BC Election Aftermath

I'm almost inclined to view the election as a backhanded kind of "protest vote", i.e. voters rolling their eyes and deciding a pox on all houses, best to just vote whatever stay-the-governing/opposition-course status quo and get it all over with. 

Thus the high incumbent and incumbent-party reelection rate.

The NDP is controlled by the unions, specifically the public sector unions, and that is why it loses over and over again.

Since the NDP became the main opposition party in 1952 (61 years by 2013) it will have held power for 13 years with 3 election victories.

This was the most left wing NDP campaign I've ever seen: everything public sector is good, everything private sector is bad.

As Keith Baldrey said on the CTV election coverage last night "the problem isn't Carole James, the problem is that the NDP just hits a wall in support below that of the Liberals (and you could basically go back to the 1979 election and replace Liberal with 'anti NDP coalition' and that will have been true for 24 of 34 years).

Even during a recession with a government mired in scandal and an unpopular premier, the NDP couldn't win.

It's time to replace the NDP with a broad based center left coalition that isn't dominated by unions and isn't intrisinically hostile to the private sector (and that doesn't mean I think everything should be privatized).

"It's time to replace the NDP with a broad based center left coalition that isn't dominated by unions and isn't intrisinically hostile to the private sector (and that doesn't mean I think everything should be privatized)."

Agreed.

I also think its time to leave "Identity Politics" behind. Which party elected both the first physically disabled MLA in decades and the first Japanese MLA ever (both women)? Hint, it wasn't the NDP.

Stockholm, I agree, on social issues like crime, the NDP did move to the right with the get tough on crime talk and no more talk of legalizing marijuana.

On economics, as I said, this was clearly the most left wing campaign I've ever seen, with the proposed moratorium on run of the river (which, as the NDP well knows, would kill of the private companies involved and leave all the projects to be bought out by B.C Hydro where they can be run by unionized public sector employees) and their talk of 'take back your province'.

It may not have been left wing enough for a lot of the people here, but that isn't really surprising and doesn't really mean anything.

I expect a lot of flak over my position, I don't care.  I think the results just speak for themselves: the NDP/CCF has been in government for 13 of 61 years, and for 5 of those years, they governed despite getting a lesser share of the vote.

The NDP wins occasionaly whenever the natural governing party, the coalition of 'free enterprisers' screws up bad enough, but clearly B.C isn't all that far off from Alberta in terms of being a one party governing province (yes, the elections are a lot closer).

BTW, I was one of those people who voted Green to protest the NDP opposing the carbon tax.  I voted NDP in 2005.

The CCF/NDP has been in power in Saskatchewan for about 50 of the last 65 years. The Ontario Tories ruled for 42 straight years. Rules are made to be broken.

I don;t know why you don't vote for Campbell and the BC Liberals they seem to offer exactly what you seem to want the NDP to be - pro-free enterprise, pro-privatization, to hell with the poor - while making a phony gestures about land claims and global warming so that upper middle class Vancouver people don't feel guilty about voting for them.

Quote:

The Green Party got a humiliatingly low 8% of the vote. Less than they got in 2001 or 2005.

They weren't the only party to get less votes.  The BC NDP got 83,843 less votes in 2009 than they did in 2005.  That's a massive amount of voters to alienate for a party that wasn't even in power. 

It was interesting watching David Schreck on CBC beaming with glee about STV being defeated and then asked whether Carol James should step down.  He replied that it was absolutely normal for the BC NDP to be out of power and a perfectly acceptable result.  That Gordon Cambell was getting to govern with complete unimpeded power for 12 years with less than a 50% mandate was the system working as it should in his opinion.  That's the impression I get of the BC NDP, they are more interested in finding a niche for themselves than they are in making our province more democratic or socialist.  The BC NDP will continue to alienate voters and bleed support for the forseeable future, I don't see a lot of evidence that they have any intention or strategy to reverse this process if it has even dawned on them that it is a problem. 

I suspect that any other non-governing party in the world that lost that amount of votes from one election to the next would be troubled by the result and engage in some introspection and perhaps reform.  I believe this comfort with defeat is a uniquely Canadian social democratic phenomenon. 

I think the problem exists primarily with the executive of the party and I have a lot of sympathy for the membership and their continual efforts, it can't be easy.

"and being left to fight an election without any real forces on the ground.  In the past, the NDP’s strength has been its organization of rank and file activists that bring the vote out on election day.:

On election day there were 10 polling stations at the location where I was working in Vancouver False Creek - there was NOT ONE NDP scrutineer there at anytime during the day and apparently none at the Roundhouse for the advance poll.

In fact one voter asked me an Elections BC official for the day why there were no NDP'ers supervising the voting. I didn't answer but someone else suggested she phone the NDP and ask them.

It looks like while the NDP popular vote is up a bit that the number of people voting for the NDP is down so perhaps some of there supporters saw the writing on the wall and stayed home.

" the first Japanese MLA ever"

She was featured on both of the major newscasts here tonight - quite a story - her Canadian born father interned during the Second World War in the Interior and getting elected 60 years to the day that the Japanese Canadians got the right to vote.

Also the Liberals elected at least 2 Chinese Canadians - three Indo-Canadians

The Saskatchewan P.C and most of the Liberals did rebrand themselves by becoming the so called 'Sask' Party.

So, that's actually an example in my favor, not in yours.

Well, I see you are having to demonize everybody you disagree with as usual, and I've argued with you enough for today. So, have a good day.

I could rebut all your nonsense, but hopefully there will be less extreme people personality wise disagreeing with my comments with whom I can have a rational conversation.

Politics101 wrote:

"and being left to fight an election without any real forces on the ground.  In the past, the NDP’s strength has been its organization of rank and file activists that bring the vote out on election day.:

On election day there were 10 polling stations at the location where I was working in Vancouver False Creek - there was NOT ONE NDP scrutineer there at anytime during the day and apparently none at the Roundhouse for the advance poll.

In fact one voter asked me an Elections BC official for the day why there were no NDP'ers supervising the voting. I didn't answer but someone else suggested she phone the NDP and ask them.

It looks like while the NDP popular vote is up a bit that the number of people voting for the NDP is down so perhaps some of there supporters saw the writing on the wall and stayed home.

In elections past, myself along with many of my relatives used to do that stuff for the NDP. I've done every kind of NDP volunteer work on E-Day: Poll Captain, ran Zone Houses, inside and outside scruntineer, runner, driver, you name it I've done it. That was a different time. The NDP machine isn't what it used to be, hence the fall in actual number of NDP votes across the Province. A large part of the overall decline in voting can be blamed on the decline of the NDP volunteer base.

These days, they are lucky to get my vote.

"On election day there were 10 polling stations at the location where I was working in Vancouver False Creek - there was NOT ONE NDP scrutineer there at anytime during the day and apparently none at the Roundhouse for the advance poll."

That's good news. I'm relieved that the NDP isn't wasting valuable volunteer resources in a no hope riding like Vancouver-False Creek.

Unfortunately, its a fact of life that much fewer people these days want to volunteer and knock on doors for any party. Society has changed. Back in the 1960s when the NDP perfected the "Riverdale model" where every single door in every single poll would be contacted 4 times during a campaign - are long gone. Back then, there were vast numbers of housewives etc... who were willing to do that legwork. Nowadays, much, much, much fewer people have the time or the desire to do volunteer work for ANY cause - political or otherwise. I suppose that the BC Liberals - with their vast amounts of $$ can make up for this by simply paying people to campaign for them. The NDP has to rely 100% on volunteers and the number of people who are willing to endure the abuse of knocking on doors is falling with the evry year.

Some truth about both parties not covering all polling stations because they are in a hard to win riding but my polling station was in that part of False Creek that was only a couple of blocks from Davie and Burrard and had a fairly strong NDP turnout - haven't seen all the poll numbers from there but the one I helped count was won by McNeil by one vote.

Yes the days of knocking on doors is becoming a thing of the past - too many people freakout when some stranger comes to the door.

http://www.cicnews.com/2009/04/canada-maintain-immigration-levels-2009-r...

http://www.canadavisa.com/about-british-columbia.html  

It's a monopolized media and the message it was sending was of fear and of ignorance as the majority of voters are clueless unlike the many that search out informative spots on the net.  Campbell didn't have a superior anything but he has the media, the only real media with TV, Print and Radio to its credit and the only real voice for many.  As there are many new in this country that don't even understand our politics much less speak the language along with a great deal of ignorance of how the system actually works as public apathy at all time high. 

And a Strong economy is that why BC has record numbers of immigrants arriving while records numbers are losing their jobs?  Are immigrants creating new jobs?  Or are they taking existing jobs while driving down wages while greatly reducing services they did not contribute to as immigrants use up programs more than natives while government makes serious cuts to necessary services?  And despite the steady decline of jobs and small business said to crumble under additional costs of $4000 for the year.  Is that why after 8 years of prosperity BC in the hole and services are left in dire want?  While those who fought for this country find themselves dying on Vancouver streets as it's a Stronger Canada than ever before or so the Media Giant's employees say as they prepare to host the Olympics as Campbell's pictures graces their pages more than any other face out there.  Except Robertson but he is something to look at least as when Campbell was on everyone wanted to turn him off and here he is going strong.  How does that work?

Quote:

melovesproles, theLiberals lost votes too.

I'd expect the incumbent government to lose votes especially when the Premier is going for a threepeat and is mired in scandal.  An opposition party which wants to gain power but gets 85,000 less votes than the last election is a pretty good indication of a failed campaign.  I was going to say I agree with the John Kerry/Carol James analogies being made but didn't Kerry increase the Democrat's vote tally?  There really isn't another party in the world that is as comfortable with losing as the NDP.

Quote:

I think the NDP got a higher popular vote percentage than they would have got if the election had been confined to Babble posters.

That definitely wouldn't have been true in 2005.  The loss of interest in the NDP by activists and the politically obsessed and the correlation with the massive decline in votes for the party isn't a coincidence.  The partisans on here happily write off progressive voters as too high maintenance, they aren't worrying a tad about the drop in voter turnout for they are once again where they and Dave Schreck feel comfortable-in opposition with an electoral system that might once ever twenty years or so produce a wonky enough result to vault their milquetoast, flavourless brand into power.

The only upside I can see out of Carol James remaining leader of the NDP is that let's face it, her replacement would probably be even worse-some good ol boy asshole like Farnworth.

The clear winner of this election was the Not Bother Voting party-they increased their vote share and their future looks bright!

Politics101 wrote:

"Every single poll in our riding was covered by NDP scrutineers for the whole day as well as for the count, etc."

Mind telling us which riding that was.

Thanks

 

Kootenay West (66.85%) -- actually, I've since found out that a small group in one area wasn't covered but most polls were covered all day.

Doesn't anyone get the irony of the tone that's running through this thread -- "I wouldn't vote for and/or support the NDP but boy are they doing a shitty job at contacting people and getting their message out"? I talked with someone today who said he didn't vote NDP because of the equity policy, because the party can't expect to "appoint" someone (there was a nomination meeting but this guy isn't a member) and get people to vote for that candidate. You just can't please people when you're the NDP, apparently. Some think we're too right, others too left, the media and David Suzuki campaign for the BC Liberals and a whole bunch of people who don't take the time to get involved in the process whine about how the party doesn't turn out to their satisfaction. 

Tell that to my mother who is caring for my elderly father who suffered brain damage (he's threatening her and he requires constant care and supervision) during his recent heart surgery -- they can't get enough home care and he has to wait two months, minimum, for a long-term care bed. When he does get placed, she will have no place to live because the costs of that care, while minimal for the service, will mean that she can't afford to keep their small condo.

Thanks for standing up for your principles...I know it will be a source of consolation to my mom and others in her position.

Vansterdam Kid wrote:

Defending BC Hydro as the sole provider of energy in this province is easy and doing so doesn't automatically make someone a hard-left ideologue. Making a pro-BC Hydro argument aptly gives the NDP more economic credibility. And I'm certain that a strong, publically held, BC Hydro is quite popular. Maybe people don't care whether our Liquor Stores are government owned - but you can be sure they do when it comes to BC Hydro. It not only affects your wallet personally, it affects the BC economy, giving our province a competitive advantage. Our public power provider provides cheap energy private companies cannot ever hope to match. While it will need more capital to increase its power generation, therefore lowering its costs to British Columbians and increasing its export capacity, it's not as if private companies don't need the capital to build new power generation projects either. Furthermore, they obviously need to have a profit margin to motivate the investment in the first place. Profit from BC Hydro is pumped back into the company, or into government coffers, therefore it stays in BC. Private companies who invest in power generation are not necessarily British Columbian, therefore we don't get all the benefits of their investment. So, providing British Columbian residents and businesses with cheap, green, energy means that it's illogical to allow private competition. Every other jurisdiction with private power generation has higher rates. Our lower energy costs give us a competitive advantage when it comes to other jurisdictions. And considering the cost of living expenses companies and workers have to incur for being based out of Vancouver, we can use all the competitive advantages we can get.

