As I dutifully delivered, leafleted, stickered and Voter ID'd for two days at the end of the Norwich North campaign, I was secretly in despair with much of the centrally produced rubbish that myself and the other activists had to put out. In the campaign itself we had the usual team of central party outsiders bossing local activists about while the literature was bereft of a single authentic word.
Let's take a look at just one of the missives that Victoria Street hoped would make all the difference, a "Broadland Matters" double-sided mock-up of a newspaper, printed on crisp white paper. Let's assume for a moment that an undecided voter paid the leaflet even a first glance:
"Helping people through the downturn will be Chris Ostrowski's number one priority as the new MP for Broadland. That's why Chris has wasted no time in persuading jobs minister Yvette Cooper to visit Norwich".
How many clichés can you stick together in one sentence? (I make it at least 4).
Over the photo is the caption:
"Chris brought Yvette Coooper to Norwich to discuss action on jobs".
Pull the other one! Yvette Cooper was not there because of Norwich's problems, or Chris's sterling efforts - she was there because she was told to be there for a photo opportunity, just as many, many other ministers had been. I'd have a fat chance of getting any ministers to visit me in Chingford, even if we had 75% unemployed!
Next, do you believe that:
"as a student Chris was a regular at Carrow Road and he can hardly wait for the season to start again next month so he can go and cheer City on again".
I'd like some hard evidence: perhaps a ticket? Or can he name last season's captain? I believe most supporters are gutted by Norwich's relegatio, but, while Chris and local campaigners spoke about that, the centrally produced literature didn’t mention it.
But most damning, most meaningless and most condescending was a section on Chris and what he was going to do for pensioners. It seems to have been penned in a hurry by a party hack cobbling together a few random constituency statistics, including (curiously?) improvement in care for cancer patients. It also drops in Ian Gibson's name for good measure.
Yet not one word could be construed as a promise or pledge to pensioners; no mention of the green paper on social care - or the devastation to pensioners' savings in the aftermath of the economic crash.
Add all the deeply off-putting negative claptrap about the Conservative candidate being a "Westminster insider" (unlike Ed Balls when he was a candidate?) and the campaign literature felt, even as I delivered it, meaningless and out of touch.
Oh, and there's a cartoon of two jockeys next to the inevitable bar chart. Oh I get it ! A two horse race! D'oh! Those bar charts are so routinely manipulated by all parties that even if this one is the real deal no-one would have take any notice. Perhaps because of such ploys, the race turned into a single-horse dash. So, a memo to all organisers at every level of every party: stop printing bar charts showing the so-called status of the parties. I have not met one person who believes they are honest. They always look and feel crooked.
The rest of the centrally produced stuff - acres of it - was similarly vapid and patronising. It had nothing to do with communicating with the electorate in any meaningful interactive way.
When a local party knows how to communicate with its supporters what is the sense in the central party taking over the "message" let alone the "medium"? Surely, at the very least, it's imperative to involve the local party in writing something that speaks authentically to the people of their constituency. And in case you ask, I volunteered to go over to Norwich before the Central Party told us PPCs to go lend a hand.
I had a great time meeting a few local party activists received fantastic hospitality. I just hope the people of Norwich have better luck in keeping their campaign in their own hands at the General Election.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
StumbleUpon
Finally, in any short bye-election campaign where spending up to the limit means that the three main parties could have spent up to £100,000 each, surely someone will be doing the sums. That's a mighty big bonfire of £20 notes for a defeat. The Labour Party has so little in the GE war-chest, I think it is reasonable to ask, did we, the members who donated the money in the first place, get value for money?
He just didn't want to know, we shared pleasantries and that was it.
Thank you for the article and well done on your contribution in the election despite the hurdles put in your path by people of less conviction and ability.
I truly sympathise, I agree completely that local parties should at least contribute to the content of the material being delivered, it sounds to me that these hacks from London are experts in one thing only, wasting party funds.
I have always found local issues to be of geat importance in a campaign and as you so rightly state, the need for progressive, radical and brave reform. If you can't produce it in Government, when can you?
It is always good to hear from other activists and I think you should ensure that you remember these problems in the campaign and possibly write a summary for your own future use. At the moment anything HQ touch turns to rust, just look at the Crewe situation. The best thing they could have done is not bother.
Add to this you were pitted against a candidate who has learnt from one of the best Tory campaigners, Gill Shepperd and that all the Tory Ministers were lending real support for the campaign.
Sadly this is what happens when bullies and useless sycophants get a free ride in the party, when it actually comes to on the ground campaigning they have no experience or ideas.
Yours however is worth gold so keep at it ;)
In some years from now with a bit of luck you will be managing your own Campaign, you will be designing your own leaflets and Newsletters.
If you know it's damaging post it into a recycling bin.
In any case, the issue here is quality control. Who approved the leaflets? Not asking for local input/approval is also unintelligent.
As for going a Carrow Road as a student. If he really liked football he wouldn't be changing his support for the team in the University city. That would would strike most die hard fans, Canaries included, as shallow.
Take GB's comments on Gazza's goal against Scotland. Alex Salmond and Nats just need to get that onto their leaflets and played, on the radio, repeated on the telly, etc, to ensure a victory in Glasgow.
P.S Town are still the Pride of Anglia, and we all know what City rhymes with.
(Silly gratuitous, non-political comment, but when's another opportunity like this going to come along)
Cath, I think you deserve an award for getting Norwich City, relegation, and gutted Canary supporters into a single blog.
Please put yourself forward as PPC for Ipswich after the useless weasel gets terminated.
We haven't had a decent MP since Ken Weetch.
What I've been waiting for on this site is for a Labour member to write a piece concerning the lack of by-election for Glasgow North-East and why one of the poorest parts of the UK has to wait until November for an MP to help them "through the downturn" and to "discuss action on jobs". The Labour party, and members of the Labour party, seem to write and talk much about caring but this only seems to extend so far. Frankly I think the Labour party are acting appallingly by delaying the by-election, and it only serves to validate my turning my back on the party three years ago. The Labour party has lost its way and no longer has any vision -- perhaps that's why you were left to deliver "centrally produced rubbish" to the Norwich North electorate.
Is prostitution for an ideological/political cause not prostitution?
The meaning of prostitution is not limited to sexual acts. What is evident is that we have a different concept of what is ethical: I would not hand out political tracts with which I not in full agreement. But then, you are an aspiring politician.
By standing as a candidate I am a politician already. I am an aspiring MP. Both roles are of course are as attractive to the voters as a bath of cold baked beans with mould on top.
Besides, it is not my integrity that has become the subject of debate.
Prostitution does not have to be for monetary gain. In this case, you're trading integrity for political gain by campaigning on arguments you know to be rubbish. When you feel like you're lying to the voters, maybe it's time to stop campaigning.
Thanks for the help with the slash - I thought it was a sign of a sloppy writer.
That doesn't sit well with most people's idea of integrity.
When I am out campaigning for Labour I believe my integrity is in being seen to support the Party, even when it is in difficulties. It lies in being able to talk to people about their worries, to try to understand why people vote for the other parties, to persuade those who are undecided, if they want to be persuaded! I am not defined by the rubbish I have been given to distribute. I am proud to be a Labour candidate - just fed up with the poor quality of generic communications.
"But do you think that newspaper boys and the postman feel a lack of integrity when they pop unsolicited propaganda through our doors everyday?"
This analogy is ridiculous as the postie delivers everybody's propaganda and, if asked, will tell you his honest opinion of it. You on the other hand are only presenting one party's propaganda and afterwards you come here to tell us that you didn't really believe what you were handing out.
"When I am out campaigning for Labour I believe my integrity is in being seen to support the Party, even when it is in difficulties."
That is loyalty, not integrity. Most people think pushing a message in which you don't believe out of blind party loyalty is pretty much the opposite of integrity.
That's why we're in such a mess though isn't it? Spinelessness, its the equivalent of 'I was only following orders'. There's a very big difference between 'If your idea of integrity is so literal then I think you are right to criticise me' and 'Yeah, whatever'.
I am sure the other commentators on your blog were campaigning ineffectively for the Tories in 1997 and 2001!
The assumption that any dissent must come from a closet Tory and can therefore be ignored is one of the reasons Labour are losing support.
As for the negative Tory tosh on this and many other blogsites - I only post when I'm in the mood for a good punch up (normally at that special time of the month). It's my equivalent of Fight Club!
I should note that I am not - and have never been - a member of any party.
You're confusing a "punch-up" with a "beating" just like you confuse "integrity" with "party loyalty".
I have replied to a few comments which I found funny or interesting because a blog is a sort of entertainment form, isn't it? You wouldn't post online for serious or honest debate, surely? For a start most of the folk are wearing aliases. Although I am sure MonkeyBot 5000 is a real name as well sounding like a vacuum cleaner.
What Cath is saying is that the presentation of the message was wrong not the message itself.
Stewart Jackson's a joke, but at least he doesn't push up my council tax by having the police called out all the time to deal with his drunken antics.
As for there being nothing wrong with the message...
"Yvette Cooper was not there because of Norwich's problems, or Chris's sterling efforts..."
"I'd like some hard evidence: perhaps a ticket? Or can he name last season's captain?"
She's calling into question the honesty and factual accuracy of the message, not criticising the font.