions. It was superb.

    72. Proud Cybernat says:


      Paid shills like Risible deserve many more home truths than I could ever deliver. This is cyberwar and I don’t play nice with those fuckers.

    73. geeo says:


      Not sure it matters if TM pulls the uk out of the negotiations early.

      Article 50 says there should be a 2 year period to conclude negotiations.

      If the uk gov pulled out in say, september this year, i read it as the EU would need to keep the 2 year period OPEN in case the Uk gov wanted to resume negotiations within that 2 years.

      If everything was concluded and shut down, the uk could argue they never got the chance to return to the table, which would breach Article 50.

      Happy to be corrected, but pretty sure the timescale preferred by the SG is secured by EU rules regarding Article 50.

    74. Jack Murphy says:

      OT.February this year.
      “Dugdale: Scottish Labour will oppose a divisive second independence referendum”.

      This week.
      “Corbyn would ‘open talks’ on Scottish Referendum”.The Mirror.

      Who to believe,and more importantly who to trust?

    75. sensibledave says:

      Robert J Sutherland 3.33pm

      …. I just searched SNP Manifesto on Google … and there it is. Its not hard Socky. Should I not read the words Socky? Are they a sacred text?

      (Note to self: Socky is waiting for instructions from above to be told what the statement on immigration means. Then he will be all for it and anyone who disagrees is a Unionist B*****d oppressor).

      …….wait for it…….

    76. David P says:

      Dr. Jim at 1.29pm

      Guy verhofstadt comment re representation for 4 nations in brexit.pdo you have a link?


    77. Reider O'Doom says:

      Table 1e – Results for England, has 1950’s and 1951’s results transposed. Reverse those two rows and it should work out.

    78. Sinky says:

      Now that female Glasgow Council workers have won their court case against the previous Labour mis-administration, like Labour’s PFI legacy that takes millions each year from every council education budget and every Health Board budget, the new SNP council budget will suffer as well as from the IT claim for a contract the SNP opposed.

      The former Labour councillors should be surcharged.

    79. Robert Louis says:

      Did we not just see this kind of political chicanery, when the BBC told everyone that the SNP had ‘notionally’* lost councillors, when in reality they actually had more.

      (* According to the BBC’s own in-house secret, unpublished ‘analysis’.)

      Just imagine, 1951, no internet, no ability to check. Not so hard to fake the election totals.

    80. Robert Roddick says:

      My first awareness of party politics was just after the war when Niall Macpherson was ‘your’ Liberal candidate. He then became ‘your’ National Liberal and Conservative candidate, which I think would be 1951. He finally became ‘your’ Conservative candidate. This may be helpful as doubtless the same thing would be happening elsewhere.

    81. Faltdubh says:

      Manifesto launch was superb. I know we are preaching to the converted etc in here ; but truly what a talent Nicola is. Not just a great debate, but she’s an excellent orator too – clear, concise and coherent (sounding a bit cliched noo)

      The 15 or so old Tories picketing outside did make me laugh. Of course that muppet Murdo Fraser was there, but honestly we shouldn’t even rise to any of it or even care! It just shows how sad they really are and also how much of a one-trick party they have become!
      It also shows jealousy! They could never have that much enthusiasm, support (place was full), and enjoyment the members for any of their conferences/manifestos. And dare I say Nicola’s stand-up routine with some of the journos too for the questions. 😉

      Slightly off-topic, but out of my close-ish pals that I keep in touch with and meet up now and again. We’re all 34/35 – it was pretty much 12 Yes 3 No. Well, one of those No’s is now voting SNP and is impressed with Sturgeon and the party, and he think he made a mistake with No in 2014 and is concerned about Brexit. I was fearing he might opt for Labour in Scotland due to Corbyn, but as mentioned “We’ve voted enough for them in the past. If England returns Labour great, but we can’t rely on England (as Brexit showed) it’ll be SNP I vote for” 🙂

      Over the moon, really. Been chipping away at him for years – tried everthing during the referendum, but great to know he’s on board for Indyref 2 whenever that happens (and it will happen, we all know that).

      So for anyone feel apathetic.

      Get out and do what you can and convince/remind people to vote.

      A return of SNP MPs will give Scotland a bigger platform too. Just look at the way Sky covered the manifesto today – the whole thing was covered in full! If we go back to the bad old days, Scotland will be insignificant. That alone is a reason to vote SNP.

      And if Labour do win in England, there will no doubt be an agreement to allow Labour to govern as a minority govt in exchange for a second referendum 😉

    82. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      sensibledave @ 15:50,

      I’m truly offended. I was admiring your diligence. But your “reasonable” persona now appears to be in need of a major re-calibration… =grin=

      byeee…. (don’t hurry back…)

    83. uno mas says:

      Woof, the troll really is on one today!

      Just every one count to ten and ignore him.

      Including (especially) you Mr Peffers, pleeeeeeese!

    84. sensibledave says:


      “And if Labour do win in England, there will no doubt be an agreement to allow Labour to govern as a minority govt in exchange for a second referendum ?”

      ….. psephology is a somewhat discredited quack science these days, please don’t put any money on that outcome. Last time round, 55% of England voted right of center – hard to see, at this stage (though plenty of time for lots of gaffes yet) how that is going to drop very much.

    85. sensibledave says:

      Robert J. Sutherland 4:06 pm

      You wrote “byeee…. (don’t hurry back…)”

      How boring would it be Socky if I wasn’t here? There would be one comment followed by 550 “dittos”.

      Anyway, apart from my interchanges with my stalker (Cybie) who wants me all to herself, I have been very good today. I have read the SNP Manifesto and made sensible (aren’t I always) observations.

      The verbiage about immigration is interesting though don’t you think. I assume we will get some clarification at some point soon?

    86. skintybroko says:

      Nicola was her excellent self today delivering the manifesto, the yoons are at fever pitch on the BBC HYS – it should be mandatory reading for Scots to see what their fellow UK Countrymen think of them.

      They are totally clueless when it comes to this being a GE and not an independence referendum – its actually a joy to behold the number of them in total meltdown. Nicola is head and shoulders above any UK Party Leader and judging by the venom in some of the comments its clear the yoons think so too and are doing their damnedest to throw as much mud as possible hoping some will stick.

    87. Thepnr says:

      @Reider O’Doom

      Well spotted you! That is the simple answer and well and truly solves the puzzle.

      Knew we’ed get there in the end 🙂

    88. Capella says:

      Has this been solved by Reider O’Doom? If so, thank heavens for that, and well done. I couldn’t face the spreadsheets.

      Can someone post a link to the SNP Manifesto Launch? I tuned into the Livestream after Nicola had started. She was, indeed superb. But I’d like to see the start of the speech.

    89. jfngw says:

      A simple message of this election is if you vote Lab/Tory/LibDem you are deciding that Scotland’s future should effectively be controlled by MP’s from outwith Scotland. The Scottish MP’s from these parties will always be a small minority in their own parties. Only the SNP and the Greens party can defend the interests of Scotland.

      Even if you don’t support independence it is clear that the authority of Holyrood is under threat. After all you can still vote no in any referendum, is that not what democracy is all about, the ability to choose the future direction of the nation.

    90. Desimond says:


      Frank McAveety will sit there smugly smiling whilst occasionally shouting “Aye but WHAT YOU GONNA DO ABOUT IT!”

      I give it 6 months before he is on BBC Scotland downcrying the state of Glasgow City Councils affairs without a care in the world

    91. credit where it is due,

      @James said at 11.57,

      at 11:57 am
      I think the numbers for the 1950 and 1951 elections in England have been transposed in that table. If you switch them around, then the totals agree.

      271 + 6 + 35 + 9 = 321 Tories

      233 + 27 + 35 + 0 = 295 Labour

      2 + 3 + 1 + 0 = 6 Liberals.

    92. Liz Rannoch says:

      @ jfngw 4.49

      Nicely said. Had a dream last week and the SNP got 56 and the Greens got 3, then I woke up. 🙁

    93. Thepnr says:

      @Scot Finlayson

      I missed that, well done James. Seems you were first to spot the error.

    94. Thepnr says:

      Rev take note that James solved this puzzle only 16 minutes after the article was posted. You have plenty of Alert Readers here 🙂

    95. Capella says:

      Found a youtube video of Nicola’s speech here:

    96. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Macart @ 16:30,

      Yes, a worthwhile read, thanks. (I didn’t know that “sofa” quote of Macmillan’s).

      What’s clear is that many people are desperately wanting to preserve as much continuity in their lives as possible in these uncertain times. Many are still hanging on to the Union because the prospect of letting go still seems the more risky prospect. This is the source of much of the unfocussed resentment towards Nicola in particular – she is the very personification for them of that unwanted dilemma.

      Yet the objective truth is the very reverse – the SNP offers the most humane and practical way of maintaining the common weal as we understand it, and it is the present manifestation of the Tory party that is by far the biggest threat to that need for continuity.

      Convincing the faint-hearted of that reality is the crucial task facing us all, if not for next week then certainly during the next two years of the Brexit negotiations.

    97. ian murray says:

      Sensible must have got a rocket from his boss.
      The propaganda machine will be very happy if someone (?) loses their rag with his comments and gives the media a story about the nasty vile etc posters on Wings

    98. Socrates MacSporran says:

      The latest post on A Wilderness of Peace is quite superb and should be required reading.

    99. Craig P says:

      Re: the manifesto launch. The British media are like Stop the Pigeon. The BBC being Dastardly and Muttley.

    100. Proud Cybernat says:

      What a thought…

    101. Tam the Bam. says:


      Just watched a Q&A session with Stewart Hosie on BBC NEWS 24.
      Clear and concise answers from the most gifted orator on matters fiscal in the SNP.In my opinion we have not seen or heard enough from Stewart since his extra-curricular affair with a journalist.Glad to see he’s back in the fray!

    102. Tam the Bam. says:


      Un-fekin-believable……STV just reported Glasgow CC being sued over a dispute with the GMB which OBVIOUSLY was a policy implemented by the previous LABOUR Administration.The GMB spokesman (Smith) did not even mention LABOUR….he did..however..mention Susan Aitken…SNP.Did STV mention Labour?….not once!

    103. mike cassidy says:

      Who would have thought it?

      The Brexit vote was about immigration not sovereignty.

      But with a twist!

    104. Cactus says:

      SNP PPB on shortbread ra now…

    105. Robert Graham says:

      Good points made by the wee ginger dug on his blog. All the Unionist parties have boxed themselves into a corner , by promoting this as a way to stop the SNP and therefore a second referendum, What if they lose . What if the SNP get more MPS than each of them , That means we have won, The People have spoken, they might act as one party but they can’t be elected as one party , oh dear how sad never mind, Somtimes you can be too f/kn smart ,eh Ruthie ? .

    106. Cactus says:

      Radio said it was actually a Party Election Broadcast.

      Vote SNP for freedom of choice.

      Go Jimi!


    107. Cactus says:

      “Make Me Smile..”

      Go Harley.

      Freedom of choice is your human right.

    108. Tam the Bam. says:


      BBC…Misreporting Scotland (now)

      Well whid ye believe it?….Jakie and her new partner in crime @Freedom Sq …DID THE EXACT SAME….(Labour?….never heard of them).

    109. Tam the Bam. says:


      ‘Go Jimi!’

      ‘WOW!’….Nicola has managed to secure Jimi Hendrix’s endorsement for The SNP!!!….I feel a song coming on..” Hey Jeremy…where ya goin’ with that gun in your hand’…..

    110. asklair says:

      What do you want to know about the SNP manifesto?
      We’ll be in touch if your question is selected.
      Form to fill out near the end of page.

    111. Big Jock says:

      Well that’s us got the young vote.My 10 month old girl just sat through whole SNP party broadcast. Transfixed she was!

    112. Cactus says:

      To do list:

      1) Go to Kelvingrove Park at 10:30 this Saturday (lawn bowls side)
      2) Go walkabout thru oor city wae yer neighbours.
      3) Go to Glasgow Green!
      4) Have fun!

      Thursday 8 June…

      Go into your booth and vote FOR SCOTLAND.

    113. Cactus says:

      Indeed Tam the Bam ~

      A Jimi endorsement 🙂

      It don’t get much better than that.

      “There must be some kinda way out of here…!”

      We know of a way..

      Love Scotland,

      For Scotland.


    114. Socrates MacSporran says:

      Kezia Dugdale on BBC Scotland.

      Will somebody please put this poor, drowing not waving, out of her depth wee lassie, out of her misery.

      She really is embarrassing herself – again.

    115. Robert Graham says:

      Just watched borris arguing with a Labour mp about Corbyn and his commitment to security, it was like listening to a out of control child in an adults body, f/k me is that the best they have ? .
      That was a Rhetorical question by the way .

    116. Training Day says:

      Nice of Dugdale to take time out of her busy schedule listening to all the Yes voters she claims don’t want another referendum to appear on TV.

    117. geeo says:

      Car crash kez striking again….

      Telling a guy she HAS answered his question when he has just told him that actually, NO, YOU HAVE NOT.

    118. Brus MacGallah says:

      Capella @ 1.17pm

      You might find this interesting (the BBC would not)

      NIC NURSE NAILED Edinburgh nurse who claimed she had to use foodbanks fined by cops after bust-up with neighbour
      Claire Austin got the penalty for breaching the peace after officers visited her flat

    119. Robert J. Sutherland says:

      Training Day @ 19:16,

      Somebody should produce a couple of “election” posters:

      One with Kez & Wee Willie, fingers stuck in their ears, muttering “na na na they don’t want another na na na na I’m not listening na na na”.

      The other with Col. Harrison on a loudhailer bellowing out “Scotland, I’M IN COMMAND HERE – FOLLOW ORDERS, YOU ‘ORRIBLE SHOWER – SHUT UP!”

    120. Dr Jim says:

      Kezia Dugdale the unstoppable disaster movie
      I’m the leader Dugdale produces another FUBAR of an interview but still refuses to accept that it is
      She says the SNP pass on Tory cuts then she says she wouldn’t do that she’d just tax Scotland more to pay for those cuts which in Kezia World is different from passing on cuts

      The job is to oppose Tory cuts you infantile nutter

      If there’s anybody out there even contemplating voting for this monstrosity of mindlessness then you’re as daft as she is and require remedial help ASAP

    121. Tam the Bam. says:


      Cheers buddy…though I suspect the song EVERYONE wants to hear is…” Well I stand up next to Theresa…and I chop her down…with the edge of my TONGUE!”

    122. ScottishPsyche says:

      Does Kezia just visit the same people again and again to get this despair and anguish from them over another referendum?

      After listening to that whining petulant verbiage I would be tearing my hair out if she turned up at my door.

    123. galamcennalath says:

      Theresa May reiterates that she will walk away from the EU if Brexit talks breakdown.

      IMO the opposite should happen. Brexit should be cancelled unless an acceptable deal can be negotiated. That would concentrate the minds of the WM negotiating team to do their job properly! If they want Brexit, then need to arrange for a viable one.

    124. McBoxheid says:

      Its the “I’ve got eleven fingers thingy”
      From the top
      10 9 8 7 6 plus 5 is eleven


    125. Dorothy Devine says:

      As I watched Oor Wullie Rennie on STV news , I found myself agreeing with him .

      He said , ‘The SNP must think we are stupid’

    126. Shinty says:

      Tam the Bam @ 6pm

      Couldn’t agree more. I remember watching a pre indyref debate with Hosie and George Robertson (Abertay Uni?). Stewart Hosie was brilliant. (real shame about his ‘indiscretion’)

      Anyhow really hope he comes back to the fore.

    127. gordoz says:

      Hey I just had a great idea if we hurry !

      Anyone else fancy staring a new party; was thinking of calling it the “Scottish SNP party in Scotland”.

      That way we can have 2 conferences every year, 2 manifesto launches, 2 Leaders (one in Scotland and one in the Capital [Edinburgh of course]), 2 x the air time on TV, 2 x the newspaper coverage etc.

      We can be very shouty; can even talk utter mince all day, contradict any gaffs by either the regional sub branch or the National party & get an easy time off commentators.

      We can even cause major mayhem in city council administrations, have the GMB donkey official blame other parties and disappear off the face of the earth if we fxck anything up, (such as equal pay and that it worked for Franky boy McAveety?)

      Anyone up for it I’m sure its a goer, there all mugs up here in Scotland anyway ?

      Anyone? Anyone ?

    128. Cuilean says:

      Watched BBC News Channel at 5.35 today interviewing SNP’s Mr Hosie with questions from public.

      Was just about to turn over when the Channel went to Huw Edwards in Wales, who is chairing the Welsh Leaders Debate tonight.

      In marked contrast to Mesdames Bird & Smith from BBC Scotland, on the questions to be asked and debated; Huw Edwards said this and I quote verbatim:

      Start of Quote By Huw Edwards:

      “We’ve had quite a difficult job selecting questions. One thing I’d point to, Clive, is this; it’s still a battle, in some ways, underlining to people, where responsibilities lie to some of the big issues.

      “So, for example, with health, health is the responsibility of the Welsh Government in Cardiff, and is NOT the responsibility of Westminster. So we’re trying to steer away from some of those topics where, for example, people like Carwyn Jones do not have ultimate say.

      “Not an easy thing to do beacuse lots of people will agree that for example, the impact of the Brexit process will have an impact on the economy which will then have an impact on public spending which will then have an impact on the health service.

      “So its not easy to try and separate some of these things but we are where we are and we’re going to be discussing ‘security’ in light of the dreadful events in Manchester; we’ll discuss Brexit and the impact of the Welsh economy; levels of poverty in parts of Wales which are shockingly poor and some of those regions which have been receiving a lot of money from the EU because they are so impoverished. We’ll be talking about what happens to them after Brexit and indeed looking ahead maybe 10 years, if that’s possible, or even wise, and asking what the kind of devolution will be, will look like, in 10 years. That of course is relevant not just to Wales but other parts of the UK as well”

      End of Quote.

      What a stark contrast between BBC Wales approach to the Welsh General Election and the travesty visited upon Scotland by the clowns and yoons infesting BBC Scotland.

      Of course, Plaid Cymru is not in government in Wales and not seen as any kind of existential threat to the BBC’s British state. Maybe that’s why the BBC is willing to be unbiased and impartial in Wales when it clearly is not in Scotland.

      In the Scottish Leaders Debate, the BBC deliberately kept to only devolved issues over which the MPs at Westminster have no ultimate say.

      Not only that, they invited on, (in her own words), ‘moderately wealthy’ nurse (now in hiding) to ambush the First Minister, that she had to use a Food Bank, when her own social media postings described the opposite.

      I can’t see BBC Wales, Huw Edwards, planting a phoney to ambush Plaid Cymru in the same manner tonight, but I will be watching with interest, if only to see how the Scottish Leaders Debate could have been conducted, if the BBC Scottish Body Politic was not infested with frothing mad, tribal yoons, of the intelligience-insulting calibre of Bird, Smith, Campbell, Brewer et al.

    129. Capella says:

      @ Brus MacGallah – yes I noticed Ms Austin has had a brush with the law. But the BBC is blissfully unaware that their protege has fallen from grace. They are quite amazingly still linking to their article about Joanna Cherry.
      I suppose if you have gone to a lot of trouble to set up a cunning sting you will want to milk it forever.

    130. Thepnr says:


      Yes the hypocrisy of the BBC is astonishing where Scotland is concerned. I can only guess we have them worried for some reason.

    131. Nick Lewis says:

      Aye, James has it. If you use the 1950 line for England instead of 1951, it adds up right. I did a quick count of Labour seats and they were definitely in the 230s, not the 250s.

    132. Jockanese Wind Talker says:

      Interesting @Brus MacGallah says at 7:23 pm

      “Edinburgh nurse who claimed she had to use foodbanks fined by cops after bust-up with neighbour…”

      Under the RCN’s Standing Orders, the Council may take disciplinary action against any member who is guilty of conduct unfitting of an RCN member

      5.0 Action in the event of criminal investigation, or other legal, professional or staff disciplinary proceedings
      5.1 Criminal investigation or other legal proceedings 5.1.1 While the RCN does not in any case condone criminal behaviour on the part of a member, there may be circumstances where it does not amount to unfitting conduct for RCN purposes. The RCN may however, initiate formal action under its Disciplinary Procedure where it is aware that a member has been charged with, or convicted of a criminal offence(s) related or unrelated to their association with the RCN, that it is considered may bring the RCN into disrepute or otherwise be unfitting of an RCN member.

      Royal College of Nursing Disciplinary Policy and Procedure:

      5.1.2 Where alleged unfitting conduct by an RCN member is the subject of a Police investigation or other legal process, the RCN may, depending on the circumstances, adjourn its own disciplinary process pending further developments in, or the outcome of, the Police investigation or other legal process. Alternatively, the RCN may if it considers appropriate, proceed with its own investigation and disciplinary proceedings.

      5.1.3 The RCN will treat a criminal caution or conviction, or a finding in civil proceedings as conclusive evidence that the member is guilty of the conduct to which the caution, conviction or civil finding relates.

      5.1.4 Where a member is an RCN officer holder and he/she is convicted of a criminal offence (excluding minor motoring offences) whether or not related to his or her association with the RCN, it is the member’s responsibility to inform the Director of Governance of the circumstances. Failure to do so may result in disciplinary action being taken.

    133. Clootie says:

      …don’t trust MacWhirter. He blow hot and cold depending on how hard his employer reminds him of his “loyalties”

    134. DW says:

      Bit late, but the mistake in the table is that the 19 National Liberals have been added to the Labour total.,_1951
      The wiki breakdown of seats gives us:

      1 Irish Labour
      2 Conservative & Liberal
      2 Liberal & Conservative
      2 National Liberal
      2 National Party of Northern Ireland
      6 Conservative & National Liberal
      6 Liberal
      7 National Liberal & Conservative
      9 Ulster Unionist
      16 Co-op & Labour
      279 Labour
      293 Conservative

      Conservative + Ulster Unionist= 302
      Labour + Co-op & Labour = 295
      Irish Labour + National Party of Northern Ireland + Liberal = 9
      National Liberal = 19

      295 + 19 = 314
      The Barnsley seat eventually went to Labour.
      But it was presumably not included in the table data.
      295 – 1 + 19 = 313

      The National Liberals seem to have won seats in England, Scotland, and Wales.
      So each of those tables showing seats won is totally wrong.

    135. wee e says:

      Including the national Liberals (and also other miscellaneous unionists from Scotland) as “Conservative Party” from 1951 (let alone from 1918!) is like including the LibDems, the Liberal Party, the SDP and UKIP as Tories from 1970-odds.

      The Conservative Party was not a parliamentary party in Scotland till the Mid-60s. In 1918 Liberal unionists were still very much liberals, with only the Home Rule issue splitting them from mainstream Liberals.

    Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

    ↑ Top