You are here: Home » Comment »

Making big politics small again

April 23, 2012 11:38 am

Author:

Tracey Hill

Share this Article

I was recently lucky enough to enjoy a long conversation about politics with a couple of friends who have different views from mine, without it turning into an argument. Lewes-based, they tend to vote for independent, Green or Lib Dem candidates, very much based on the personalities concerned.

Talking about a particular independent councillor, what they valued was that she took an active interest in local issues and got back to people about them even if the news was not good. She has a regular newsletter, which is mainly about what she is doing and which does not contain much that is negative about other parties.

Clearly this profile is very positive and the councillor they have in mind is doing a lot to serve the local community. What this made me realise is that although we have councillors, and local activists, who are doing all these things, we are simply not getting the message out that it’s happening. We have fallen into a habit of thinking that it’s enough to do the work, and have forgotten that if we don’t tell people we’re doing it, they will assume that we are not. We have to start blowing our own trumpet more about the work that’s being done, by elected representatives and others, across the city. Not everything we do is party political by any means: handling casework and representing local views are often not related to “big politics” at all.

My friends also expressed a general scepticism and weariness with mainstream politics, which they felt was all about negativity and point-scoring, with no party genuinely being better than any other. Exploring this more, I did get the impression that at least some of this was due to the way politics is dealt with in the media, with its over-emphasis on conflict, personalities and fluff that doesn’t really matter much, like who rides which horse, for example. I mean, who cares? And prime minister’s question time really does not help. The Today programme, the daily argument where ministers are constantly harangued and interrupted by interviewers intent on placing traps rather than exploring issues, has done a huge amount to put people off politics.

The best political events I have experienced are those where an informed person, particularly a minister, can explain, away from the glare of the media, why certain policies were followed, and give some of the context behind decisions. You rarely get this in newspapers or on television or radio where it’s all about headline-grabbing. Unfortunately, the net result of all of this is a general loss of interest in politics generally, with people being unable to distinguish between the parties because the real issues that matter – basically, how effective are the policies? – are so rarely explored.

What to do about this? I don’t think we can avoid being negative entirely. It’s the job of the opposition to challenge the party in power and point out the deficiencies in what they are doing. If Labour did not challenge the coalition government, there are plenty of things which would have gone unsaid and unnoticed, and there have been times when a good strong opposition has brought about change. So we must do this, but we could perhaps do a better job of explaining why it’s necessary and an integral part of an open, working democracy.

I think it comes down to communication again. Taking the time to talk to people about what’s going on – not “canvassing” for their vote in the run-up to elections, but keeping a dialogue going all year round, and making sure that people know that we’re doing it. Engaging people on local as well as national issues, fostering genuine political debate, and doing our best to support communities through local campaigns. And we also need to have plenty of positive things to say both locally and nationally, spreading the word about what we’re doing, and developing great ideas for what we would do if we were in power at the moment.

As a local party, we do know all this. It’s a matter of developing a culture of doing this so that it’s taken as read that it’s what we’re about.

If we can manage it, I think we do have the ability to change people’s minds about politics.

AlanGiles

“The Today programme, the daily argument where ministers are constantly harangued and interrupted by interviewers intent on placing traps rather than exploring issues, has done a huge amount to put people off politics.”

But I think listeners are sometimes (often?) happy to hear some rather pompous and self-satisified individuals taken down a bit.

This isn’t a party political point – all three parties have dissembling and arrogant spokespersons and they often deserve what is meeted out to them.
Brumanuensis

I share Alan’s view on ‘Today’. Paxman and Humphry’s can be annoying, but their abrasiveness is sometimes a useful corrective to the rather self-regarding attitude of our politicians.

I do agree communication is key. The problem can partly be traced to John Stuart Mill’s observation about Conservatism being necessarily stupid. Not, as Mill noted, that Conservatives are all stupid, but because it is very easy to argue conservative points and comparatively hard to argue the contrary. Conservatism appeals to self-interest, which is generally nearest to people’s hearts. Liberals and social-democrats often have to appeal to rather more altruistic motives, which everyone would say they share, but in practice often don’t bother to follow.

If you say ‘I want to increase income tax by 2 pts in order to fund an expansion the education budget’, you might persuade people. If you just sav ‘I want to increase income tax by 2 pts’, people will get irate. If, on the other hand, you said ‘I want to cut income tax by 2 pts’, most people will get behind you and give you the benefit of the doubt, because it matches their self-interest. Similarly, if you say ‘we have to pay down our debts and reduce the deficit, because that’s what a household would do’, then no matter how little economic sense it makes, people will grasp it. Trying to argue the merits of counter-cyclical fiscal policy is a hard thing to do, although Obama made a decent fist of it early on in his Presidency. Then he gave up, to his detriment.

The short summary is that politics must be personal. People respond well to anecdotes, not data. Everyone has heard stories on canvassing rounds from people who claim to know immigrants sponging off the state. It doesn’t matter if you quote facts to show that most immigrants don’t fall into that category. People respond to actual impressions, over abstract concepts. Until the left articulates a person-centred, rather than argument-centred, rhetoric to support its views, we will keep losing to the Tories.

I recommend Drew Westen’s ‘The Political Brain’, on this topic.
Peter MacDonald

As regards the point about the Today Programme, I must say I find myself shouting “answer the question” more often than “let him/her answer the question” when listing to Humphreys et al. in the morning!

That said, I also think that many politicians themselves have fallen into a lazy habit of deciding what sound bites they will repeat, and repeating them every chance they get. I think this only encourages the media to use those sound bites, and generally oversimplify complex arguments.

Brumanuensis mentiones immigration – benefits claimants are also often treated in the same way – a few examples of cheats used by both the media and politicians to claim that we must “crack down” when, in fact, the percentage of benefits cheats is quite low.

I quite agree with you, Tracey, when you say the best political discussions you’ve heard have been away from the media – but the problem as I see it is that many politicians do not WANT to speak away from the media – they want the media and the coverage. Once upon a time campaigning MP’s held town hall debates, public meetings, and other such events to get their message out. While these have not completely vanished, they are certainly on the wane and, in “safe seats”, virtually non-existant.
Uglyfatbloke

An excellent piece, and I’m afraid it explains the steady growing success of the Gnats over the last several years. They are relentlessly positive, which does get a bit wearing after a while, but is more effective in the long run. Under TB and GB Labour becane the party of ‘do as your told’ rather than the party of personal liberty, the party that is opposed to scrapping the lords and to democratic reform because power is an end in itself.
I’m inclined to agree that people like seeing politicians getting slapped around a bit and that they get annoyed when politicians are let off the hook – they still remember that at least 400 or so MPs were let off for stealing on their expenses. All three parties should be ashamed for not dumping swathes of MPs.
http://twitter.com/TraceyMHill Tracey Hill

Thanks for the comments. Re the Today programme, yes, I’m sure some people like that style of debate but I remain convinced that there are just as many who don’t feel that it really helps us get to the important stuff, which is what choices are being made, and what those decisions are actually achieving. Programmes like Today, and a lot of other coverage, place too much focus on the personal attributes of politicians and not enough on the effect of their actions. There are other – I think better – ways of talking politics which allow more information to come out, and which will alienate fewer people.

Latest

News
Labour Equal marriage amendment gets Tory backing

From: HERBERT, Nick Sent: 20 May 2013 16:29 To: HERBERT, Nick Subject: Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill – voting today Dear Colleague Thank you for your support for the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill at Second Reading. You will be aware of the amendments tabled by Tim Loughton and others (new Clauses 10 & 11) to extend civil partnerships to heterosexual couples I have no issue with the principle of this proposal, but I am very worried that adding this measure to the [...]
Read more →
News
Whitewash report claims that there’s no such thing as DWP “league tables” for sanctions

Whilst the Westminster village has been working itself up into a lather over the rise of UKIP and when/if there should be an EU referendum, the DWP snuck out a report on the evidence of DWP league tables that we brought you recently. It’s a total whitewash. The report – which you can read here – argues that claims of a league table are entirely down to individual managers at a number of job centres. You could call it the [...]
Read more →
Featured
Equal Marriage is the most important thing – but Labour can’t let Equal Civil Partnerships get the “long grass” treatment

By Mark Ferguson

So after toying with support for the Tim Loughton amendment over the weekend, Labour has decided to abstain on that particular amendment, and propose their own. Let’s be clear – the most important news today is that Equal Marriage will pass through the commons, and that’s a cause for huge celebration for all but an isolated minority in the Labour Party. I made clear this morning that I didn’t buy the argument that supporting the Loughton amendment would stop or [...]
Read more →
News
Labour’s Equal marriage Bill amendment on Civil Partnerships

Labour MPs will be encouraged to back this amendment – rather than that of Tory backbencher Tim Loughton – today: House of Commons Monday 20 May 2013 CONSIDERATION OF BILL New Amendments handed in are marked thus * MARRIAGE (SAME SEX COUPLES) BILL MANUSCRIPT AMENDMENT (a) As an Amendment to Secretary Maria Miller’s proposed New Clause (Review of civil partnership) (NC16):- Kate Green (a)(a * Line 8, leave out from ‘practicable’ to end of Clause, and insert ‘and include a [...]
Read more →
News
Is Ed Miliband picking a fight with Google?

By Mark Ferguson

In his interview with the Observer yesterday, Ed Miliband singled out Google as a company who aren’t “living up to their responsibilities” on tax, saying: ” I don’t think [Google] are living up to their responsibilities at the moment, and I will be very clear about that on Wednesday. It is part of a culture of irresponsibility. If everyone approaches their tax affairs as some of these companies have approached their tax affairs we wouldn’t have a health service, we wouldn’t [...]
Read more →