Work as if you live in the early days of a

Better Nation

Election round up: the media battle

Apr 9

Posted by The Burd in Elections, Holyrood, Media | 42 Comments

How does the saying go?  A picture is worth a thousand words and elections are no different.  The uninitiated might think the battle is for copy and content but no.  One big, fat visual is enough to make even the most grumpy campaign co-ordinator smile.  For a moment anyhow.

So, two and a bit weeks in, a slew of manifesto launches later, who is winning this particular battle?

Never thought I’d be saying this but STV vs the Beeb?  No contest.  Hats off to Matt Roper, the digital content geek at STV -  the commercial channel has wiped the floor with the one what we pay for.  And frankly, have a right to expect better from.

STVstole a march with the first televised leaders’ debate and a live blog facility.  Its offering includes news, news round ups, live streaming, a postcode searchable facility for your constituency and region, profiles of them and the candidates, blogs and analysis, a twitter stream for all candidates, its pack of reporters assigned a party each, a polling panel, innovative programming and of course, Bernard Ponsonby overseeing proceedings.

What does BBC Scotland offer?  A shoestring in comparison.  No dedicated election space or heading.  A bog standard round up page that scrolls the oldest first (even the burd knows that is a big no-no).  There is, though, an impressively designed candidate map with postcode search facility.  And of course, Brian’s Blog (Taylor in case you were wondering), though it’s not been updated since Wednesday. Tsk, tsk.  It is all a bit, well bitty and half hearted.

The fact remains, though, that newspapers and what they print during the campaign will play a big role in informing the voting public, even if they are no longer the influencers they once were.  Looking at this week through the papers’ pictures provides some clues about who they will all be backing and urging their readers to back.

It’s unlikely that the Record will spring a surprise on us this election by transferring its traditional allegiance from Labour.  The Tories’ manifesto launch got a whole page (with an image of Annabel looking like she was about to eat the thing), the Lib Dems a paltry half page with a bigger photie of Iain Gray than Tavish Scott, and Labour a full two pages, complete with graphics, analysis and one or two well place pics of the leader.  Everyday this week (I think  – funnily enough, I’m not an habitual Record reader) Iain Gray’s fizzog featured somewhere, though Nicola Sturgeon also scored a few.  If Record readers still can’t recognise Mr Gray at the end of the campaign, it won’t be for its trying.

The Sun appears to be moving towards backing the SNP if its current coverage and slant is any indicator. Some nice pics of Salmond, highly positive coverage, a couple of front page exclusives, all adding up to what seems like a successful wooing.  A result in any party’s book.

Of the two Scottish broadsheets, the Scotsman is playing it most canny.  Pretty fair, proportionate coverage so far for all the parties and a share of the images.  Plenty action shots which they all like: how refreshing that someone is playing nicely.  The Herald – well, if they don’t come out for Labour I’m going to be a curry and a tenner down.  The Tories got a nice pic of Annabel (with a bizarre rainbow background) and damning headlines for their manifesto launch, but by far and away the best image of Iain Gray this week appeared in Thursday’s edition to coincide with his party’s manifesto launch.

The SNP, of course, tried to steal Labour’s thunder with Brian Cox’s endorsement of the SNP in this election.  Did it work?  Sort of.  A great big splash and clever headline on the front page of the Sun on the morning of Labour’s manifesto launch ensured coverage spilling over into the broadcast news headlines and into other newspapers the following day.

They did the same to the Lib Dems, with the endorsement of Salmond for FM from retiring MSP John Farquhar Munro.  They needn’t have bothered – no one was up for covering it much anyway.  Yesterday’s people would appear to be the view of the meeja, which tells us a lot.

In terms of news management, the SNP is playing a blinder, though its Scottish Futures Fund launch did fall a bit flat, when such an initiative deserved much more coverage.  Its experience tells, not least because they have veteran media man Kevin Pringle at the helm.  But they should be careful on two counts.  Playing dirty can always backfire, especially when the other parties have time to prepare to counter the SNP’s manifesto launch this coming Tuesday.  Moreover, the problem with blizzarding is that news – and pictures, as happened this week – can get lost in the whiteout.

But of course, the images that dominated the week are the ones that Iain Gray will want to forget.  Whoever is advising him on media management deserves a dressing down.  Or locked in a cupboard until it’s all over and replaced with some more experienced heavyweights.

There’s a Goldilocks effect at play right now.  The SNP?  Too much.  Labour?  Too little.  The media with its low boredom threshhold and attention span needs to be fed just the right amount of stories and images to sate its appetite.  Otherwise, incidents like the one in Glasgow Central station end up dominating the headlines.

Does Labour’s PR fail mark a downward turning point as some journalists and commentators are suggesting?  Nah.  A bad media day dents the morale of the party concerned and provides a filip for the opposition.  Such incidents provide a day’s news, and while they might entertain the masses for a moment, they do not actually influence the outcome of elections.  Anyone remember Jennifer’s ear?

Tags: , , , , ,

#SP11 Region Watch – Conclusions

Apr 8

Posted by Malc in Elections, Holyrood | 44 Comments

We now have a full slate of Scottish regions accounted for through our Region Watch series.  You can see each of the individual posts by clicking on the links below:

Highlands & Islands
North East Scotland
Lothians
Mid-Scotland & Fife
West Scotland
Central Scotland
South Scotland
Glasgow

The astute among you will probably have taken note of our predictions in each region and know the overall scores on the doors.  To pull it all together, the regional results have been collated in the image below:

Which makes the total seats:

Also, information I had noted throughout on the split of candidates between men and women, and between new and returning MSPs.  With our analysis, I make it that we’re currently projecting 46 female MSPs (35%) which is a marginal increase on the previous session.  We’d also see 34 new faces in Holyrood (26%) which, given we had 20 MSPs standing down, shouldn’t be a big shock – but it will be interesting to see how having a quarter of all MSPs feeling their way into the job will play out.

Anyway – back to the baseline numbers.  From the figures we’ve projected (and please treat this as you would any opinion poll, subject to the usual caveats, questioning of methodology, scepticism of the outcomes etc) we’d have Labour up 4 seats, the SNP down 1, the Conservatives up 1, the Lib Dems down 5, the Greens up 1 and Margo returning, so no change on the Independent figure.  Which, on the face of it is minimal change from 2007 – Labour winning back their position as Scotland’s largest party and a marked decline in the Lib Dem vote having an impact on their outcome in seats.  Note also that the Lib Dem representation in West and South is limited to 1 list seat, and they are wiped out in both Central and Glasgow on these figures – the first time in the devolution period that one of the “big four” would fail to return at least 1 MSP in each of the 8 electoral regions.

For outcomes, we’d likely be looking at minority government, since there would only be potential for two winning coalitions: Lab-SNP (96) and Lab-Con (68).  SNP-Con, totalling 64, might be workable given we need a Presiding Officer from somewhere, but it would be precarious.  And unless either the Conservatives (more likely, though I wouldn’t say odds on) or the Lib Dems voted for Alex Salmond in the First Ministerial vote, that minority government would be Labour run… though how long it would last is anybody’s guess.  Mine is that Labour wouldn’t get the same kind of dispensation from their opposition as the SNP got to run the last government since at Westminster they are overtly hostile to the two governing parties there. (Jeff addition:- One point to make here is that Labour seats exceed SNP + Greens together which could prove crucial as the post-election wrangling gets underway, though if I’d given that 7th Glasgow seat to the SNP, an SNP/Green coalition would be ahead by 1 seat, assuming (amongst other things) that Lib Dems and Tories would abstain).

In the coming weeks, we’ll try to sharpen up our analysis, look for the (massive!) holes in our local knowledge, perhaps change around a few seats and see how close we get to the final outcome.  In the meantime, knock yourselves out with working out who will form the next government!

#SP11 Region Watch – Glasgow

Apr 8

Posted by Jeff in Holyrood | 34 Comments

Glasgow, the reddest of red regions and the primary base of Labour resources, home to one Parliament co-convener, the Deputy First Minister and Smeato. The Glasgow Airport hero might not be standing in this election but that doesn’t mean that there won’t be instances of people ‘getting banjoed’ on May 6th either in celebration or defeat, (but both metaphorically, of course).

Anyway, obligatory preamble over, let’s get a few easy ones out of the way first:

Glasgow Anniesland/Maryhill & Springburn/Pollok/Provan/Rutherglen/Shettleston – I don’t care what the SNP canvass returns say or what ‘amazing feedback we’re seeing on the streets’, these are all easy Labour holds. Welcome back to Holyrood Bill Butler, Patricia Ferguson, Johann Lamont, Paul Martin, James Kelly & Frank McAveety.

So, where does that leave us:

Glasgow Cathcart – I must admit that I did not realise that this seat is as close as it is between incumbent Charlie Gordon (Labour) and challenger James Dornan (SNP). The 2007 majority was 2,189 which was reduced to 1,852 after boundary changes, that’s on a turnout of c22,000. Putting the voteshare for SNP and Labour on a level pegging actually increases the forecast winning majority to 2,222, due to the fact that the SNP won slightly more votes than Labour overall in 2007. The SNP will be in with a shout of taking this if they continue to creep up in the polls but I don’t see this being within the Nats’ reach this time. Labour hold – Charlie Gordon

Glasgow Kelvin – In many ways it is a real shame that the Greens have decided not to stand in this constituency as they pulled off an impressive 3rd place in 2007 and if they do aspire to becoming a major party (and getting invited along to leader debates) then they need to start bedding in some 3rd place and 2nd place finishes to show they are going places. I suppose the Greens know better than any of us that money doesn’t grow on trees and the party can’t afford lost deposit after lost deposit. The upside of all of this, of course, is that the challenge to Labour’s dominance of this constituency is not as split as it might have otherwise been. Sandra White has a real chance for the SNP against Pauline McNeill who has been MSP here for 12 years. So much depends on where the 5,700 votes for the Lib Dems and Greens will fall and what the decisive issues will be for those people from prior year. Nuclear power may even prove to be the key dividing line which one would think would fall in the SNP’s favour.

I really am quite torn so I shall follow what my model is saying and push out an argument that a personal vote for the incumbent will be a factor, just for good measure. Labour hold – Pauline McNeill

Glasgow Southside – If the SNP lose this seat, they surely will not win the most number of seats in Scotland. That is not to say that if they ‘do’ win the seat, that they will emerge as the largest party but there is no doubt that this is a key contest. Further evidence comes in the shape of The Straight Choice as Glasgow Southside is one of the few Scottish constituencies that has seen a real blitz of campaign leaflets over the past week or two. I get the impression that Labour challenger Stephen Curran is throwing himself into this contest with gusto but if there is any replacement for being the Deputy First Minister then it is surely to be seen as competent, efficient, likeable and human, qualities that Nicola Sturgeon has in spades. By a couple of thousands votes, I have this down as a comfortable SNP Hold – Nicola Sturgeon

So, the constituency result looks set to be SNP – 1, Labour – 8 (with +/- 1 potential for both figures)

Before ploughing on to work out the regional seats, it is worth considering the Socialists and George Galloway individually, as applying national trends does not really apply to these region-specific considerations.

It is a subjective call at this stage really and he may well prove to be the West’s Margo MacDonald but, for me, George Galloway will not win a seat at Holyrood. The main factor that results in that prediction is the mere fact that George has been gallivanting around anywhere but Glasgow for the past four years so it seems a bit churlish of the man to expect to be able to walk into a cushy job in the Scottish Parliament after being largely rebuffed everywhere else. George is a great orator and a great showman, but I suspect his contribution at the Scottish Parliament in terms of substance would be minimal, and the people of Glasgow will by and large realise that when considering who to vote for. Indeed, the lack of party machine may even mean that George barely registers in voters’ minds.

For the Scottish Socialist Party, despite Tommy Sheridan not standing, I suspect that the presence of George Galloway will hamper their voteshare to the extent that Frances Curran will miss out on a seat once more. The SSP finished behind the BNP, the SCCUP, the Scottish Christians, Socialist Labour and Christian Peoples party last time. They will improve on that lowly position, but I don’t see them catapulting themselves into Holyrood this year I’m afraid.

Based on a projected national voteshare of Lab – 35%, SNP – 35%, Con – 14%, LD – 8% & Green – 5%, the result that I do expect is the following:

1 – SNP (Humza Yousaf)
2 – SNP (Bob Doris)
3 – SNP (Sandra White)
4 – Con (Ruth Davidson)
5 – Grn (Patrick Harvie)
6 – SNP (Sid Khan)
7 – Labour (Hanzala Malik)

8 – SNP (James Dornan)

NB – SNP miss out on the 7th seat by 17 votes, the Lib Dems miss out on the 7th seat by 53 votes.

That 7th seat is probably not the result that many were expecting, particularly those of the staunch belief that Labour just don’t win list MSPs in Glasgow, so allow me to explain.

The region of Glasgow has one less seat this time around after the boundary changes, so the Labour vote is being divided by 9 in the d’hondt allocation (8 FPTP wins + 1) rather than the 10 from 2007. This has the effect of increasing their ‘votes/divisor’ figure by around 1,000 which is a significant amount when it comes to the dogfight for the 7th seat.

Further to this, the Lib Dem vote has collapsed and as a result the Labour regional voteshare has increased higher than it was in 2010. The SNP voteshare has increased higher than 2010 also but there is a watermark at which, in the absence of a meaningful challenge from a third party, that Labour will start taking regional seats. That watermark appears to be 35% national voteshare.

Now, I am just faithfully following what the polls are saying here and my personal view is that, after three terms with zero Glasgow list Labour MSPs, there will be far too many Labour voters giving their second votes to George Galloway, Socialists, Greens and even the SNP for Labour to get a look-in on this seventh seat but, well, all I’m saying is don’t be too surprised if a dramatic snatching of that last spot is the difference between who is the largest party at Holyrood.

Tactical voting considerations

For the SNP, like so many other regions now that they are either the incumbents or the main challengers, there are none. Irrespective of what constituency a Glasgow voter is in, 1st vote – SNP and 2nd vote – SNP are the only options if the primary objectives for this election are to see the SNP emerge as the largest party and Alex Salmond emerge as First Minister.

For the Greens, it is quite clear that the extent of their ambitions is 1 MSP from this region, unless something really dramatic happens in the national polls. It is also clear that Labour winning all FPTP seats will reduce Patrick Harvie’s chances of being re-elected so a first vote for the SNP should be considered in Southside, Kelvin and perhaps even Cathcart.

The primary tactical voting consideration for the Greens though is to try to induce would-be Labour voters to vote Green in order to reduce the SNP’s chances of maximising its number of regional MSPs here. Just don’t tell any Glaswegians that, actually, there is a chance of a Labour list MSP here after all!

(Consolidated results to follow)

#SP11 Region Watch – South Scotland

Apr 7

Posted by Malc in Elections, Holyrood | 48 Comments

Using the same poll as last time (STV poll published 28 March, to keep the second-half of this series consistent – the numbers are SNP & Lab – 35%, Con 14%, LD 8% and Green 5%) I’ve done the numbers for South Scotland which follow.  I make the net change Labour gaining one seat from the Lib Dems, but its not as straightforward as simply Labour taking one seat from them, as you’ll see from the outline of the region below.  Starting, as ever, with the constituencies, here we go:

Ayr – This has been Conservative held since a by-election in the early days of devolution.  With a notional Tory majority of over 4,000, I can’t see that changing this time around. Con hold (John Scott – returning)

Cumnock & Doon Valley – Labour held since… well, forever.  Cathy Jamieson departs to Westminster but leaves a healthy notional Labour majority of over 4,000 for her successor. Lab hold (Richard Leonard – new face)

Clydesdale – This is interesting, and the first of two fairly problematic seats.  A few reasons.  Karen Gillon is Labour’s incumbent MSP and has been since 1999.  Aileen Campbell was elected for the SNP on the South of Scotland list in 2007 as Holyrood’s youngest MSP, so she is a well-kent face too.  The notional majority is just 1,079.  And the Lib Dems managed to bungle their nomination papers for the constituency and thus have no candidate.  So we have some interesting things happening – not least 3,000-ish Lib Dem voters with no one to vote for.  What will they do?  Stay home?  Just vote on the list?  Try to vote tactically?  On the last point, I’ve been trying to work out who would be best for them to vote tactically for – and to my mind, it doesn’t really matter, since I can’t see them being close enough to win a second list seat.  So, that’s an interesting dynamic – and it will be worth watching for that reason.  It could lead to a surprise SNP gain, but I’d be more inclined to think the Lib Dem votes will split fairly evenly, and thus leave this as a Lab hold (Karen Gillon – returning)

Dumfriesshire – Here’s a problem too.  Similar to Eastwood, this is a notional Conservative seat now, with a majority of around 600.  But Labour’s Elaine Murray, as the incumbent, won’t be a pushover here.  I’m tempted to go with her, since she is a known quantity while, though the Conservative candidate is a local councillor, she’s probably not as well known across the constituency.  Consistent with Labour’s policy of allowing their candidates to stand on the list when their seat has been substantially re-configured, Elaine Murray is relatively safe, and will return whether winning here or not.  And whether she wins or not doesn’t make a difference to the overall outcome in South, since Labour & the Tories would simply switch a constituency for a regional seat.  I’ll lean to notional Con hold (Gillian Dykes – new face) which sadly means no place in Holyrood for the impressive Derek Brownlee.

East Lothian – I was mocked a few weeks ago for suggesting Iain Gray might have a bit of trouble returning to Holyrood.  It is unlikely, so this is probably a fairly safe Lab hold (Iain Gray -returning)

Ettrick, Roxburgh & Berwickshire – A Conservative gain from the Lib Dems in 2007, if opinion polls keep going the way it is unlikely that they’ll win it back, given the notional 1500 majority.  Con hold (John Lamont – returning)

Galloway & West Dumfries – This is the Presiding Officer’s seat, and the PO himself is standing again (the first time this has happened in the devolution period) and back in the party fold.  On the face of it, that dynamic makes this seat a little interesting – and certainly gives it a unique condition – but the fact that the former PO is defending a notional 2,500 majority suggests no change here.  Con hold (Alex Fergusson – returning)

Kilmarnock & Irvine Valley – The shift of this seat from Central to South actually means the SNP lose out on a seat in Central Scotland, and probably means they hold steady  here… which means a net reduction of one seat overall.  What effect will that have on the final outcome?  They defend a 1,300 majority on the new boundaries, and look likely to hold it. SNP hold (Willie Coffey – returning)

Midlothian South, Tweeddale & Lauderdale – Lib Dems look away now.  Christine Grahame has had three attempts to beat the Lib Dems here and hasn’t managed yet.  However, this time conditions are most favourable – a nationally collapsing Lib Dem vote and new boundaries which firmly put this seat in the SNP column by over 1,200 votes.  Jeremy Purvis is a formidable candidate – and its win or bust for him since he’s not on the South Scotland list.  Unfortunately for him, it looks like bust, since I can’t see his personal vote overcoming the national slump and the 1,200 vote deficit.  What works in his favour is that he has beaten Christine Grahame a couple of times before… but this one might be a step too far. SNP (notional) hold (Christine Grahame – returning)

So the constituency outcomes are:

Conservative – 4
Labour – 3
SNP – 2

D’Hondt calculations based on above would lead to seat allocation of:

Seat 1: SNP (Aileen Campbell – returning [#2 on SNP list but Christine Grahame elected in constituency])
Seat 2: Labour (Elaine Murray – returning)
Seat 3: SNP (Adam Ingram – returning [#3 on SNP list])
Seat 4: Lib Dem (Jim Hume – returning)
Seat 5: Labour (Claudia Beamish – new face)
Seat 6: SNP (Joan McAlpine – new face [#4 on SNP list)
Seat 7: Labour (Graeme Pearson – new face)

(Seat 8 would be the SNP’s Aileen McLeod, but the party are 2,000 votes behind the last seat – Labour & the SNP continue to alternate further down the list).

Total seats are:

Labour – 3 + 3 = 6 (5)
SNP –2 + 3 = 5 (5)
 Conservative – 4 + 0 = 4 (4)
Lib Dem – 0 + 1 = 1 (2)

6 female to 10 male
11 returning to 5 new faces

Tactical Voting?
Opportunities are limited here.  As mentioned before, I don’t think the Lib Dems are in with a shot of a second seat, so tactical voting for them is moot.  And even if the split of seats among the other three parties is 3 each, or Lab 4-Con 3-SNP 2, or if the SNP were to lose Kilmarnock to Labour (thus 4-4-1) the overall outcome looks the same.  A list seat compensates each of them for the loss of a constituency.  Net overall outcome is the loss of a Lib Dem and the increase by one Labour MSP from the region.

Jeff does our last region (Glasgow) shortly, then we’ll pull all the results together and analyse what we have.  As we get closer to the election we’ll, ahem, revise and refine some of our predictions and see where if we can work out how Scotland will look on May 6.  Enjoy.

 

Water – Scotland’s Liquid Gold?

Apr 6

Posted by Jeff in Elections | 36 Comments

plugholeI’ve not really had a chance to read the various manifestos that have been festooned upon the masses amid as much pomp, ceremony, media attention and balloons as the parties can muster. I gather Labour’s launch today was hit by a smoke alarm going off, rumours of someone’s ‘pants on fire’ are, as yet, unfounded.

The Lib Dems have pinned much of their election hopes on cash that could be raised from Scottish Water. Money may not grow on trees (as the SNP learned when considering selling off forests) but it might fall out of pipes.

Now, I’m going to try to give this idea the fairest crack of the whip possible, if only to avoid Douglas MacLellan tracking me down and, probably quite fairly, lamping me for being unduly harsh on the Scottish Lib Dems.

So, first of the positives is simply this: it is a relatively new idea. Labour has aped much of the SNP’s policies depriving the electorate of real choice. This suggestion from the Lib Dems provides real choice and is a juicy contribution to the campaign at large.

Second positive is that it is the type of dynamic, ‘outside the box’ solution that Scotland needs to get through this difficult financial period. We don’t have borrowing powers, we don’t have the tax-varying option (yet) and we don’t have an ever-increasing budget. The Tesco Tax has been rebuffed and the parties are circling around Council Tax, sniffing out its potential to close some funding gaps. What else do we have? Well, Scottish Water seems to be right up there as a cash cow so it’s asking to be explored.

Another positive is that companies do this all the time, selling debt on here, factoring debtors there. Who do you think holds your mortage debt? You might want to guess again. The practice has become part and parcel of running an efficient cashflow and if the benefits of early money can exceed the negatives of foregone inflows further into the future, then the approach is worthwhile.

This, to me, is where the Lib Dem plan starts to move into disagreeable PFI territory. Short term gain for long term pain, but I haven’t seen enough detail to make a fair comparison and the little that I can find is maddeningly light on what is actually being proposed. As far as I can make out, the sale of the Scottish Water debt would be covered by a bond issuance (private investors paying cash for guaranteed income over a set period of time) and the difference between the bonds and the debt is £1.5bn. How reliably this is arrived at seems to be anyone’s guess. Certainly my experience (from my current job, in Corporate Finance) is that refinancing is pushing the price of loans up, not down.

So this is neither positive nor negative but…. more detail is desperately required regarding what is being proposed here.

Now, the potential negatives. First up, the proposal states that Scottish Water would be a ‘public benefit corporation’. What does that mean? It sounds nice and fluffy but what sort of public benefit can be left once the debts have been flogged off? My initial suspicion is that there would be a private element to this venture.

Well, thanks to Wikipedia, the best example of an existing pbc are certain NHS Foundation Trusts and the BBC, in all but name at least. That sounds reasonable to me and not so far removed from its current status so a tentative crossing out goes against that worry.

My main concern is that the cost of water in Scotland would increase signifcantly over time in order to satisfy the cost of the private investment (bonds). Caveating the following given my only partial understanding of the proposal, but if you pull out £1.5bn from Scottish Water then you will inevitably have to put it back in at some later date, regardless of what the small print or technical detail says. That is just basic accounting and finance, surely. The Lib Dem proposal is to spend this £1.5bn of money on setting up regional banks (£500m), early intervention (£250m), energy saving (£250m), digital economy (£250m) and a “science nation fund” (£250m). All great ideas, (well, depending on what exactly the “science nation fund” is I suppose) but this cannot be ‘free money’ and it’s important to remember that. This is a cash advance, at a discount, from private investors, and the Effective Interest Rate has to be clear before we embark on this venture, or vote on it for that matter.

Another concern is the fact that the UK Treasury has not looked through the detail of this proposal and there is no guarantee that the amounts raised wouldn’t be simply creamed off the block grant, completely undermining the point of the whole venture.

In short, selling Scottish Water’s debt sounds like an idea that is worthy of further exploration and analysis as the gain may well exceed the pain but the conservative side of me naturally bristles against cashing in on long term considerations for short term benefit and it all just seems a bit too much too soon to be taken too seriously. If only the Lib Dems had checked it out with the Treasury first, it’d seem more plausible.

So, for me, the assumption has to be that this won’t work, certainly not at least until the Lib Dems are able to spell out the detail more clearly.

And they only have four weeks.