Communicating the Labour message

In a recent post I commented on the challenges for communicators. I used a Labour party video as an example and the way it has been rebutted.

Thanks must go to Tory Bear for highlighting this video on YouTube that shows how effective communication can be done. It has been made cheaply but is clearly heartfelt.

As Tory Bear says: "The message behind it is far, far more powerful than anything that has come from the top."

Tellingly, it has not been sent up or attacked by opponents.

The video is here:

How the web changes the rules for communicators

There has been a row going on in the blog world about the accuracy of a Labour party video.

As far as I can gather, Sara Bedford, a Lib Dem, was the first to provide a detailed rebuttal. You can read it here.

Now Guido Fawkes's new initiative 'Guy News' has produced its own response.

The video is at the end of this post.

In the past, political parties would argue over accuracy or simply ignore something they disagreed with. Now party activists or political hobbyists can get stuck in and offer an alternative view.

Communicators need to think hard about what they put out because it is likely to be countered quickly and they will have to be ready to respond or be prepared to ignore the attack.

This is equally true for those in politics and those promoting a commercial product or service.

I suspect that during the 2010 general election campaign will see much more of this.

Stories worth reading

In the Times today, Danny Finklestein reflects on the Queen's speech and people's view of politics

The Lib Dem blogger, Cicero's Songs also looks at the Queen's speech and comments on the principles behind making good laws

And Tristan Mills defines what he means by the free market in his new look blog

Taxpayers' Charter launched

One of my rules for this blog is never to comment on the day job.

Just over three months ago I left The Chartered Institute of Taxation (CIOT) and joined the Association for Consultancy and Engineering (ACE).

I had spent four and a half years at the CIOT. It has been a fascinating and rewarding experience but it was time, for me, to move on and develop my public policy expertise by working on other issues.

During my time at the CIOT I helped campaign for a 'taxpayers' charter'.

Last week it was launched and you can read about it here.

I am breaking my rule, although this isn't any longer the day job so feel I am have some leeway, because I am proud to have helped get the charter into existence.

It should help people navigate through the tax system, especially those on low incomes who cannot afford to pay for tax advice.

And it is an example of the positive contribution the much maligned profession of lobbying can make to developing government policy.

Neil Stockley's challenge

In a previous post, I was speculating on a Lib Dem response to the Cameron theme of the 'big society'.

I suggested that one way to approach the Conservative narrative was to focus on the core liberal principle of making sure people have as much control over their lives as possible.

Neil Stockley posed the following question: "What messages do you believe that the Lib Dems tell about public services / inequality? What story does the party tell?"

Before I directly answer that, it might be useful to quickly review where the parties are at the moment.

New Labour's proposition was that a free market creating wealth can co-exist with strong public services. In fact, New Labour argued you cannot fund public services without such wealth creation. In the last year or so there has been a move towards a more interventionist approach to markets. We have seen the development of policy on financial regulation and a greater emphasis on backing British industry. There has also been a consistent desire to lead people to better decisions, according to Labour lights, on health and social behaviour.

The Cameron proposition is to blame 'big government' and replace it with a 'big society'. Markets would still be free, but like Labour financial markets regulated more, and government would nudge people to do the right thing, according to the lights of conservatism naturally.

All three parties talk about decentralising power and empowering people.

Labour has recently suggested that public services could become independent mutuals while the Conservatives have looked at the Swedish model for schools.

This rather crowds out the Liberal Democrats as they share a lot of these views, hence my suggestion of going back to Smith, Locke, Mill etc.

It is for the policy wonks to work out all the details. And one can argue that this is the direction of travel the party is going in anyway, as are the other two.

Pupil passports, greater freedom for hospitals and more local power all fits in with giving people more control over their lives.

The real challenge for the Lib Dems is to be as distinct as their libertarian cousins while being practical and ensuring they satisfy their public policy objectives.

Clearly, one of those objectives is dealing with inequality. After all it says so on the Lib Dem website.

The problem that arises is that the more you decentralise power and let people make decisions the more inequality you are likely to produce. This is because people will want difference things and that leads to different outcomes. Then again, if what you mean is making sure everyone can make their choices as they see fit, in other words all equally have control over their lives, the messages fit rather nicely.

It all depends on definitions and what you want your policy to do.

On this blog, I generally leave policy to others. My point, I hope, is that one can weave a consistent message if one wishes to.

Things that caught my eye during the week...

An African perspective on the fall of the Berlin Wall - care of Sara Scarlett at Liberal Vision

New from old: A Friendly Society - the Devil's Kitchen makes the libertarian case for the return of the friendly society

The Government that cried 'WOLF' - Angela Harbutt gives her take on the Times report that 41% of people in the UK are unconvinced on climate change and for contrast here is Neil Stockley's reaction to the same story...

Climate change not our problem, say UK voters

UK child migrant apology planned - BBC reports on the story of poor children being deported to Australia where they were mostly put in state institutions

And finally some light-hearted relief...

The challenge to liberals part two

The Guardian has just posted this story - 'Labour's plan for John Lewis public services' - which is a further challenge to the Lib Dems.