I'd say a good rule of thumb is not to pronounce a new political party "dead on arrival" until at least the second poll. It was never the case that Alba's 3% showing in the Survation poll a few days ago put it out of contention for seats, but tonight's Panelbase poll shows a radically different picture.
Scottish Parliament constituency ballot voting intentions (Panelbase / Sunday Times):
SNP 49% (+2)
Conservatives 22% (-1)
Labour 20% (-)
Liberal Democrats 6% (-1)
Greens 2% (-)
Scottish Parliament regional list ballot voting intentions:
SNP 39% (-3)
Conservatives 21% (-1)
Labour 17% (-2)
Greens 8% (+2)
Alba 6% (+6)
Liberal Democrats 5% (-2)
All for Unity 4% (+4)
Seats projection (with changes from 2016 election): SNP 65 (+2), Conservatives 24 (-7), Labour 20 (-4), Greens 8 (+2), Alba 6 (+6), Liberal Democrats 5 (-), All for Unity 1 (+1)
SNP: 65 seats
All others: 64 seats
SNP OVERALL MAJORITY OF 1 SEAT
Pro-independence parties: 79 seats (61.2%)
Anti-independence parties: 50 seats (38.8%)
PRO-INDEPENDENCE MAJORITY OF 29 SEATS
So many of the claims made over the last few days now look highly questionable. It was said that there would be no pressure from the polls for the broadcasters to consider the case for Alba to included in the TV election debates - well, here we have a poll showing Alba ahead of the Liberal Democrats in terms of both votes and seats. If Alex Salmond isn't going to be in the debates, what's Willie Rennie doing there? It was said that Alba couldn't possibly contribute to a pro-independence supermajority, and that the Greens were the only game in town if voters wanted to achieve that outcome - well, here we have a poll showing both Alba and the Greens making a major contribution to a supermajority.
Are there any health warnings that need to be put on these numbers? As Scottish Skier will doubtless point out, it seems that Panelbase took the unusual step of putting the words "led by Alex Salmond" in brackets next to Alba's name. It could be argued that may have led to an overstatement of support, but the flipside of the coin is that there could have been an understatement of support if it hadn't been done, because voters may not be familiar with the Alba name yet - but hopefully will be by the time of the election.
Another possibility is that Alba may be enjoying a honeymoon spell following its launch, and that its support will fade before polling day. It's also conceivable that the hysterical "it's all over for Salmond" reporting of the Survation poll may have put off potential Alba supporters and that the Panelbase poll hasn't picked that up because of its fieldwork dates. So, yes, there are all sorts of reasons for being cautious - but the bottom line is that Alba are now in the mix, and for the time being the prospect of them gaining several seats needs to be taken very seriously.
My gut instinct is to be a bit sceptical about the finding that George Galloway will take a seat for All for Unity. The assumption until now has been that all Galloway would do is take votes away from the serious unionist players without getting close to actually winning a seat - and to be honest that's still how I expect it to play out. However, we can't have it both ways - if we're going to take Alba's numbers in the Panelbase poll seriously, we have to do the same for All for Unity's numbers. So perhaps Alex Salmond and George Galloway will be sparring in Holyrood debates before too long - just like old times in the House of Commons.
Should Scotland be an independent country? (Panelbase / Sunday Times)
Yes 51% (+1)
No 49% (-1)
So Yes are back in the lead with Panelbase, and across all firms this is also the fourth poll in a row to show a Yes lead of some description. It's starting to look like there may been a small but genuine bounceback in Yes support after the dip in the early part of the year. The poll apparently also shows that 54% of respondents want a second independence referendum to be held within the next five years (ie. within the term of the Holyrood parliament that's about to be elected).
It appears the smears are not paying off. Let's get this supermajority!
ReplyDeleteWhat you mean Wings was telling fibs?
DeleteI'm talking about the smears from Nicola, Marco Biagi, mhairi black and the rest of the SNP
DeleteThe independence numbers are Yes: 51% No: 49% and 54% say there should be a referendum within 5 years.
ReplyDeleteAny word of the independence question?
ReplyDeleteIt was Yes: 51%
DeleteGood news for independence supporters!
ReplyDeleteEnter the unionist nightmare.... SNP holding their vote, Greens Up, Alba up...supermajority almost at 80 seats.. In my opinion, anything over 80 seats is the desired result. At that level, no one can argue with the right of Scots to decide their own future.
ReplyDeleteI think we need to start talking about a "supermajority" in a meaningful, practical way. IMO, a "supermajority" would be 86 seats, because, at that point, the "supermajority" would have the voting power to vote for an immediate election, which would be what is needed, if Doris manages to prevent a referendum (by whatever means).
Delete80 seats isn't a supermajority. It's just a bigger majority than we have now, with no REAL extra clout.
The so utterly falls into the trap that’s been created for us. A majority in Parliament is enough to assert our right. It’s fine to aim for a big majority but don’t make such claims as “at that level . . .” It is hostage to fortune, just as Salmond’s “once in a generation” was.
Delete@Justin and Alex Birnie
DeleteFrom Wikipedia "If the Parliament itself resolves that it should be dissolved (with at least two-thirds of the Members voting in favour), or if the Parliament fails to nominate one of its members to be First Minister within 28 days of a General Election or of the position becoming vacant,[72] the Presiding Officer proposes a date for an extraordinary general election and the Parliament is dissolved by the Queen by royal proclamation."
It looks to me like the Super Majority is more than a buzz word - it is actually a useful tool for forcing a Plebescite Election.
With the Super Majority, the FM could call a vote to dissolve if a Referendum were thwarted by Westminster and remain FM. Without the Super Majority, Sturgeon [for we assume it is she] would hav to resign, the SNP would have to refuse to nominate a replacement and would have to vote down all other nominations. To my mind the optics of dissolving with a Super Majority look loads better, when you consider how it might play out over 2 or 3 weeks at Holyrood with no Super Majority.
It was Sturgeon who tied the “once in a generation” millstone around our neck, not Salmond
DeleteIn Alex Salmond's preface in the white paper Scotland's Future he calls it a "once in a generation" opportunity, so no.
Delete39 + 8 + 6 = 53% for Yes parties. 21 + 17 + 5 + 4 = 47% for No parties.
ReplyDeleteStarting to get interesting!
53% of MSPs would be fine for iref2. Ties in with 51% Yes.
DeleteBut why don't we game the system to disenfranchise a large section of the electorate then laugh in their faces about it?
That will have them swinging behind Yes!
#superdupermajority
Judging by most of the comments here you are shouting into the wind Skier. It is deeply depressing that people really do not seem to get it. I think court action is inevitable if, as seems probable, we have a referendum without a Section 30 order. Gaming the system will be the unionist response in court to claims of possessing a supermajority electoral mandate. We have an inalienable right to self determination. The way in which we exercise that right is all important in terms of securing the de facto and de jure recognition needed to operate as an Independent country. I fear the Alba approach is going to come back to haunt us throughout this process.
DeleteBet you that Sturgeon continues the moronic mantra of SNP 1 & 2.
ReplyDeleteI think what would be moronic would be for the leader of any political party with both list and constituency candidates to suggest folk vote against their own candidates.
DeleteI think the point people are making us that she doesn't have to be quite so vitriolic in her demands for votes, or indeed to tell so many bare-faced lies about it. Look at Angus MacNeil for how to play it classy.
DeleteYou're right. How can Nicola tell the SNP list candidates that she wants them to lose? She has to say the mantra.
Delete"Moronic mantra".....Jesus wept! As someone who intends to vote Alba in NE Scotland, but who wants a SNP majority, i despair of some of my fellow yessers.....
DeleteYou have to vote alba over green.. Alba is a real yes party will encourage activism, a wildcat referendum, garner internatiomsl support and declare udi.. The UK legal routes are blocked (although we'll have to go through them to demonstrate that).
ReplyDeleteGreens aren't salmond calibre.. They're just takin a len. They wouldn't have the first idea of the process of how to get to udi or indeed the inclination. If you really want independence it's alba on list. Fake indy or party hacks say green or snpon list. The snp has to decide if it's a party5if government or a party of independence.. Surgeon's disgraceful anti salmond remarks are continuing suggests she's gone soft on independence herself.. They get constiiturncy vote from me. But that's all.
"Wildcat referendum" is a curiously pejorative term for an independence supporter to use.
DeleteWe Greens are solidly for independence, and that carries weight with soft no voters since our main aim is to make sure we have a future for our kids based on justice. So for those for whom independence is something they’d support fir other reasons, we reassure them there is good reason.
DeleteSurvation support for independence by voting intention:
DeleteSNP = 91% Yes / 9% No
Green = 76% Yes / 24% No
Alba = 64% Yes / 36% No
Keaton, yes it is. I suspect De sf is a bit of a “wildcat” independence supporter, or a unionist gone off the reservation ;-)
DeleteJustin,
DeleteI'm probably going to be voting Green after independence, so I'm not anti-Green, but if "We Greens are solidly for Independence", then you should think about editing the Wikipedia entry, which says "the Scottish Green Party is open about and comfortable with the differences of opinion within the party on the constitutional issue, with co-conveyor Patrick Harvie pointing out that "even the very firm supporters of independence within the Greens tend to be more strongly motivated by other aspects of our political agenda"..."
Another curious phrase is "Alba is a real yes party (that) will encourage activism" when there was no attempt to appeal to any supporters or future members in setting-up Alba, deciding on its policies and strategies etc. Do we even know if the party will have any members, policies or strategies before May 6? Will Alex Salmond address ISP and AFI members directly? They must be scratching their heads and wondering WTF is going on. Each party decides not to co-operate with each other in the election and then another party appears from nowhere with a celebrity leader and little else and each simply stands-down in some sort of voluntary, temporary dissolution.
DeleteThey appear to have the most spineless memberships in the history of politics!
Second half of the campaign:
ReplyDelete# DELVER INDEPENDENCE
No political party can deliver independence.
DeleteOnly the people of Scotland can do that.
Yes vote up despite everything - Good. Yoons minus 11 seats - Good if not excellent.
ReplyDeleteWho on earth are All for Unity? Oops Galloway my bad. Splitting the Yoons anti Scottish Indy vote - Good.
This is a good result for indy. The spin in the news article reporting this is interesting - "Nicola Sturgeon is heading for an outright majority and a proindependence “supermajority” in May’s elections with the help of Alex Salmond’s new party". Nicola Sturgeon is in actual fact heading for an outright majority and a proindepdence supermajority with the help of the Greens and Alex Salmond's party. It is also the case that in the last poll prior to Alba's launch, the SNP were already on course for an actual majority and indy in general was already on course for a significant supermajority between SNP + Green seats. These two facts are curiously rarely acknowledged betwixt Alba triumphalism.
ReplyDeleteI further see a lot of Alba supporters taking the AP results of this poll at face value but asserting that the Galloway result is out of kilter or an outlier. You cannot do so, it's either both or neither.
What are the rules surrounding a major political party openly advocating and taking an official line that its voters should vote for another party I wonder? Is there any legislation or electoral rules preventing the SNP from doing so?
In any case, let's get a good result for indy in this election.
Well you have the precedent of Dugdale advising "vote Tory" to stop the SNP. No action taken by anyone on that spruik.
DeleteThe fact that the MSM are on full attack dog mode against the Alba party and its members.Suggests to me that they may well be afraid of a more radical pro -independence party being represented at Holyrood. Interesting times for sure
ReplyDeleteWow well done Alba.
ReplyDeleteAye, nae bother Andrew - as moronic as telling people NOT to vote SNP on the first ticket, aye?
ReplyDeleteProsperity to Scotland, and no union.
It's interesting to view the possibilities slightly differently.
ReplyDeleteA significant Alba vote will cut into the number of MSPs of the three, major unionist parties. The way parliamentary politics works a large proportion of the finance available to these, already shaky, party machines comes via their number of MSPs. Take that away and their paid officials, offices and 'critical mass' in communities wither fast.
Contributing to an increased indy majority is the major factor but smashing up unionist future political capacity is a close second. The 6/7% minimum question remains the same but Alba has a double potential if that support can be achieved.
You would have thought the SNP would have supported those objectives for the sake of achieving Indy but it seems not.
DeleteIf the polls stay constant, then I will be voting Alba in NE Scotland, because it is "Salmond heartland", and he is very likely to win a seat. If polls show a possibility of less than 9 constituency SNP seats, or Alba falls back in the polls, then I'll revert to voting SNP/SNP.
DeleteBefore there is ANY significant "cutting into the numbers of unionist MSP's", there will have to be a substantial percentage of SNP voters voting for Alba. It is far more likely that Alba will take seats from Greens, than from unionists if the percentages are low. This doesn't worry me personally, because I'd rather see Alex Salmond in Holyrood than a Green, for many reasons.
We shouldn't get carried away about "supermajorities", unless the unionist vote collapses, which would be EXCELLENT news, because it would mean that many more no voters have come over to our side.
THE most important issue is NOT the number of pro-Indy MSP's, but the number of pro-Indy votes. Given the (unrealistic) choice between 55% of the vote and 75 seats, or 51% of the vote and 80 seats, I'd pick the first option, because the 55% of the vote is going to be the main driver for independence, not the number of MSP's . I'm fairly sure that Boris Johnson would pick the opposite choice from me, because he knows how much more danger to the union a majority vote poses.
Does the database of this poll give the regional variation for Alba %.
ReplyDeleteAlly
"If Alex Salmond isn't going to be in the debates, what's Willie Rennie doing there?"
ReplyDeleteI'm sure many of us have been wondering just that about Willie for quite a number of years irrespective of Salmond's latest political resurrection.
The election is certainly looking very interesting now,with no doubt many twists and turns to come,and likely some surprises as the votes are counted.
You've already pointed it out James! :-)
ReplyDeleteThis is a non-standard poll!
Unfortunately, this is a non-standard poll question, so we have to treat the result differently. I would advise people not to base their gambling on non-standard polls.
If leaders names are to be included, it should be done for all parties.
It would have been just as unfair to only add 'led by Nicola Sturgeon' next to the SNP. That might have given a significant boost to SNP on the list given her very high level of popularity.
That aside, it doesn't seem Alba is obviously drawing solely from the SNP, but from unionists. This ties in with its voters being the least pro-independence, with 36% of Alba supporters being pro-union (SNP only 9%) according to survation.
Will be interesting to look at the tables for this one.
Scottish skier what utter nonsense you say a third or more of alba supporters are unionists go take a cold shower and stop drivelling
DeleteSkier,
DeleteDid you just say that 36% of Alba voters are pro-UNION? Have we all finally disappeared down the rabbit hole??
51% definitely isn't a supermajority.
ReplyDeleteRather than working on getting more than our fair share of seats, it should take priority.
Scottish Skier...79 seats is a supermajority
Delete51% is enough
49% is not going to stop independence , why should it, we get tory governments for less
On the one hand yes it's unfair. On the other hand, it's fptp that's unfair and people are entitled to vote for a list party that suits them. On the third hand, Unionist parties don't accept Scotland's democratic right of self determination, so they aren't that deserving of sympathy.
DeletePanelbase are usually quite slow in publishing their data tables. What I want to see is how the parties were listed. If they had "All for Unity - leader George Galloway or Alba led by Alex Salmond" it might just skew the vote a tad. Just like the Survation data tables it will be interesting to see who actually is supporting these Parties and their previous past vote. Lets see other polls and the trend in them. This is just one poll and with the margin of error could mean success or failure.
ReplyDeleteI took part in this poll. Alba was the only party with its leader identified. All for Unity was just that - "All for Unity".
DeleteIf you trust Electoral Calculus' methodology then they estimate 8 seats for Alba. See https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/blogs/ec_scotlandpoll_20210330.html
ReplyDelete@Andrew Morton, Your comment is wrong. Neither Nicola Sturgeon or any other party leader will EVER say "Don't vote for my party".
ReplyDeleteIt's up to every voter to decide whether to switch their vote, but it's still a gamble because if the constituency forecast turns out to be wrong you'll be casting a regional vote with an unrealistic expectation of the final outcome.
The Times poll shows a fight for second place and Anas Sarwar has more pro-indy votes to lose to ALBA than Dougie Ross IMO. Interesting.
Happy to see... Expected no less. Now with 6 % let's try to get to 10 % the less Red Blue an yellow fence sitters in Holyrood the better.
ReplyDeleteJames. It seems to me that there is an absence of the consideration of tactical voting at the regional level.
ReplyDeleteFor instance in High Tory /unionist regions , such as the South of Scotland, both votes SNP would be still the most rational way to vote. The reason being if Tories/unionists get in on the constituency, the SNP is still the best placed to catch list MSPs. The converse is true for central belt regions with a High Indy vote where SNP will landslide the constituency but struggle to get any lists, despite a huge number of list vote. I don't have strong preference for Greens or ALBA, so I guess it is down to an individuals views of non Indy subjects to make their choice.
James. Do you if anyone is looking at regional breakdowns to judge where list votes are going to Indy parties?
James I know that you are correct to err on the side of caution about Alba but I believe this is just the start.
ReplyDelete#
In todays Sunday Post the Proclaimers are both voting Alba on the list and urging people to do the same. This will help to raise the profile again.
Any more well kent faces ready to come out for Alba I wonder.
Genuine question, but if the goal was to maximise seats and avoid the high risk of vote splitting / losing seats, why didn't Alba just field candidates in regions where the SNP normally sweeps the constituency board?
ReplyDeleteUnionists in Southern Scotland must be very pleased Alba are standing.
They assume that the SNP will sweep the constituencies apart from Orkney and Shetland. The SNP haven't helped their own cause by running a Wokist to the top of the Highland List. SNP could and should ask why it is that the Greens are standing against them in winnable constituencies. The Greens are clearly not thinking as Pro Indy Party from that point of view.
DeleteSince some people have not been paying attention.
ReplyDeleteIt is easy for Mrs Murrell to bash the Yoons while she pretends to be working towards independence. It is another matter to be simultaneously bashing a party which is supporting her stated aims and which is asking her what she's doing to bring them about.
One Alba MSP would destroy her mirage. A handful could bring down her regime.
No wonder she's in full Adolf mode.
OK, Stu.
DeleteSo what? Even if Alba took three or even four times that number of seats, what does that contribute to the fight to restore Scotland's independence? Alba isn't offering some radical new approach to the constitutional issue. And even if they were, they have no way of implementing that approach unless the SNP adopts the same approach and gets a mandate for it.
ReplyDeleteSorry to burst bubbles. But somebody has to take a coldly pragmatic look at our politics. All I'm seeing is a new partisan battle much like any other partisan battle. What I'm looking at as an outcome to this election is another five years of dither and delay. I'm anticipating five years of increasingly bitter rivalry between SNP and Alba. Five years of smear, scandal and squabbling. Five years in which the British will continue to dismantle our democracy while Salmond and Sturgeon are busy trying to dismantle each other.
Because you bloviating gonk, the rules set out by london allow our Parliament to change the electoral system, call instant elections and a host of other tasty morsels if there is a Supermajority.
DeleteMurrell won't last a month with Salmond back as an MSP. Her crimes will come out and she's going to be sharing a cell with one of her TWAW friends. Lovely.
If we had a group in parliament asking the first minister each week what she is doing to ensure a referendum, or other route to independence, I think that would be *highly effective* in concentrating minds on the talk at hand!
DeleteYou may be tight Peter but this is where the SNP has put us. Under this SNP leadership there will be no referendum. At least with Alba there it gives us something to build. The ideal scenario would probably be a clear out of the SNP decision makers but I fear that’s not going to happen any time soon. Better to start a new course of action rather than just wait and hope something changes in the SNP.
DeleteNo bubbles to burst. Your entire argument rests on the premise that the SNP are deliberately delaying independence. This idea seems to have become rooted among certain prominent "pro-Indy" bloggers, such as yourself, Indycar, Barrhead Boy, Craig Murray, and ...... I hesitate to include him among "pro-Indy" bloggers ...... Stuart Campbell.
Deletei speak only for myself, but there IS an alternative explanation for the (apparent) slow progress. Sturgeon has been trying to match the pace of the independence campaign to the pace of the Scottish electorate. I'm a great believer in Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation is usually the correct one.
Looking back to 2025, I was extremely doubtful about the decision to announce "A vote for the SNP is not a vote for independence", but it now looks like tactical brilliance. I spoke to Alex Salmond about it at a constituency meeting in New Deer, and his reply has stuck with me. He said "I'm a gambler. Nicola isn't. She is her own woman, and she'll do things her way, but she knows exactly what she's doing".
IMO, Sturgeon was trying not to scare the horses, because a proclamation that a vote for the SNP WAS a vote for independence, only months after the referendum, would have been her saying "I don't CARE what you no voters think".
As "events" have unfolded ..... EVEL, Brexit, the advent of Boris, the pandemic and the stark contrast between the two leaders' handling of it, the Scottish electorate SEEM to have come round to the idea of independence.
Some folk (like myself) have looked at what has happened and have thought to themselves "maybe that statement in 2015 WASN'T cowardice .... maybe it was astute judgement. Others, perhaps blinded by impatience, have ignored the rise in the polls and keep harping on about what a terrible job the SNP have been doing.
If there is a majority vote for Indy parties, then I believe that Sturgeon will act decisively, because she will recognise that the people are behind her. Once that happens, the game is up for Boris and Co. once WE decide we want independence then we will take it. Him and his cohorts have never mattered. It has ALWAYS been about what WE want - as a nation.
However, if I'm wrong, and Sturgeon doesn't act decisively with a majority vote behind her, we will all have to (sadly) admit that the naysayers have been right all along (even the truly odious Stu Campbell), and that we've been taken for fools. We will then have to embark on the (much longer) road of reforming or replacing the SNP.
I fervently hope I'm right. Don't you?
Peter, the block is Sturgeon and the SNP leadership. They aren't interested in Independence and are too feckin incompetent to do anything to counter the British state even if showed the political will to do it. Without new leadership and a clean out we are going nowhere but down
DeleteBath opines.
DeleteLooking like enough will give Alba 6 seats at least here is hoping and wish SNP leadership would come out at the last minute and say vote list Alba, making it too late for the unionists to make another ploy.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately they can't. Its too late in the process to do it. How would you feel is you were on the list for SNP MSP then the party ditches you for an alliance with other parties. My take is Alba should have waited until after this election and go through the whole cycle of the next to build support.
DeleteI just hope folk will heed the need for regional selective discrimination for casting list votes.
If the SNP called on SNP voters to back ALBA on the regional list, they would be risking the perceived benefit if it gained an advantage.
DeleteIt would be a gift to unionists, and an excuse to challenge the result.
Posters on here need to wise up.
Stop giving freebies to the unionists!
Seems auntie beeb doesn't want to acknowledge Alba party's existence https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-56510773 headline sez, Scottish election 2021: Who should I vote for? Compare party policies; Guess what there are only five parties to choose from. I reckon they are terrified.
ReplyDeleteAll for Unity. As in Unity Mitford?
ReplyDeleteGalloway's Alliance for Unity party jumped from (at best) 1% to 4%, seemingly simply due to the change in prompting.
ReplyDeleteIt has of course been included in polling (under 'other') from July 2020 when it was founded.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/19209715.alex-salmonds-alba-george-galloways-a4u-support-may-overstated-poll/
Beware non-standard polls.
If 'Alex Salmond's new party' or the likes was included next to Alba, it would make Scotland in union blush in terms of leading methodology.
Out of interest, would pro-independence people rather see 65 SNP seats (a majority) or 64 SNP seats (a minority) but plus 8 Greens & 6 Albas?
ReplyDeleteTo put it another way, how important is a single party majority for independence?
Legally it matters not a jot.
DeleteI think only one bill in Scotland since 1999 has not had the blessing of two or more parties.
I can't for the life of me remmeber a poll with an over 50% majority for pro indy parties. Not >50% seats.
ReplyDeleteWould now be perfect time to call this a plebescite election?
This spurious unionist talk about unfair “gaming the system” tugs at my heart strings, it really does. Don’t let us forget the whole election system for Holyrood was designed explicitly to prevent a pro independence parliament. If you want to talk about “gaming the system” let’s start there. They don’t like to be beaten at their own game. Diddums
ReplyDeleteI await the tables, but assuming this is a non-standard poll as discussed, I can't include it my regional PoP averages as it's not comparable with other polls.
ReplyDeleteIt sticks out like a sore thumb statistically, and no wonder given the apparent bias in prompting for some parties.
The constituency is fine, and can be included.
Need some help here James.. just read this:
ReplyDeletehttps://listvotesense.medium.com/but-we-wont-be-competing-with-the-snp-a5ab1a167c7
I'm in Mid Scotland and Fife region, usually vote SNP1, Greens
2. If I go for SNP1, Alba2, could Greens lose a seat and Unionists gain because vote is split? Fully support what Alba are setting out to achieve, but plenty Tory voters in my area...