Sunday, September 20, 2020

Are Liberal Democrats too busy talking to themselves to reach out to the electorate?

I have to admit that I drafted this a month ago for Liberal Democrat Voice, but decided not to publish it at the time - I wasn’t sure that I wanted or needed the grief that would probably come from offering it up to a (probably) larger audience than it would get here. But, the nagging thought in my mind won’t quite go away... so here it is. It isn’t necessarily my final word, nor is it a perfect distillation of my views, although it does seem to reflect the views of our new leader, perhaps unexpectedly.

As we come to the end of a leadership contest which feels as though it has lasted forever - and I admit to not having cast my vote yet - it has occurred to me that we seem to have spent a lot of time lately having leadership contests (or, in the case of Vince’s coronation, non-contest). Tim vs Norman, Vince vs the radicals, Jo vs Ed, Ed vs Layla. Four leadership elections in five years, and a lot of talk about what happens next.

Or not, really.

To win a leadership contest, you have to persuade members to feel good about themselves. That means that we talk about issues that matter to our members. It isn’t, however, necessarily the case that the campaigns talk about issues that matter outside that group, i.e. to the overwhelming majority of the public.

Now, some of you will be thinking that I have an unspoken agenda here. “Don’t talk about minority issues, talk about schools and hospitals, jobs and crime instead.”, might be running through your head. And, perhaps, you may have a point.

I’m proud of our opinions on minority rights, on social reforms that allow everyone (and I do mean everyone) to live their lives in the way they choose, subject to the restraints of law designed to protect us from harm. Our policies on those issues are well thought out, easy to articulate, and will make a real difference to lives. Making sure that we express those views when we’re talking to those who want to hear them, or those directly affected, is exactly what a radical, social reformist political party should do.

But, in spending so much time talking to ourselves over the last five years, we seem to have stopped talking about things that actually affect large numbers of people, many of whom just want to feel that someone is listening to them. Yes, we spent a lot of time talking about Europe - our members would want little else given the reason why so many of them joined. We tended to be unequivocal about how much better being in the European Union was, rather than arguing the case for working together. There was a worrying tendency by some to assume that those on the other side were racist or stupid, or both, rather than being ill-informed by our media, or despairing of the day to day grind of lives that weren’t so fortunate. But whilst we were focussed on that, we stopped expressing ourselves about the other stuff.

How much did we talk about housing, when so many young people are struggling to find a place they can afford? What did we say about the instability of work in an era of zero-hour contracts and the gig economy? What did we say about how the tax system and the finance sector distort our economy and encourage short-term investment strategies? Was it anything more than sound bites designed to attract a moment’s attention?

Can you remember? I can’t. And, perhaps, that’s the problem.

It seems to me that, where we’ve been successful over a long period, it’s because we talk to people about the things that matter, we offer solutions that resonate, and we have a passion to serve those communities. It isn’t where we take a purist approach, insisting that people sign up to the overwhelming majority of our policies. Hell, I don’t sign up to all of our policies, and I’ve been a member of the Party and its predecessor for thirty-six years.

So, whoever wins when the votes are counted, we need to talk to people where they metaphorically live. No, that doesn’t mean pandering to them, even if it’s tempting. It means addressing the things that, if fixed, would make their lives genuinely better, making the case for the changes we think will work, and being patient.

Being a Liberal Democrat isn’t easy. If it was, everybody would be one. We aren’t going to go from 6% to glorious victory in one electoral cycle, or even two or three. But, if we have any aspiration to do so, we need to start talking to them, not just us.

3 comments:

David Murray said...

We tend to be too rational in what we promote, rather than emotional in terms of what changes would make people's lives better. Poverty and inequality are the main items affecting our society, and viable solutions to these, and the benefits to individuals, need to be emphasized. We will need a new approach if and when the Covid-19 pandemic is under control. A Universal Basic Income is one possibility that would help the worst-off and avoid a lot of form-filling and independent(?) assessment. It would give people some independence and restore their dignity. Land Value Taxation, more generally, would help to reduce the cost of homes, and provide greater opportunities for the young to get on the housing ladder. Addressing climate change will start to improve conditions for those suffering from flooding and extreme weather. But the Lib Dem offering has been fragmented and does not 'cut through' in the media or on the doorstep.

David Evans said...

Sadly, in a few short years we moved from being an insurgent party that was on the verge of going into government with the ability to do so much to change the system for all those people who needed us in there to fight for them, to a failed establishment party whose leaders had decided that once in power that all they needed to do was make coalition work. No - what we had to show is that we could make government work - for the people.

Now we are once again a small party, clinging to existence, but with little to offer on the concerns of most of the country (as far as they are concerned). The problem was that it wasn't an accident. It wasn't because those nasty Tories stopped us, it was because our leader and his close supporters in power, chose to let it happen.

When the party was collapsing all around them, members and voters leaving in droves not one senior figure stood up and said, "This idiocy has to stop". They just ploughed on and on with the delusion that it was alright because they personally were doing some good.

It wasn't. All it did was give the Conservatives time to rebuild their reputation, undermine our party and its values, and ultimately take our country out of Europe. Now many Lib Dems spend more time obsessing about fringe youth issues to do with sex and sexuality, but still have produced no response on the Alston Report on poverty in the UK.

Maybe, having squandered the support of two generations of mainstream Social Democrats in the party, we are just a party of those comfortably well off with a social conscience and there are too few left who can be bothered to focus on or even talk about the poor, the dispossessed and the downtrodden.

nigel hunter said...

David ,I agree.UBI would give an element of dignity to a person rather than going 'cap in hand' to 'our betters'for welfare which i see is just around the corner.