Monday, February 06, 2006
Voting early
Ballot papers in the Liberal Democrat leadership race will be sent out to members this week, leaving precious little time for the various candidates to influence the electorate. As the Western Mail reports many members will fill them in and return them within a few days of the mailing dropping on their doormats. I believe though that most will watch the Question Time session featuring all three candidates on Thursday before doing so.
Simon Hughes arrives in Swansea at 12 noon today as part of his campaign and then will join the other candidates in the National Assembly before the Welsh hustings at 7.30pm tonight in Cardiff University. However, the Western Mail chooses to focus on Sir Menzies Campbell as the "Lib Dem leadership favourite". Really!
On a Liberal Democrat forum last night there was much discussion about negative campaigning. One member made the entirely reasonable point that whatever positive claim a candidate may make about himself will be interpreted negatively by the media. So it seems is the case with the Western Mail interview:
Sir Menzies Campbell, who has been acting leader since Charles Kennedy's admissions of alcoholism led him to stand down, took a coded swipe at his former boss as he promised to take tough decisions about the party's future and to provide more "clarity".
The passage that I found most interesting contains more than a nod in the direction of the so-called 'Orange bookers':
In a heavy hint that the party's distinctive pledge for a higher tax rate for big earners will go, he said, "I would not have any trouble defending it again, but you cannot create a tax policy around one tax rate," he said.
Those comments will be seen as a dig against Mr Hughes, the choice of the party's left and a believer in higher taxes. So too will Sir Menzies's claim the party "should not be afraid of" the private sector.
There is though nothing new in any of these remarks, other than perhaps the emphasis. The party has always advocated a mixed economy model in its approach towards providing public services, as have Labour for that matter. The difference between us and Labour is that we put quality and universality above artificial choice. The important consideration for us is the delivery of a high quality, value-for-money service. I do not believe that Simon Hughes sits outside of that tradition. Equally, Simon has already said that he believes that the 50p top rate tax policy has fulfilled its purpose and is advocating other forms of progressive taxation.
It is almost as if two different elections are being fought - the one amongst party members, the other in the media. The biggest blight on British politics in the last decade or two has been in the way that the media seek to act as interpreter of politician's words so as to set their own agenda. This process has been aided by the politicians themselves, saying one thing publicly but briefing seperately in private. It is called 'playing the game' and Sir Menzies Campbell is more adept at it than most.
If there is one thing I would like to see come out of the Liberal Democrat leadership election it is that one or more candidate will reject this approach and speak directly to voters openly and from the heart. Like many voters I am heartily fed-up with spin.
Simon Hughes arrives in Swansea at 12 noon today as part of his campaign and then will join the other candidates in the National Assembly before the Welsh hustings at 7.30pm tonight in Cardiff University. However, the Western Mail chooses to focus on Sir Menzies Campbell as the "Lib Dem leadership favourite". Really!
On a Liberal Democrat forum last night there was much discussion about negative campaigning. One member made the entirely reasonable point that whatever positive claim a candidate may make about himself will be interpreted negatively by the media. So it seems is the case with the Western Mail interview:
Sir Menzies Campbell, who has been acting leader since Charles Kennedy's admissions of alcoholism led him to stand down, took a coded swipe at his former boss as he promised to take tough decisions about the party's future and to provide more "clarity".
The passage that I found most interesting contains more than a nod in the direction of the so-called 'Orange bookers':
In a heavy hint that the party's distinctive pledge for a higher tax rate for big earners will go, he said, "I would not have any trouble defending it again, but you cannot create a tax policy around one tax rate," he said.
Those comments will be seen as a dig against Mr Hughes, the choice of the party's left and a believer in higher taxes. So too will Sir Menzies's claim the party "should not be afraid of" the private sector.
There is though nothing new in any of these remarks, other than perhaps the emphasis. The party has always advocated a mixed economy model in its approach towards providing public services, as have Labour for that matter. The difference between us and Labour is that we put quality and universality above artificial choice. The important consideration for us is the delivery of a high quality, value-for-money service. I do not believe that Simon Hughes sits outside of that tradition. Equally, Simon has already said that he believes that the 50p top rate tax policy has fulfilled its purpose and is advocating other forms of progressive taxation.
It is almost as if two different elections are being fought - the one amongst party members, the other in the media. The biggest blight on British politics in the last decade or two has been in the way that the media seek to act as interpreter of politician's words so as to set their own agenda. This process has been aided by the politicians themselves, saying one thing publicly but briefing seperately in private. It is called 'playing the game' and Sir Menzies Campbell is more adept at it than most.
If there is one thing I would like to see come out of the Liberal Democrat leadership election it is that one or more candidate will reject this approach and speak directly to voters openly and from the heart. Like many voters I am heartily fed-up with spin.
Comments:
<< Home
In so far as your general comments go I agree wholeheartedly. (Obviously am neutral with regard to candidates)
Personally I much prefer to see commenst being made on the record, even if they imply criticism, at least we know where people then stand and can distinguish between the candidates' views and those of their 'supporters'.
Post a Comment
Personally I much prefer to see commenst being made on the record, even if they imply criticism, at least we know where people then stand and can distinguish between the candidates' views and those of their 'supporters'.
<< Home
