THE rumours of the Alba Party's death, or more specifically the oft-heard claims that it was "dead on arrival", have proved to be greatly exaggerated.
For a second Panelbase poll in a row, Alex Salmond's new electoral force is reported to be on 6% of the list vote - which is the magic level of support at which it would start to win a significant number of seats in the Scottish Parliament, and thus do good to the independence cause.
This finding will be a tremendous boost for the party in its battle to be given a fair crack of the whip with the broadcasters, and will also be a timely antidote to the claim that the Greens are the only credible option for voters chasing an independence "supermajority".
The reality is that if both Alba and the Greens can secure more than around 5% of the vote each, they can both make an important contribution towards a large pro-indy majority.
READ MORE: SNP, Greens and Alba to form pro-independence majority, poll predicts
Of course, today's poll has to be placed in the context of earlier surveys showing Alba on a lower figure of 3%, or in one case 2%. But context is the very thing that was missing from much of the commentary on those polls. It was forgotten that all polls are snapshots, not predictions and that it's hardly implausible that a party on 3% of the vote early in a campaign can make it to 5% or 6% by polling day.
It was forgotten that seat projections are generally based on crude assumptions of a uniform swing and that it's absolutely possible that with uneven support across the country, Alba might pick up one or two seats even if it does only take 3% of the national vote.
And above all else, it was forgotten that although Panelbase might be overestimating Alba due to a house effect, it's equally possible that other firms might be underestimating the party due to their own house effects. We simply don't know which firm is closest to the truth, and we won't know until the votes are counted.
Arguably a cause for concern is that Panelbase are showing the SNP on 63 seats, which is 2 seats short of a single-party overall majority. It may be that there's a trade-off between chasing a multi-party supermajority and maximising the SNP's own number of seats.
However, the poll offers reassurance on a couple of other points.
When the creation of Alba was announced, there were fears that the Greens could take a hammering from the new party, but instead we have the ideal outcome of both parties prospering simultaneously - which suggests that there isn't actually all that much overlap between the potential Green and Alba support.
READ MORE: Scotland's second independence vote is far too important to be hurried
There were also concerns that Alba's existence might perpetuate the soap opera of the Sturgeon-Salmond feud and accordingly drain support from independence. But Panelbase shows support for independence at 51%, which means we now have eight polls in a row showing Yes on 50% or higher.
It's also the seventh poll out of eight to show a Yes lead of some description. It's conceivable that the Alba intervention is contributing to excitement about independence and thus helping to keep the Yes vote high.
When a movement fractures into multiple parties, the polling situation is bound to become more complex. But if Panelbase are right, the plus points seem to be firmly outweighing the negatives at the moment: the SNP government is heading for a decisive re-election, and all three leading pro-indy parties have realistic hopes of forming part of a Yes-dominated parliament.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel