There are such big problems that they need deep and often inconvenient responses, and they need leadership, not snippets and soundbites
Opinion: There was a time when political parties released detailed policy manifestos for elections. Yes, they may have ignored large parts of them when elected but they did provide an overall picture of what they proposed to do.
In this age of instant gratification and limited attention span we have moved to policies that fit a different news cycle. Released as snippets, like a lolly scramble for attention.
I’m not at all convinced this is improving the quality of the process.
READ MORE:
* National’s agriculture policy a John Key re-heat
* What are National and Act doing in the shadows?
* Election gets six of the best
A little story first, to set the scene:
The campaign manager rubbed his eyes. Rubbed his back. Rubbed his stress ball. And the other ones.
Rubbed out the obscenity he had written on the draft media release.
One week gone and all he felt was fatigue.
Not tired physically. There were pills for that. Not sleepy. Pills for that too.
But there were no pills for election fatigue.
The candidate was bouncing around the office shaking hands and grinning. His family and staff were looking bemused by it, but he was beyond recognising them as he kept circling.
If only the party name could be changed to the “don’t know, not voting, no answer party” they would romp in
Nothing could degrade or embarrass the candidate now. It was past that point. No mispronunciation, no demonstrable lie, no unzipped trousers, no inedible savoury, no foolish costume or pose could reach what might once have been his self-respect.
The policy analysts had given up and left. They were no loss. They all could have been working for the other side. Kept checking facts rather than making them up. Reading books at night rather than boozing with journalists and trying to compromise them. Kept referring to treaties and UN declarations and legislation as if they were laws.
The public servants no longer returned his calls. Disloyal bastards. Two weeks ago they were leaking, delaying and covering up, entertaining and otherwise doing the “neutral is what neutral does” waltz with him. Now they had scuttled up to the Wellington Club to hibernate for the month.
The month loomed out in front of him.
28 news cycles. All fraught with the potential for cock-ups.
The media release in front of him had to go out. Sent out like a lost explorer into the blizzard.
He had already corrected the date, the spelling, the grammar and the headline presented by the comms team. The topic for today was tax. Up, down, shake it all about were the options. Safest thing was to say the others were wrong. They almost certainly were. The numbers did not stack up. Also almost certainly true. They had said something different last election/year/week/day. Probably right too.
He reached for the focus group reports. With campaign funds stretched they had got volunteers from the local party branch. They enthusiastically endorsed anything with the right colour print and condemned other colours.
The latest polls were little help. The most popular position was “please stop phoning me with inane questions”. If only the party name could be changed to the “don’t know, not voting, no answer party” they would romp in.
That was it. “Do Nothing” was a short and pithy slogan to head the release.
“It is time for us to reject our problems.” Maybe a little too strong and “ignore” did sound negative. Maybe “Not worry too much” captured the mood better. It nicely captured the mood of not being happy but having every proposal to do something sound even worse.
“There is a great danger of being too radical.” A bit sweeping and there are still ideologues out there who think they like radical ideas. He had it! “There is great danger in other parties’ radical ideas.” Focus on the other guys, distance ourselves from them, after all most people did not like most of the parties. That was where the silent majority lived. In “not voting, not them” land. And no one liked danger.
This was coming together well.
“We are listening to the people”. People liked to be listened to, or so the media kept saying. No doubt the journalists and show hosts liked being listened to. He had a lingering suspicion that telling people you were listening was not the same as actually listening. Appearing to listen and ignoring could be twins rather than options. But you could hardly say “we are pretending to listen”.
“We have heard the people” is better. Not true of course, but hard to disprove. But still not right, most people clearly did not like being told they are like other people. “We hear you”. Lovely, that is everyone, all pronouns and ethnicities included.
Be reassuring. “It is okay to be uncertain in uncertain times”. Love it. Identifying with everyone. And let’s face it no one has a clue what should really be done. The candidate might even be able to appear sincere about not knowing what to do.
Now the killer blow. “You know, we know, and even our opponents know this. But no other party will admit it.”
No one could make you wrong on this. Make you resign if you did not fulfil the promise. No pesky economists to throw other numbers around. No leaks of background research papers, because there are none. The only real answer from opponents is to repeat “they don’t know what they are doing”. Which is, it turns out, exactly our policy, one everyone knows is true, and shared.
There, he sighed. Press the button to send. Cover to the candidate with the instruction “You don’t know what you are talking about, but neither do they. You are used to it so relax and go with it.”
Job done for another day. But the election fatigue had not lifted. It had settled heavily over him.
But not as heavily as it had on the voters.
There are such big problems – climate, poverty, health, housing. They need big responses. They need deep and often inconvenient responses. They need leadership. With apologies to the Exponents, not a contest of “Who Fears Who The Most?”.
