Posted by: John | July 25, 2009

Thoughts on Norwich

My thoughts are very mixed. On the one hand we managed to steer clear of 4th place and the UKIP/Independent meme. I wonder what the balance was between doorstep and leaflets?

I have reached a few conclusions:

1. The age of Rennard is dead in its philosophy – throw enough literature at a place and it provides a `bandwagon` effect. Not when everybody else does! Glad to see that there wasn’t a surfeit of vacuous `women’s magazines` – it works a bit where the leading contender is a man but that’s about it. In Crewe & Nantwich very few people were fooled.

2. The need for doorstep activity with experienced campaigners who can technically report back both professionally and objectively. I’ve been picking up the UKIP trends for some weeks on the telephone. UKIP now take from all sides even from the Lib Dems – `It’s you or the Independence Party` is the cry meaning `rebellious non-mainstreamers` that must have added at least 500 to the UKIP’s 4000 total. They now also take from the BNP who some people have now seen through.

3. The Conservatives didn’t do that well. This is a by-election where people were bound to put their crosses to the main anti-Labour challenger. They achieved 39.5% which is below the magic 40 number that gives Governments some moral legitimacy. I doubt if they will achieve that in Norwich North next time.

4. Chloe Smith’s `contract with Norwich` went down well there – we are behind the curve when it comes to campaigning. Note: not literature but campaigning.

5. It’s time to decide our three main messages and repeat them ad nauseum. We also need to seal the deal on our `TINA` messages. I can think of two: `you only get the best economy when we change things for good` and `you only get Vince Cable as Chancellor by voting Liberal Democrat`.

6. Presenting amateurs with 5 sheets of telephone canvas with a complicated script doesn’t really work (as happened to a friend of mine) – this needs to be done by experienced campaigners. I would suggest Voter ID in such a place as NN to start with going on to more technical work later on.

7. This is not to deny the candidature of April Pond nor the energy of the people on the ground without whom we would be in 4th place. This is just to say that we now need to rewrite the Rennard rule-book and start afresh engaging people on the doorstep. Oh, and for once, Irfan Ahmed has a good idea. And no I’m not talking about emails. Have a look.



  1. That’s a good post!
    the type of messages we need to get across are such as:
    * we’re quite a big third party. to talk of the two big parties like that arrangement could never be overturned is now wrong!
    * people have to decide whether they want a boom to bust economy or they want the rather boring but stable economy we offer.
    * change needs substance, if the next election is just a toss of the coin between the two establishment parties, there will be a change of faces not substance!
    * when was it decided that a political party with a minority of the vote would belittle parliament – we want to see parliamentary democracy restored.
    * only STV – single transferable vote will take power back from the establishment to the people and restore the peoples’ parliament.
    * we look forward to a parliament where policy, whether on war or the economy, is passed through scrutiny and power of argument than force of party whip.
    * if the media obey their paymasters, and the next election doesn’t yield clear choice and debate over tax and spending choices, and political reform – the public reaction in the aftermath may be dangerous.
    * we offer clear, honest policies born out of our historic principles of liberty, social conscience and internationalism.
    * a Labour or Tory victory will bring not change but calamity.
    * if the media don’t grow up at the next election, the public won’t forgive them. The media failed to worn of the impending credit crunch because they drank from the same trough.

    overall then, and why we haven’t benefited from the expenses scandal is that we have not displayed our anti-establishment credentials – that onl we represent real change – with substance.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: