What we think

Three days after Scotland's historic election, there is much we do not yet know. It remains uncertain who will form the Executive, who will be first minister andwhat deals will be donetoforma government. But we can be sure of this: our country will never be the same again. Political cliché or not, the tectonic plates have shifted irrevocably.

This newspaper believes that is a good thing. We argued last week that an SNP-led coalition with the Liberal Democrats was the best possible outcome of the election. Scotland needs change to accelerate our rate of progress and Labour needs a period in opposition to rediscover its sense of purpose and direction.

The election result represents a triumph of hope over fear, however slim; a welcome reminder that scare tactics such as those employed by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown can often have the opposite effect to that intended if they seek to undermine self-confidence; and an inspiring two fingers to tabloid newspapers (and yes, we mean The Daily Record and the Scottish editions of The Sun and the Daily Mail) whose attempts to terrify the electorate into believing a vote for the SNP would spell the end of everything were as patronising as they were pathetic.

Last Thursday may or may not be the first step towards independence - we consider Scotland still some years away from having to take that decision - but it was the first step out of the shadows of fear and negativity.

It is an inevitable result of the electoral system for Holyrood that parties who win a relatively small number of seats can wield disproportionate power. This is true of the LibDems, who emerged from the election shambles with one fewer seat than in 2003 yet find themselves in prime position to help form a government. The Tories have ruled out all talk of coalition.

LibDem leader Nicol Stephen has been characteristically contradictory on the issue of coalition deals. On the one hand he has stated he would not prop up the Labour Party if they failed to win the popular vote. On the other he has ruled out a deal with the SNP if they refuse to drop their commitment to a referendum on independence. On that basis, we should expect to see Stephen return to the back benches and his party wield less power and influence than the Tories, who gained one more seat than the LibDems last Thursday.

That, of course, will not happen. The LibDems should embrace political pragmatism and positively play the hand the election dealt them. It is almost inconceivable that the LibDems, having tasted power in Holyrood, would willingly give up the ministerial posts and the status associated with them. The democratic fear, however, is that they will do that deal with Labour, driven not by concern for what is best for Scotland's parliament, but by concerns that lie in Westminster. There are indications that LibDems national leader Menzies Campbell and prime minister-in-waitingGordon Brown have been discussing how best to work together to keep the SNP out.

This newspaper believes such an arrangement would not be in the best interests of the Scottish electorate. There was a clear vote in favour of a change in the government at Holyrood. The SNP won more seats than any other party and had a larger share of the vote. A cobbled together coalition of a wounded Labour party and a LibDem party clearly less popular than it was in 2003, would fly in the face of democracy and, more prosaically, risk a voter backlash at the next election. The pre-poll promise from the LibDems was that they would not risk a deal with a party that had not won the largest number of MSPs. Were they to simply ignore that, why would anyone trust what they said in the future?

The unanswered question is, therefore: can the SNP and the LibDems work together? There is general agreement between both parties on a number of issues, most notably the replacement of the council tax with a form of local income tax. An SNP-LibDem coalition would not have a majority at Holyrood, but with the support of the Greens, who are believed to be open to offers, the possibility of a functioning administration becomes more likely. The support of Margo Macdonald may seem far-fetched, given the well-known antipathy between her and Alex Salmond, but we would argue that the need for a stable Executive merits a priority beyond that of a personal feud. The progressive forces in Scottish politics must come together. Democracy demands it.

This coalition - comprising many ofthoseprogressive forces referred to by Salmond in a conciliatory victory speech (albeit one deliveredbefore the final outcome wasknown) - seems to us to be the way ahead. The bigstumblingblockremainsthe referendum issue.

One solution may lie in the idea of a "Constitution Convention", set up to give the SNP leader a way of easing himself into the chair of the first minister while allowing the LibDems to maintain they have not put the union at immediate risk. Salmond's hard-core separatists might be disappointed that they have not prioritised the 2010 referendum. But being seen as a party capable of governing and putting the short-term health of the Holyrood parliament above their own long-term objectives can only increase the stature of the Nationalists.

Critics of a new convention will pounce on it as a re-run of an exercise which was essentially only there to keep the wider Scottish electorate happy while the Tories ruled.

Donald Dewar's constitutional convention kept devolution hopes up when Labour was in no position in Westminster to deliver anything. This could be different and more successful. Devolution has happened, and political power is there to be used. If a convention puts the contentious issue of independence to one side and instead concentrates on how the Scottish parliament can positively evolve, it will not be a wasted process for any party.

Labour's leader almost-elect, Gordon Brown, having seen his own party lose power in his fiefdom, should welcome a convention. Having said he would find it "impossible" to work with Salmond because of the SNP's "dangerous and disastrous" fixation with independence, Brown will find it easier to establish a working relationship with the SNP if, as prime minister, he believes Salmond is putting the parliament first. That, however, says little about Brown's qualities as a statesman. Politics is often the art of finding a compromise with your opponents. This week Tony Blair will be applauded in Belfast for delivering a hard-foughtpoliticalsettlementin Stormont which sees Dr Ian Paisley and Gerry Adams resuming the work of the Northern Ireland assembly. Sinn Fein and Ulster Unionists have often said working together is "impossible". Now it isn't.

The same pragmatism has to be reflected in the way Edinburgh and Westminster must now operate. Brown dismissing the democratic will of the Scottish electorate shouldn't be one of the first statements he makes in the week Tony Blair is expected to finally announce his departure.

Labour lost Scotland, but that doesn't mean they abandon it - especially in Westminster - until the next election. If Brown wants an independent Scotland, simply ignoring Salmond and the SNP will be the best recruitment policy the Nationalists have enjoyed since Margaret Thatcher sent the poll tax north.