The 'no need for a profit', 'can make investments with lower interest rates' and 'all the money stays local' are the exact same arguments Clement Atlee used to argue in favor of nationalization of the 'commanding heights' 60 years ago.  While no doubt a lot of the opposition to nationalization is based on biased papers written by people financed by the private sector, I believe most independent university economists and other researchers have also found that, in most areas, public sector ownership is unsuccesful compared to private sector ownership.  This tends not to be true for services like health, education and the like, but is true for many other things.

The basic problem, as we saw with B.C Hydro, is that having no profit motive, there is no incentive to innovate.  In fact, the incentive works entirely the other way.  All of the motivations are in favor of the status quo so as not to annoy the established interests like the unionized employees and the management who are all used to doing things in certain ways.  Of course, B.C Hydro has many highly skilled and educated people who, no doubt, would like to try new things, but in most cases, they are overruled by management.

For instance, it took years (and Barry Penner) before B.C Hydro allowed people to generate their own energy and put any surplus back into the grid.  Why bother to change when you've done things the same way for so long?  It's no surprise that practically all (at least that I'm aware of) of the ideas for new power generation come from people in the private sector and not from B.C Hydro or that run of the river projects are developed by private sector interests.

But, hey, if you're the NDP, demonize the private sector and condemn those wanting to (horrors!) make a profit.

As to the 'cheapness' of the electricity produced by B.C Hydro.  B.C happens to have great geography allowing for hydroelectrical power that can be produced at cheap rates.  That is their advantage, not the advantage of being publicly owned.

The lesson: Good public policy can be a catalyst for gains from skilled emigration when combined with a healthy economy that can make real use of the skills highly educated migrants have to offer.

http://www.triec.ca/news/story/75

Established immigrants increasingly stuck in low-education jobs, study finds

Globe and Mail

http://www.bclocalnews.com/greater_vancouver/northshoreoutlook/news/44484017.html?period=W&

Paul Martin:

 "I would not make the comparison with the Great Depression of the '30s. This is not that (but) it is the most severe financial crisis since the Second World War. This is a banking crisis that goes right to the heart of the financial systems in the United States, Europe and Japan.

"Everybody really knew that the U.S. real estate market was overbuilt, that it was a bubble. A lot of us raised the issue that this idea that you can compensate for declining income by raising your house prices and you can continue to incur debt - we knew that (system) was going to blow ... but some people said 'It's going to happen next year' and then 'It will happen next year' and year after year it didn't happen and eventually you build up a feeling, 'Well, my gosh, it may never happen.'"

And somebody has got to point out that this thing blew and the most knowledgeable people in the world - not just bankers but (leaders of) industries didn't have a clue that it was going to happen."

You can compensate for declining income by raising your house prices and you can continue to incur debt-we knew that system was going to blow? 

Well that's certainly a surprise as Mr. Martin it did happen as housing bubble has burst.  And what are Harper/Campbell trying to do but compensate for income by raising house prices once again with immigrants but only the market is barely moving as prices along with interest rates are unbearably low.   And what did the bankers and leaders believe was going to happen that they would blow the place before anyone found out? 

To what extent do you see the media influencing our view of society, of politics, of the state of the world in general? To what extent is the media going to win or lose  the election?  Do you think the effects can even be more dynamic with a media monopoly where the message is consistent through all mediums as outlined in Liberal Communication Strategy along with having Can West sitting on boards and former members working for them? 

I think that the media both shapes and reflects our view of society. It is a powerful influence in Canadian society today. It shapes our views because so many people rely on the media for information, and there is no such thing as judgment free or unbiased news. The news media, through what they report (and what they don't report), and the pictures they show (and the pictures they don't show), can make people believe pretty much anything. Sometimes the media acts as judge and jury. Look at the way the media portrayed Glen Clark like he had already been convicted when they raged on his home and private life.  And his government was in the daily news non-stop as Can west was fixated on the  Ministries that was before but now that Campbell is in and conditions are the worst they have ever been BC Children are no longer of interest to Global or the Provincial Sun or Van Province Newspaper or Radio stations or anyone else for that matter it seems except for the Ministry workers themselves who said they were running on empty as 60% shortage that will cut those kids down to size.   Its go Campbell go you're the one to keep those kids down and get them to the stroll along with getting rid of the poor with either low paying jobs or no jobs and homes as low income move to the streets to make way for new Canadians.  Be the monkey on their backs.

A great example of what the media can do to a politician's career is the Dean scream. A sound made for only a few seconds was rebroadcast a million times, jokes were made, and Dean's career took a nosedive.

I imagine its chilling for those who are either unemployed or employed during this recession and this being the province with the largest unemployed for several months in a row while unprecedented numbers enter BC.  Making BC that much stronger some how or so the Media says along with BC Liberals and of course Harper is no doubt a big help along with Railgate which despite its obvious public interest remains out of the daily news.

Campbell's Strong Immigration during Strong Economic Uncertainly and High unemployment + Inflatinary Prices is just what BC's unemployed workers needed at this time was to fight for non existent jobs and a place on the sidewalk.. 

Strong Immigration + Strong Unemployment + Global Recession = A Strong Economy  

Wrong Its more like

 Strong Immigration + Strong Unemployment + Strong Economic Uncertainly + Carbon Tax =  Economic Disaster + High Unemployment + Reduced services + Increased Taxes + Inflated prices

BC Voters Sure Know How To Pick a Winner, but its not like they didn't have a great deal of help as all those bright smiling faces that give us the news and the low downs didn't make it all a nightmare for BC children who are now going to have to figure out how to live through Mr. Campbell's new cuts to their existance.

Loretta wrote:

Doesn't anyone get the irony of the tone that's running through this thread -- "I wouldn't vote for and/or support the NDP but boy are they doing a shitty job at contacting people and getting their message out"?

Not really. I've been getting the impression that people who vote NDP, and volunteered for them in the past, are criticizing the NDP for being kind of - bleh. Look at the voter turnout; I think most people will agree with me (cause barely half bothered to vote, compared to 70-80% twenty years ago).

I voted for them because they're better than the alternative on most issues. But I can't very well volunteer and donate to a party I disagree with on some important issues, ie. the NDP's support for Gateway, opposition to the Carbon Tax, support for removing land from the ALR to deal with land claims, certain candidates hard-right drug policy views (Gabriel Yiu - who made the Liberal look reasonable in his riding) and the decision to whack their own candidates over the knuckles because of inane controversies like Mabel Elmore saying the word 'zionist' or Ray Lam having dumb pictures on facebook (not even his own facebook page btw, but, w/e.) Not to mention how dismissive Carole James was to young people during that whole incident, "it was, you know, his age..." Hey Carole, it's Colonel Mustard get a clue. Zionist isn't an anti-Semitic slur and we're in the 21st century so learn how to use the internets and facebooks would you?

Loretta,

"Doesn't anyone get the irony of the tone that's running through this thread -- "I wouldn't vote for and/or support the NDP but boy are they doing a shitty job at contacting people and getting their message out"?"

I find that's the case in most elections.  There's always some reason the NDP can't be voted for.  Must be easy on the Right since it doesn't matter how much your leader is disliked or what your policies are you can always say if you don't vote for us you'll get the NDP.

Its clear that the NDP isn't the problem as most babblers can't even agree with each other so I fail to see how the NDP could please all of them.  There will always be a number of policies that someone will find unacceptable.

The carbon tax and run-of-rivers are issues which were supported by 2 parties out of 3 with only the NDP being against.  Yet being a choice for those opposed to those policies was found to be unacceptable by so-called progressives.   Well that's tough, but at some point people will have to realize parties will disagree on some issues and you have to make a choice.  If the carbon tax is more important to you than leading Canada in child poverty year after year then you have an easy choice to make, vote Liberal or Green.  No one should be complaining they have no one to vote for.

Therefore the lack of participation displayed in the low turn-out was inexcuseable.  Not only did half the population find it too hard to mark a ballot in support of a political party but they also found it too onerous to show up and vote Yes or No to a new electoral system that might have fixed some of the problems they complain about in politics.  At some point one must assume democracy is just too much responsibility for too many people.

Vansterdam Kid wrote:

Not really. I've been getting the impression that people who vote NDP, and volunteered for them in the past, are criticizing the NDP for being kind of - bleh. Look at the voter turnout; I think most people will agree with me (cause barely half bothered to vote, compared to 70-80% twenty years ago).

Yes, the right seriously promotes voter apathy and cynicism so that more progressive voters will stay away and, guess what, it works!

Vansterdam Kid wrote:

I voted for them because they're better than the alternative on most issues. But I can't very well volunteer and donate to a party I disagree with on some important issues...

Ah yes, the NDP is imperfect and people makes mistakes but like many, rather than getting involved to make it better, it's easier to be an armchair politician and shout criticism from the sidelines.

Sorry, remind. I missed your supportive post upthread -- I appreciate it and your strong and informed position on the NDP. I think that, for many here, rather than admit that they are being influenced by the crap promulgated in the msm (it permeates our culture so we are all subject to its effect), people here point the finger at the NDP, often in misinformed ways. They believe what they read and then use it as an excuse not to get engaged in the process -- and now it's the NDP's fault that they walked by an empty campaign office and nobody called them. Waah!

I also think that there are right-wing infiltrators on this board, dividing and conquering, an ages-old tactic, to which it seems many have been susceptible. Free thinkers, all. I hope it's of comfort when they can't get much-needed surgery (especially when you live "beyond Hope"), when your kids need special ed, or when their parents need long-term care.

Carole did an amazing job - as a Leader of the NDP, a woman and a person of aboriginal descent, she was up against power, in a big way. She wasn't the leader choice I supported but she has handled herself, while imperfectly as do all human beings, in a strong and graceful manner. Her performance in the leader's debate was so strong that Campbell cancelled the next radio debate and her concession speech spoke truth to power, in spite of her obvious heartbreak. I hope she stays on -- she will make a fine Premier.

Remind, my dad is way beyond anyone caring for him at home -- he's bordering on violence since the brain damage, is incontinent and doesn't sleep more than 2 hours on most nights. I live far away and have an 8 year old so leaving here to care for him just can't be managed. Our family is in ongoing conversation about what supports we can provide...it's a sad way to go out of this life.

Thank you Loretta, and I agree completely with your first 3 paragraph conclusions.

In respect to your father, in juxtaposition with my mother, I am, or was a nurse, so it was much easier for me to take on my mother's care burden, than it would be for those not trained to do so. But she was much the same as you decribe your father as being. I could not have done this though, had I had small children as you do.

Home support came in for 4 hrs a day so I could sleep, it was partially subsidized with us paying the remainder. I also paid out of my own pocket, to have a private nurse come in if I needed free time for other. When my son in law died resulting from a car accident, it cost us large for private care for her while we were contending with our daughters and granddaughters resulting needs, for several weeks after the fact.

Thank goodness you family is working together on this, mom and I were not so fortunate,  mine did not bother with her after her stroke, literally.

Perhaps money contributions of small amounts from everyone in the family, could go towards his long term care costs, and thus your mom could stay in her home?

And could she not access provincial pension top up funding for herself, once he is in a home?

Had this had to your family in the 90's you would not be facing this, Gordo has done much to harm families, and seniors, but heyy the carbon tax is worth it right?

If James wants to stay on a lot of us will fight to make sure she is allowed to. 

"The NDP got 45% of the vote on Barriett's last try, BTW. It has never done as well since."

So much for change for the sake of change then.  Another reason to stay with Carole.

Loraetta wrote:

Yes, the right seriously promotes voter apathy and cynicism so that more progressive voters will stay away and, guess what, it works!

So why didn't the NDP do a competent job promoting voter participation and optimism then? It worked pretty well for Obama didn't it?

Loretta wrote:

Her performance in the leader's debate was so strong that Campbell cancelled the next radio debate and her concession speech spoke truth to power, in spite of her obvious heartbreak. I hope she stays on -- she will make a fine Premier.

If James had what it takes to be Premier the NDP would have won the election. Sorry to sound harsh but there is no excuse this time for not winning. The voters have spoken. Fewer people voted for the party than in the last election.

James is the first leader since Dave Barrett to have been given a second try after a loss, and she's not going to get a third. The NDP got 45% of the vote on Barrett's last try, BTW. It has never done as well since.