Posts Tagged ‘Big Society’

The final debate

Friday, April 30th, 2010

The 2010 election will be remembered as the one that changed all future elections. The three debates have been the only game in town in what has otherwise been a fairly uneventful campaign, save for Wednesday’s gaffe by the PM. The final debate was the last real chance before the election for the leaders to put their case directly to the electorate on prime-time TV. The result of this debate: a more upbeat Conservative party, sustained hope for the Lib Dems and a realisation for Labour that it’s almost certainly now over.

After 270 minutes of live television in the most closely fought election for a generation, the leaders of the three main parties did not manage to land a single knockout blow on their opponents – perhaps acknowledging that the traditional yah-boo aspects of political debate turn people off. The unfamiliarity with the format and the Cleggmania phenomenon are also factors that need to be taken into account when asking why some punches have been pulled.

The verdict

Cameron and Brown have faced a choice between fighting the old enemy or the young pretender. Last night they chose both in what was a more combative debate. Both put in better performances, demonstrating that they had learnt the lessons of the previous debates.

Whilst skipping over the more troublesome aspects of the economy, the debate yesterday focussed on a range of related issues such as National Insurance, Child Tax Credits, bankers’ bonuses, education and the always delicate subject of immigration.

Brown, on his specialist subject of the economy, defended the government’s record on all fronts, but went for a more negative approach which doesn’t appear to have gone down well with the electorate. He appeared marginally stronger than the previous debates, especially given the difficult circumstances, but looked exhausted and struggled to cobble together a coherent case for a fourth Labour term. His technocratic musings on the role of Regional Development Agencies is not going to convince the man on the street to vote Labour, especially when Cameron spoke so ably about schools.

Cameron also benefitted from the discussions on the euro and immigration, areas in which Clegg looked uncomfortable, and he was able to appeal to the core vote without vacating the centre ground. He showed that he had adapted to the format well and made his arguments more relevant to the man on the street rather than through the overly complex prism of the ‘Big Society’. 

Clegg put in a reasonable performance, but struggled to convey the image of change and freshness that came so easily in the first debate. The electorate now know him well and it’s difficult to be the new kid on the block when you’ve been the focus of the campaign for the past fortnight. His constant references to ‘old politics’ began to grate against the recent media backdrop and he failed to convince on immigration and the euro. A less impressive performance will leave his party disappointed that he did not win, but delighted that his participation in these debates has boosted their poll standing so substantially.

The majority of the immediate polls showed the winner was Cameron, followed by Clegg, with Brown languishing behind. A YouGov/Sun poll put Cameron on 41%, Clegg on 32% and Brown on 25%. ComRes had Cameron ahead of Clegg by 2% and Populus put both Cameron and Clegg on 38%, ahead of Brown on 25%.

You can’t handle the truth

Despite the focus of the debate being the economy, no further details could be prised out of the leaders of the cuts the parties would need to make and taxes they would raise should they find themselves in power on 7 May. This week the Institute for Fiscal Studies has reported that all three parties have not explained in their manifestos, by some distance, how they are going to finance their plans to reduce the deficit.

Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England, possibly provided the best explanation of this reticence yesterday when he was reported as saying that the winner of the next election would become unelectable for a generation, such are the level of cuts needed to nurse the public finances out of intensive care. Debates between Brown and Cameron over £6billion will seem like bickering over small change when much larger numbers become the norm. Whoever wins the election will have to make difficult – and unpalatable – decisions.

Brown’s final bow

What now looks clear is that this debate was, in all likelihood, Gordon Brown’s last significant public appearance as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom. If Labour is to remain in Government as part of a coalition, Brown’s head would be Nick Clegg’s first request. Cameron’s growing stature in the debates may have allowed Clegg off the hook, leaving the Labour party itself to finish off their leader whilst he looks to form a coalition with Cameron.

The Conservative leader will be hoping however, that he has done enough to win a majority.  Over a drizzly bank holiday weekend, the 30% of voters who remain undecided will gradually make their minds up. Only 8 million watched the BBC’s debate last night, but with the media now providing the background narrative of Brown at the bottom of the heap, Clegg as a serious player and Cameron growing in confidence and stature, the Conservatives will be quietly confident that their man is on his way to Downing Street.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

Future, Change or Fairness

Thursday, April 22nd, 2010

The election story today isn’t really about Brown, Cameron or Clegg. Instead the media are focussing on their favourite issue … the media.

The first of three leaders debates will kick off tonight on ITV1 for what many are predicting will provide the game changing moment for the three parties, none of which has succeeded in nailing the deficit issue or capturing the public’s imagination.

This week each of the parties polished their presentation skills and stepped up a gear with the publication of the manifestos. While the leader’s debates will inevitably be the main focus of the campaign, the manifesto launches provided the first opportunity to test the credibility of the parties. So how did they do?

Cuts, cuts, cuts

The big battleground of the campaign continues to be the budget deficit, with all three parties recognising that this path is going to be difficult to navigate, and the political terrain rocky.

With the budget deficit needing to be reduced by around £70 billion, arguments continue about the balance between tax increases and spending cuts, the timing of cuts, and what to cut. While in all cases it is difficult to pin down the details, it appears that the Conservatives are planning the biggest squeeze on spending (and will act more quickly than the other two parties), followed by Labour, with the Lib Dems, surprisingly given Vince Cable’s positioning as the blunt speaking economic sage, marginally behind Labour in the spending squeeze stakes. Commentators will be hoping that more details emerge in the economy leaders’ debate, although given this is the last of the three on 29 April, they will have some time to wait yet.

Policy on the cheap

The Labour Manifesto offers the public the opportunity to recognise its investment in public services to date and to consolidate this under the experience of Gordon Brown.

But policy after the election will be characterised by a prudence beyond even the early years of Gordon Brown’s chancellorship – and the source of the budget cuts remains unclear. Whilst recognising government spending must be reduced, Labour offers a set of guarantees on public services such as health and education to ensure they continue to deliver despite budget cuts. They propose a ‘future fair for all’ which is based on the idea that the state has an active and beneficial role in people’s lives and point to their record in office to demonstrate this.

The Conservative theme of the big society and their invitation to join the government of Britain rejects this expanded role for the state, supporting public services, but asking why government should always be the one to provide them. Cameron’s ‘invitation to join the government of Britain’ offers individuals and local groups the chance to run their own public services with government funding. Tax breaks for businesses and some married couples indicate traditional Conservative priorities aimed at strengthening the private sector and sense of community. Questions remain over the extent to which individuals want to run their own public services or probe the minutiae of government expenditure and Cameron’s approach could be criticised for being over-cerebral.

The Liberal Democrats offer the theme of fairness with wealth redistribution as the cornerstone. A new tax regime would remove those on the lowest incomes from tax altogether whilst the rich would have to pay more than Labour’s proposals. Vince Cable has provided additional clout, as well as populism, to the Lib Dem cause in his role as economic sage and bank-basher-in-chief. By returning the banks to centre stage the LibDems hope their manifesto pledges will rekindle the anger which people felt as ‘Fred the Shred’ hit the headlines to secure them new votes. At the heart of the Lib Dem prospectus is a major package of tax changes – £16.8bn of tax cuts, financed by £19.2bn of tax increases. Commentators have questioned whether the arithmetic adds up, as their calculations are based on being able to raise an additional £4.6bn in tax revenue from unspecified anti-avoidance measures. There is irony in this as Vince Cable has attacked both Labour and the Conservatives for relying on “efficiency savings” in their calculations.

The campaign continues

But election manifestos are not bestsellers, especially at a time when politics itself is in the dock (literally in some cases). How will these documents affect the campaign and the outcome of the election?

The manifestos ultimately provide the proof points for the general theme of the campaign and demonstrate that the parties have done the preparatory work necessary to govern effectively. They are also closely analysed by the media who will be quick to highlight inconsistencies and black holes which is why the launch presentation is often as significant as the content. With the polls so close and a hung parliament still very much on the cards, the similarities between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats – constitutional reform aside – are interesting. The Liberal Democrats have cleverly crafted their manifesto pledges to chime with the Conservatives and leave open the option of a post-election deal.

The opinion polls remain all over the place. Yesterday the Conservatives were as little as 3% ahead nationally. Today they are 9% ahead nationally and 12% ahead in the top 100 marginal seats. The truth is it is probably worth treating all polls with a pinch of salt until well after the Leaders’ Debate and the end of the first full week of campaigning. Only then will we get a clearer picture of the direction of this campaign.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »