On campaigning charities and political parties

Summary

Why the rise of large non-party-political campaigning charities vis-a-vis the shrinking of mainstream political parties leaves me a little uncomfortable

Seven environmental-related charities and organisations have got together to organise a London-based hustings. (See here). You’ll be hearing of various campaign groups from across the political matrix making their case. Earlier today on telly they had a whisky trade federation calling for the Chancellor to cut tax on their products in the run up to next week’s Budget – the last before the election. Conservative-leaning bodies tend to call for targeted tax cuts in their area of business, while Labour-leaning groups tend to call for more spending in their area of interest. It’s then left to a shrinking group of people from what feels like increasingly narrow backgrounds to decide how to balance the two.

Campaigning for something is one thing. Standing for election & being cross-examined by the public is quite another.

I stood as Puffles at the Cambridge City Council elections in 2014. And the dragon beat UKIP -> 89 votes to 0. They didn’t stand so lost be default. It’ll be different in 2015 as both The Greens and UKIP in Cambridge will be contesting most if not all of the wards at the local elections in Cambridge, which are happening on the same day as the general election. It’s one thing being a paper candidate, but quite another putting yourself out in public to face scrutiny & cross-examination.

Puffles gatecrashing Cambridge Labour Party's stall in our neighbourhood

Puffles gatecrashing Cambridge Labour Party’s stall in our neighbourhood

The glamorous side of ‘charity campaigning’ is when you get invited to posh receptions and visits to Parliament. You get the kudos of being the informed, passionate expert – but don’t necessarily have to worry about other issues far removed from your areas of passion or expertise because that’s not in the job description. (That’s not to criticise – this is to compare it to standing for election). When you’re standing for election – as I found out – you’re expected to have an opinion on everything. Should that opinion be found to be uninformed, a potential firestorm awaits. Whether it’s someone fact-checking in real time to an opponent creating a straw man to knock down (taking you down in the process), you find yourself in a situation where you’re expected to be knowledgable & informed where few others are.

But how many of us get to be in that position of being that reasonably well-paid full time campaigner where we’re attending all of these ‘Whitehall-and-Parliament-facing’ events? One of the criticisms of such charities and campaign groups made by Big Issue founder John Bird was that too many highly paid executives of such charities and groups had no experience of being dependent on the work of the charities they ran. (See here).

“Aren’t campaigning charities & groups popular because they are successful at achieving policy change?”

To an extent yes. At the same time it reveals a relative failure of political party members to secure policy changes & impose them on their party leaders. The stereotype is that Conservative grassroots is more politically right wing than its leadership, and Labour’s grassroots more leftwing than its leadership. However, if a party has ambitions for government, it’s got to reach out beyond that core vote. Hence having to make compromises there. Furthermore, given outsourcing & privatisation of the past 30 years – along with globalisation too, the power that parties in government used to have no longer exists. Take house building. The state is entirely dependent on the private sector to build homes. So if achieving policy change isn’t going to come from political leaders that ignore their members, what’s the alternative?

Hence why some have set up organisations

The well-trodden path is this:

  1. set up an organisation
  2. hire some offices in Westminster within easy reach of the institutions you want to influence
  3. find out who works where – ie map the people inside the institutions
  4. organise an event at somewhere nice
  5. invite people from the institutions you want to influence to said event
  6. be very nice to invitees at said event
  7. organise informal coffee/meetings
  8. become an independent stakeholder on a policy group

…and then you are inside the system. Repeat, only this time with the media. Friends in politics, friends in the media…this in part is how corporate lobbyists work. Charities and campaign groups picked up on this and have copied such tactics. Whether this will remain successful in years to come in social media world (& in the context of growing wealth inequalities) remains to be seen. Not least with nominally public events inside ‘the bubble’ now accessible to a much wider audience – whether through eventbrite/meetup or through people live-tweeting on a hashtag.

A big advantage of party backing

It’s all too easy to forget this, but other than having fellow party members campaigning for you, you also have the benefit of someone else with similar values to you having done the research. When it comes to manifesto time, it’s reasonable to expect that the policy experts in your party have done the research to withstand detailed scrutiny.

The route to Parliament – via campaigning charities.

A number of social justice charities, campaign groups and think tanks are fairly well known as being on the path that politicians tread during their rise up the political ladder. Lisa Nandy MP at Centrepoint (homelessness), Dr Stella Creasy at the Scout Association, Jack Straw’s son Will (who is standing for Parliament at this election) at the IPPR Think Tank are a few examples from Labour. This inevitably raises criticisms from party political opponents that this sort of activity is a subsidy. They think that charities should be restricted to providing relief to those in need rather than campaigning on the issues that create that need in the first place. Recall the quotation:

“When I give food to the poor they call me a saint, but when I ask why the poor have no food they call me a communist”

It’s not as simple as saying “You’re all cowards for not standing for election!”

As has been raised by a number of people, the barrage of hatred that women in particular have to put up with for even expressing an opinion is more than enough to put too many good people off from politics altogether. It’s only fortunate that more people feel confident enough to call such behaviour out – most recently a national newspaper super-imposing the head of Scotland’s first minister (Nicola Sturgeon) onto a bikini-clad model recreating an image from a pop video of a couple of years ago. Some might say ‘grow a thicker skin’, but if such behaviour is putting off talented people from engaging in politics & policy – to the detriment of our democracy, how can that be in the public interest?

Barriers to standing for election

That’s before you’ve considered the sacrifices you have to make with campaigning. At the Women of the World – Cambridge festival at the weekend I discussed this with a number of women, including one – Anna Smith, who is standing in the neighbouring Romsey ward in Cambridge. Campaigning becomes a full time job in the run up to an election. But how many people can afford to take the time off work to campaign? How many have sympathetic employers who will allow this?

Should we have a maternity/paternity leave style system for people who stand for election?

I don’t know how this might work in detail, but the principle is that the state would pay a set rate for people standing for election for the time when nominations close to when the results are announced. (Normally about six weeks). Additionally, Parliament could legislate for employers to give staff additional paid time off (or banks to provide mortgage holidays) for those standing for elections. It’s about removing some of the barriers to people standing for election.

Posted in Campaigning, protesting and demonstrating, Charities and Big Society, Party politics | 1 Comment

Natalie Bennett struggles in the media again – a problem of style or substance – or both?

Summary

Thoughts on Green Party Leader Natalie Bennett’s recent interviews, and a recent piece by Liberal Democrats’ president Baroness Sal Brinton on a visit to Cambridge recently.

The detail via The Spectator’s Isabel Hardman (who in the grand scheme of things I rate quite highly as a journalist/political commentator even though she operates in a different part of the political matrix) is here. Social media has also noticed that this wasn’t the first interview she’s struggled with – the BBC’s Andrew Neil making mincemeat of the citizen’s income policy.

Some damage to their brand and the standing of the party has been done. But is it the end of their campaign and prospects? Unlikely. One of the reasons for this is that in the minds of the electorate that is aware of them, The Greens are the opposite ‘brand wise’ of UKIP. Given the lack of mainstream media coverage until of late, it’s unlikely that Bennett’s past media appearances were a major reason for people joining the party – unlike Farage’s extended & ongoing media coverage in the face of seemingly increasingly bland & anonymous politicians from the mainstream parties. As Natalie Bennett was only elected party leader a couple of years ago – succeeding Caroline Lucas MP who had served her constitutional maximum 2 terms, (See p7 here) Bennett won the leadership election succeeding Lucas who until then had been their highest profile politician as both leader and only MP.

Are the problems one of media style or policy substance? Or was it just another bad day?

There’s a mix of all. Could Natalie Bennett (given how ill she was with a cold – as you can hear in her voice) have said: “I am ill – Caroline Lucas/Jenny Jones will be available for interview instead”. I’m surprised more ministers and politicians choose to plough on than take time to recover and put a substitute spokesperson in their place.

On both style and substance, The Greens have not had to face intense policy scrutiny from the mainstream media and their political opponents. Just before their recent problems, I posted this blogpost. Since then, they have faced scrutiny over social media posts – here in Cambridge with candidate Dr Rupert Read, followed by the challenges over policy from Andrew Neil and on Newsnight just now from Evan Davis over style & on how media-savvy they are. (He was interviewing Baroness Jones, the only Green Party peer in the House of Lords – who also was elected to the London Assembly).

You can’t solve a policy problem with media training and you can’t solve a style problem by overhauling your policies 

If I were on the inside track with The Greens, I’d be investing not just in some short-term intensive media training from someone who really knows their stuff, but also in some longer term mentoring. (Ideally also from someone who has been through something similar or worse & bears the scars from the experience!) In particular, how to prepare for media interviews – both in the run up & on the day. This blogpost by Janet Murray covers the essentials if you are appearing in the media for any political party. (Or organisation for that matter).

How much policy detail should a political party know at this stage?

Former Labour Party special adviser Damian McBride is spot on here. He posted that post shortly after Ed Miliband and Ed Balls got into a bit of bother over their proposed mansion tax. No political party in the UK has the resources to give the level of policy detail being asked on some of the policies. That’s why we have a civil service in this country to do the detailed policy work for whoever gets elected. Take for example Labour’s flagship minimum wage policy. It was in their 1997 manifesto, and lots of people understandably asked: “What will the new minimum wage be?” To which their response was to set out a process for how the wage level would be set (so as not to frighten off the business lobby whose vote Blair courted heavily). Even when the National Minimum Wage Act 1998 was passed into law, the new minimum wage was not on the face of the legislation. It simply gave powers to the Secretary of State to set the minimum wage subject to the due processes set out in the legislation.

The point being that for the citizen’s income policy, Natalie Bennett did not need to go anywhere near giving away any numbers or ballpark figures. The policy itself is far too complex with too many factors & variables in it for such a small organisation to come up with a robust policy on it. What she should have said – in particular to Andrew Neil is to have argued the principle of the policy on its merit and said that the detailed policy analysis would come from the civil service assuming the Greens (or another party supporting the policy) got elected. Remember Natalie Bennett has gone on record saying what matters – in particular environment-wise, is that their policies are adopted, rather than getting ministerial seats.

Managing expectations

As I’ve mentioned before, The Greens have a significant number of published policies – click here. Ever since the Green Surge the mainstream media has been pouring over these in detail. Because there is so much there, it’s ever so easy to get caught out by an interviewer saying: “Your website says…”. No party leader is going to know that level of policy detail. This is where Bennett might have gotten away with: “Our policy spokesperson who knows far more about the detail you’re asking for, is [click here for the list of spokespeople]…I can put you in touch with them because you’re asking me about a level of policy detail that you wouldn’t expect from any other party leader.” This is a media cultural problem of wanting to go to the party leader for any and every question under the sun, rather than going to the party policy specialist.

“Isn’t the risk with ‘media style training’ that you turn ordinary political activists into political media clones so derided by so many people?”

Yes – and it’s a significant risk. But that doesn’t mean you have to turn into a political drone pre-programmed by party HQ incapable of independent thought. Whether it’s the ‘straw man’ question (“You’ve said that you want to increase green taxes on businesses to help deal with climate change, why is it that you want to put lots of hard working small business owners out of a job, with the knock-on impact on their hard-working families and…won’t someone think of the children??!?!?!”) or any other trap (there are a few here), you can see why simply repeating the ‘line to take’ becomes easy to fall back on. Funnily enough, the only person I’ve ever heard openly ‘rejecting the premise of a question’ (see last point here) posed by an interviewer on mainstream TV is Laurie Penny.

Being your own media

I’m still surprised more politicians and parties don’t do far more on this. In The Green Party’s case, one of the things they could do is create some short digital videos setting out detailed and informed responses to all of the questions put to them in the difficult media interviews of recent days. Not ‘soundbite responses’ but ones that demonstrate just how complex and difficult public policy is to develop and deliver – and how trying to reduce these to soundbites or even short political exchanges does no one any favours. Let’s take another example – but from a different political party: The Liberal Democrats.

If the Greens are taking heat now, that’s nothing compared to the 5 year roasting the Liberal Democrats have taken for choosing to go into the Coalition

Given the huge number of controversial decisions Liberal Democrat MPs, peers & ministers have taken, they have often found themselves on the back foot. At times it’s as if the mood from some sections has been: “We expect these sorts of policies from the Tories, but not from you!”

The structural & existential challenge the Liberal Democrats have is that proportional representation is in their political DNA – understandably so. Look at the difference in seats vs total votes in the 1983 & 1987 elections from their predecessor Liberal/SDP alliance (1983 here, and 1987 here). Imagine if the House of Lords took the general election results & allocated seats to members of an elected upper chamber via proportional representation & gave that chamber far stronger powers to vote down and/or delay/change legislation. History could have been very different.

How do the Liberal Democrats defend the decision to go into the Coalition given the 4+ years we’ve had since?

Lib Dem President Sal Brinton, now in the House of Lords but a former county councillor here in Cambridge gave it a go on a visit to Cambridge recently. I filmed it. It’s almost 20 minutes long but is worth a listen irrespective of your political affiliation.

The point of the above being: ‘Yes, there are difficult questions to answer, so here are my answers in my own words in my own time.’ The risk with this is that if you don’t answer those difficult questions, you run the risk of any positive content being ignored as people focus on what you refuse to answer.

Food for thought?

 

Posted in Events I have been to, Party politics, Social media | 3 Comments

Love with a ‘broken mind’

Summary

This ‘bah humbug’ style post follows from another article by Fleetstreetfox and from half a dozen conversations I’ve had with friends around the Mill Road part of town, as well as online.

Foxy’s article is here. You may also be interested in this article about dating & mental health

“Be part of red heart day, and show the one you love how much you love them by buying lots of stuff at inflated prices putting you into even more debt!”

“But if there’s one thing that means romance more than anything else in the modern era, it’s this:

When you’re with them, you want to put your phone down.

And if you can’t manage that, people, then I’ve no hope for you”

Well that’s me doomed then!

This is the first blogpost I’ve written about this topic because it’s something that historically has filled me with sad emotions. Thus my way of dealing with it has been to pretend publicly that I don’t have such emotions or to keep them hidden out of sight & out of mind of everyone else.

During my teens, I was crushed by the fear of rejection and humiliation along with an austere religious doctrine when it came to sex and relationship education. Without anyone to make the serious case for alternative viewpoints – remember Section 28 was still around throughout my school & college years. It was ‘family values or nothing.’

What really strikes me now (in a positive way) is how I now know lots of people in a variety of different relationships, and also how comfortable I am with this given my upbringing. Part of this was the impact of spending three years in Brighton at a time when I both wanted and needed to rebel against so many of the values that with hindsight crushed my soul & spirit. But at the same time it meant I had to spend most of my early 20s getting things out of my system that I should have dealt with in my teens. No, I’m still not over everything yet. Every time I think of organised religion and its impact on my emotional health – not to say every Sunday morning wasted being indoctrinated, I get really angry and have to use CBT-techniques to calm down.

Struggling with the emotional side of exploring my own sexuality

I remember about 15 years ago at an international student conference in my first year at uni, one of the women there offered sex on a plate. I froze, not really knowing how to deal with it & the moment was gone. This was after a few months at university not really having connected with anyone whether dating-wise or friendship-wise. That said, the conference was great fun and those of us that went came away wondering why university wasn’t like this. Fast-forward to graduation & I remember the contempt too many graduands felt towards the university – something several of us talked about at the graduation ceremony. Mine was the second generation of ‘up front fees’ and felt we were treated like cash cows rather than an integral inclusive part of university life. That’s why I tend to shout down the phone at any unfortunate soul from the university trying to get more money off me.

Dashed hopes and expectations?

I wasn’t the only one. Ever since, a number of people I’ve met over the years who went to university (and came out disappointed) felt they were sold a lie by the institution, or were told by their elders about a university lifestyle that no longer existed. I still remember being told that going to university meant you were in the top 1-2% of the brightest people in the country, as well as being told that I was likely to meet my future wife there. I guess one of the hardest things about growing up is learning that what the older generation tells you about life isn’t always true. In my case it’s meant I no longer trust the opinions or advice of an entire cohort of people in my parents generation that knew me as a child. What they told me as a child/teenager turned out not to be true and it hurt me. Badly.

Living like a teen in my ‘roaring 20s’

When I returned to Cambridge after university – six months after my first major mental health crisis, I got involved in a number of societies at Cambridge & Anglia Ruskin as a post-graduate student of the latter. Having dated/had short relationships with a number of students from the former, one of the things that struck me was how intense their workloads & lifestyles were – to the extent that in your formative years I could understand how lifelong friendships & relationships were struck up. When a group of you are faced with the same intense pressures, it sort of brings you together in a way the more lethargic lifestyles of other universities (mainly in arts/humanities) at the time could not. To put it in perspective, I had 2-3 assessed essays per term, where as at Cambridge my partners had 2-3 assess essays per week.

It was only after I transferred down to London that I found myself in a reasonably stable relationship – what I call my first proper relationship. But being so single-minded & selfish at the time, I wasn’t nearly the loving, caring boyfriend that I should have been. Obviously the commute didn’t help – we could only see each other at weekends or when I took time off work during university holidays. Shortly after we broke up, I moved to London and lived the work hard-play hard lifestyle, going on various dates, having short flings but never finding the stable loving relationship that I so desperately wanted. Again, dashed expectations of not having found my life partner in the furnace of graduate professional London living.

Where I am now

In early 2012 I had a mental health breakdown which meant I was no longer able to work full time hours. I still cannot to this day. Only earlier this week there were three events I wanted to film but could not get out of bed. I was utterly exhausted.

It seems like years since I was last with someone who made me really feel the emotion of love – my definition of giving and receiving of ‘intimate love’ between people. (The English language is incredibly limited, hence liking the deconstruction of the term ‘love’ here using Greek).

Since 2012, I’ve effectively stopped dating completely. Part of it was due to my breakdown being related to rejection that in my rational mind actually made perfect sense but one that my emotional mind could not switch off. The rest is due to me feeling that while I’m not working full time & having had to move back in with my family, I won’t be good enough for everyone. Not in a ‘woe is me!’ sense but in a: ‘Let’s be realistic here and spend our time doing something more constructive than searching for a forlorn hope, getting continually rejected even more’ sense.

‘But you’re always doing fun stuff!’

I’m still struggling to connect emotionally with people. In part because I have an emotion intensity that can be off-putting. It’s something that when I see it in other people, I back away from them too. Almost as if ‘it’s bad enough being me!’ At the same time, others see me as this confident & outgoing guy who is active in the community. I on the other hand see myself as doing some of the things that ‘need to be done and have a strong public interest to have them done,’ but hardly anyone else will do or is able to do. Some of the decision-making at a very basic level is emotionally exhausting – even deciding to catch a bus into town. It uses up my supply of spoons.

No one to help recharge my emotional batteries

Over the past year it’s something I’ve started feeling more acutely. Whether it’s wanting to work as part of a bigger team on a regular, stable basis to having the loving arms and warm embrace to come back to after a hectic day, the void is becoming more and more noticeable. And all too often it feels like there’s nothing I can do about it. Essentially I’m fighting a war on four fronts:

  • Health
  • Friendships & relationships
  • Employment & financial
  • Living arrangements

The problem for me is that all of these are so closely intertwined. The other is the huge level of uncertainty both with my health (ie ‘will I ever recover to a point where I can work full time hours again? It’s been three years remember) and also what I see as the general economic/political outlook. Will I ever be in a situation where I’ll be able to afford my own place in the not-to-distant future?

“Stop sulking!”

A couple of years ago – not long after my 2012 breakdown I wrote a blogpost titled: “I’d like to teach the world to sing”This reflects my mindset today: Physically I’m past my peak of my mid-20s. Therefore if there are life experiences that I want to have before it’s too late, now’s the time to do them. So. Let’s look at that list & see what actions I’ve taken.

“I’d like to sing or perform as part of a large group of people to a big audience in splendid surroundings.” Done – and still doing. See here with Dowsing Sound Collective

“I’d like to learn how to ice skate and roller-blade properly. So please can we have that long-muted permanent ice rink in Cambridge please, given that lots of building is happening anyway?” Doing – now skating with Romsey Rollerbillies, and nearly 1,000 FB likes on the Cambridge Ice Rink campaign page I created.

“I’d like to make a positive difference to my home town – making it realise (and ultimately deal with) its own flaws so that it can meet the expectations that come with a growing ‘brand’. (Yes, I hate the term too).” Doing with Be the change – Cambridge -> Join us on 14 March to have your say too! (See here)

“I’d like to overcome my mental blocks on all things creative – especially with art, music and creative media. I have a number of tools but struggle to pick them up, let alone use them in the way I’d like to.” Done and Doing with video – kicked off in summer 2014.

There’s still a lot more to do, but adopting a ‘do stuff’ rather than ‘wait for someone else to do stuff’ seems to be that little bit more constructive. Happy red heart day!

Posted in Mental health | 2 Comments

Stopping on rollerskates

Summary

Week 2 of training with the brilliant Romsey Rollerbillies

If you scroll to the last five seconds of the video below, you’ll see an expert’s example of how to stop on rollerskates in style

I signed up for the Rollerbillies’ Fresh Meat program having filmed them last year (see above). Having gotten into the filming swing of things, I’m now experimenting with a variety of non-conventional camera shots – in particular where me & the camcorder are moving. But I don’t think I’ll be getting anywhere near the standards of this clip below.

Joining a club run by and made up of mainly women members

[For those of you interested in sport & feminism, the paper Sport, Gender and Power : The rise of roller derby may be of interest.]

I’m really grateful for being given the chance to learn how to skate with them. The only lessons I’ve been able to find for skating have been in London. Not living in a single place for long enough – and thus not settling meant I never took up the option while I was living there in the late 2000s. Despite turning up in week 1 with the wrong kit – blades rather than skates, a cycle helmet rather than a more substantial crash helmet, and leisure pads rather than rollerderby pads, the welcome I got put me at ease. Quite something for someone with an anxiety disorder!

Safety first – and in more ways than one

The focus on safety was at the heart of everything they taught. A ‘tick-box’ culture this was not. What struck me was how similar their focus on health and safety was to the teacher training I did at Cambridge Regional College in late 2011. Straight from the textbook and communicated very well. I knew I was in good hands.

Furthermore, Shona the lead instructor on the first week and Rachel in the second reinforced the concept of the hall being a ‘safe space’ – and in two ways.

A safe space to make mistakes

The first was that it was safe to make mistakes, get things wrong, fall over and take time to learn things. For me this was like the opposite of school and church as a child. Do badly in an exam at school and all hell breaks loose with family and family friends. Make a mistake in life and you have to go to church and confess your sins and feel guilt and shame. Here was the opposite. What I also noticed was how some of the more experienced skaters read my body-language on skates like a book: I was incredibly tense – fearing the pain I might suffer if I fell over and having everyone pointing & laughing at me. The only time I saw people laughing at someone falling over was when one of the very experienced skaters did so.

A safe space for everyone – irrespective of your size or shape

The week I started skating with the Rollerbillies seemed to coincide with the #ThisGirlCan campaign to get more women into sport. I picked this up from Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson (who I met in Parliament a couple of years ago) tweeting about it.

I knew I was throwing myself into this while being very out of shape. What I didn’t realise until the end of the second week was just how much of a workout I had got. Having bought some new upgraded pads, I was astonished to find how soaked in sweat my wrist pads were. We were on our wheels for a good couple of hours. The exercise you get isn’t so much a sprint or a distance run, but more related to the pressure your muscles are put under – or so it felt. Being in ‘derby stance’ where you are effectively standing in a squatting position while skating around the track is something that requires an incredible amount of stamina – something that I’ve seldom had!

Just as with my days dancing in the 2000s, people of all shapes and sizes demonstrated incredible skill, talent, stamina and co-ordination. For all the body-shaming in the media, here were a large group of people in my home town comprehensively busting those negative messages.

At the same time given the nature of the activity & the level I’m at, I’m in listening & concentrating mode. Break that concentration & you fall over. Hard. I’m in listening mode because the people giving me advice have all been where I have been skating-wise. Their advice without exception has been constructive, friendly, reassuring & encouraging. With all of us newbies they have taken several of us slower learners aside for 1-2-1 short sessions to work on specific pieces of technique. For people who might be low on confidence and/or have an anxious disposition, the impact this approach has is huge.

Quite a commitment just to get a few seconds of dynamic film footage?

It sounds like it, doesn’t it? But remember back in 2012 I blogged how I wanted to learn how to stop on rollerblades? (With a view to skating regularly – somewhere). My mindset as in that linked blogpost is that I’m past my physical peak. (I’m in my mid-30s now). Therefore if I want to avoid middle-aged and elderly years full of regrets about not doing more physical activities, it really is now or never. That I can combine it with filming is even better. Even if I’m not able to capture the sort of footage I have in mind, I’ve still learnt a new skill, met some nice new people and improved my fitness.

Personal styles of learning – alone or in a group? One off or repeated over time?

An alternative style of learning to this could be looking online at some digital videos and going out somewhere to try things out myself. Another might be a one-day crash course. The former I find procrastination a huge barrier. With the latter I find I need to have been a practitioner and know the basics before going along somewhere to break through a glass ceiling. I found this out when I was a Freedom of Information Officer in the civil service during my early/mid 20s. The Act had been in force for just under a year and we had got a few things wrong – as you inevitably do with interpreting a new piece of legislation. Having booked myself into a seminar that I thought would have dozens of people with a senior barrister (I think it was Sue Cullen) on FoI & data protection – the latter of which I couldn’t get my head round on its application. In the end, only four of us turned up. Thus we had a whole day with a senior barrister to go through all of the issues at work we had with the two pieces of legislation. Following that session, I re-wrote the guidance on FoI & data protection for our office to make it fit for purpose.

In a nutshell, learning in a group over time is what works for me. Not just with skating but with music too. Which was why I was pleasantly surprised to see one of the experienced skaters, Meg, at our first Sunday music rehearsal for the Dowsing Sound Collective this year – having joined us a couple of weeks prior. Which reminds me, we have a musical year that looks like it’ll be just as exciting as 2014. And if you’re in London, get yourselves down to the Union Chapel on 28 March. The London collectives are up and running…

 

Posted in Cambridge, Charities and Big Society, Events I have been to, Music, Sport | 1 Comment

The Greens may be surging, but the next bit could be tricky for them

Summary

The challenges of rapid expansion in a short space of time

At the end of my civil service career I went through the opposite – the largescale downsizing of an organisation numbered in the thousands. The Green Party judging by recent headlines now has more members than UKIP, and at the time of writing is not far off the Liberal Democrats, all three hovering just over 40,000 members across the UK.

“Hang on a minute, how did this happen?”

The Green Party’s membership has been steadily rising over recent years, and shot up in 2014.

(Above graph via @Jim_Jepps and @steve4319).

What then followed after the European elections (where The Greens missed out narrowly on doubling their MEPs with defeats in the North West & East Anglia by small margins) was the Scottish Independence referendum. On the side of a dynamic and radical ‘Yes’ campaign (from what my Twitter friends in Scotland from across the spectrum told me), The Scottish Greens experienced a surge in membership numbers shortly after the ‘No’ victory was announced. By ‘surge’ I mean they more than doubled their membership of just over 2,000 to well over 5,000…in three days.

“In three days?!? Crikey!”

It was even more for the Scottish National Party – who now look very likely to take control of a significant number of Scottish constituencies in the Westminster Parliament in the May 2015 general election. I’ll explain why this matters later on.

“Are they or aren’t they a major party?”

In October, the TV broadcasters got together to announce the planned format of the TV debates as they had in 2010. They included UKIP but excluded The Greens. The Greens, supporters, sympathisers & those that wanted a more plural TV debate started signing a petition. In their hundreds of thousands – nearly 300,000 at the time of writing this. Combined with the argument of Caroline Lucas’s presence in the Commons, representation in a number of councils, three MEPs and two MSPs in the Holyrood Parliament in Scotland has put pressure on the broadcasters.

Cameron steps in and puts The Greens on the front pages

At Prime Minister’s Questions on 14 January, Cameron put The Green Party on the front pages of the politics news (and of the evening news because they report PMQs as ‘real’ news) when attacking Miliband & Labour. (See here, from 5m30s). This meant that Wednesday’s evening news led with Cameron and Miliband clashing over whether The Greens should take part in the TV debates. Publicity gold dust given that many outside of politics may not have known about The Greens, or saw them as a tiny party not worth the attention because the news didn’t feature them. With a greater frequency of higher profile news coverage and a general desire for ‘something new’ in politics, at the moment The Greens are benefiting.

“What’s Cameron’s game? Why is he deliberately inflating The Greens given they stand for almost everything he does not?”

Good question. Note that George Osborne repeated Conservative backing for the Greens to take part in the TV debates a day earlier in Parliament. (See here). In a nutshell, it’s tactical. UKIP are likely to take more votes off the Tories than Labour or the Lib Dems. By having The Greens on the same platform, Labour and the Lib Dems will have to watch their left flanks. With little chance of either The Greens or UKIP winning power, they can afford to be more radical with their policies. From a disgruntled voters perspective, between the Greens & UKIP there is very clear political water between the two. Cambridge will be a microcosm of this throughout 2015 as the media-friendly duo of Patrick O’Flynn & Dr Rupert Read (of UKIP and The Greens respectively) go head to head at the fringes. Although both are unlikely to win Cambridge, the question is how much of the Lib Dem and Labour vote will go to either of those two parties. Note in 2014 at the Euro elections the two of them totalled over 12,000 votes in Cambridge.

Rapid growth brings risks – as Nigel found to his cost

Despite electoral success, the rise of UKIP was plagued with media stories of ‘politically incorrect’ (to downright offensive) outbursts from various activists, candidates and even elected councillors. As Farage commented at the time, UKIP simply did not have the administrative infrastructure in place to do basic background checks on all of its new members and candidates. As a result, Farage found himself having to fight off negative headlines on a regular basis.

Could the same happen to The Greens? Quite easily. With a rising profile comes greater scrutiny. Expect to see a number of media splashes where a tweet or a Facebook post is taken ‘out of context’, or where the direct action past of someone is plastered all over the media. My advice? Get your staff trained in crisis management communications. The Media Trust are particularly good at this – see their courses here. In fact, that goes for other parties and campaign groups too.

Not all membership fees are comparable across parties

This is the other thing to consider. In the case of The Greens, their fees are based on income, starting at £5 pa for students, under 18s & those earning less than £10k per year. (See this tweet). For UKIP it’s a flat £30 per year bar special offers for armed forces & under 22s. Labour fees are also income based (see here). For the Tories, it’s more simplified (see here) and for the Lib Dems, I couldn’t find publicly available numbers. I’ve seen some social media comments about the impact of varying fees, but I’d guess for many people – especially young people, the low annual starting rates are not a huge barrier to getting involved.

“What do you do with all of these new activists?”

Keep an eye on the various party political vacancies on W4MP. The vacancies there often tell stories behind the headlines of the organisations that advertise. The challenge any rapidly-expanding organisation has is inducting new members into its culture, systems and processes. There’s also the challenge of developing trust. What do you do as a party/campaign administrator if you suddenly get over 100 membership applications from a part of the country that you’ve never been active in before? Where do you start?

In the case of Cambridge, there has been rapid growth – the local party having over 200 members and climbing still. The difference with Cambridge is that there are long-established environmentalist groups such as Cambridge Carbon Footprint and Transition Cambridge with a very solid core of long standing community activists, some of whom inevitably are members of political parties. But what if you don’t have that local activist or community base to build from? Where do you start? How do you know who to trust? What do you do if the trust breaks down?

It might sound corporate and bland, but I wonder if The Greens have done a basic risk assessment on the back of the surge in numbers. What are all the good and bad things that could happen as a result of this huge increase in numbers? What are their plans to mitigate any risks that might occur (and thus become incidents)? The same goes for Labour and the SNP – especially in a social media age where every social media molehill will be turned into a mountain by a sensationalist media. Why feature complicated policies when you can have a short “10 social media fails by [insert name of party]”?

Who will become the voices and faces of The Greens with this raised profile?

Updated to add: Funnily enough, within minutes of me posting this blogpost, The Greens updated their website with a substantive list of policy spokespersons (and their social media contacts). See the list here.

At a national level, The Greens have a number of experienced elected representatives – see here. But as with UKIP, how do/will they manage below that surface – especially at city/town/village level with local media? In Cambridge for The Greens this has been a real challenge over the past few years. What do you do if you’re in an area where none of your activists wants to be the point of contact for the local newspaper or radio station? Cambridge Greens have been fortunate with Rupert Read running a more proactive and disciplined media operation – not least reflected in his regular letters published in the Cambridge News reminding some 30,000 readers that the party is there. Whether that turns into votes or members remains to be seen.

How will the Greens cope when their opponents inevitably fire back?

Because party politics can be a very, very dirty business. The first exchanges in Cambridge between the five candidates together was on BBC Cambridgeshire with Chris Mann.

Obviously it won’t be the last.

Posted in Cambridge, Campaigning, protesting and demonstrating, Party politics, Social media | 3 Comments

Greater Cambridge Assembly meets for the first time…

Summary

…but do the people of Cambridge know it even exists, let alone know how to influence it?

Here’s a pano-pic I took at the start of the meeting

CambridgeAssembly

…having made my way via bus from Cambridge to Cambourne, a very new ‘newtown’ built in the last few years to help accommodate a growing county population. Here’s the WikiP entry, & here’s their parish council’s website.

Cambourne’s been much-maligned as an example of how not to build a newtown – a few of which this Guardian article touches on. In the grand scheme of things, the faults are with the planners and politicians, not the people that have chosen to move there to make the best of it. The big problem for me as a sometime visitor to the local council is poor public transport. Given the planned expansion and the scale of the place, for me there should have been some planning for rail – ideally as part of the East-West Rail plans.

“So…who’s on the Assembly?”

Here’s the list. I also picked up that people could ask public questions – but didn’t spot the bit about giving notice. That said, having seen the first couple of hours of the inaugural assembly, I’ve now got ***lots*** of follow-up questions for the assembly (as well as to the executive that the assembly scrutinises). Anyway, here’s what asking a question to the assembly looks like, courtesy of Jim Chisholm of the Cambridge Cycling Campaign, & Dr Julian Huppert MP.

“How did you find the meeting?”

Not exactly earth-shaking. To be fair, the setup we have is the result of successive failure by Whitehall to give Cambridge the local government structure it needs to deal with the problems it has. This assembly is the next best thing to a much needed unitary authority (in my opinion). Instead, we have three different councils with three different sets of political control (Cambridge (@CamCitCo) = Labour, South Cambridgeshire (@SouthCambs) = Conservative, Cambridgeshire County (@CambsCC) = No overall control) combined with representation from what Whitehall would call ‘key stakeholders’. Now that the assembly is up and running, @SouthCambs need to update the assembly web pages (see here) so everyone knows who is on the assembly, who they represent & why.

The thing is, it could have – and perhaps should have been something much more substantive and, dare I say it ‘exciting’. Part of the problem I think is with communications – something I touched on when I scrutinised the shadow city deal board in November 2014. (See my write-up here). In a nutshell, the papers for the 12 January meeting (see here) should have been the basis for some really exciting community activities to get people’s input into the proposed transport schemes.

“How many schemes were there?”

There were lots on the list and at various stages of planning. Yet all too often I find myself wondering where the ideas for transport schemes – especially the more expensive ones – come from. Given how transport infrastructure affects our daily lives, shouldn’t people have more of a chance to find out about how the system works & how to influence it? (Or at least be encouraged to?)

Sparking people’s imagination

I think there’s a huge opportunity with the general election coming up to get people involved. Lots of parties, activists & organisations are working to get people interested in the election, so why not do something that keeps people in touch once the votes have been counted? We found out today in Cambridge that one of the political parties is going to accuse the others of not being nearly radical enough on transport issues in Cambridge.

Given the number of local public debates there will be in Cambridge, it’ll be interesting to see what the exchanges are like – and what specifics the candidates are prepared to commit to in their local party manifestos.

The wider question on ‘how we communicate with each other as a city’ still needs addressing

The set up of the assembly in part acknowledges that we don’t communicate, let alone work together as a city. For a start the lack of diversity in the room was in striking contrast to the diversity of people that make up Cambridge. For example, the experiences of young people in local further or higher education (ie those that live at home & commute daily rather than those that leave home to go to university) is likely to be very different to those representing the business interests when it comes to cars vs cycles & busses. But they still face the same problem of congestion in Cambridge. But how are the views of young people being collected and systematically fed into the decision-making processes?

As far as media was concerned, Jon Vale of the Cambridge News was there for the meeting as well as myself filming various bits of it. I also counted just over a dozen people in the public seats at various points – though it wasn’t clear who was representing/reporting for someone else and who was there as an interested citizen. Given the amount of money being spent as part of the deal, my take is there needs to be more publicity and civic education about not just the city deal, but about our civic and democratic institutions generally. But that can’t be addressed without looking at how we the people of our city communicate with each other and our institutions. Because let’s face it, everyone’s got something to sell or a message to share. But does everyone want to listen? How do you make it easier for people to filter the things they don’t want to hear but be kept informed about the things they want to know about?

It’s not all doom & gloom though!

This is a 15 year process. There is still scope for people to influence the decisions the assembly takes. The most interesting bit for me is that we now have a very public forum to scrutinise Cambridge University – as they have a seat on the assembly.

Friday 16 Jan – debate on Cambridge Railsee here for details  – four of the five prospective parliamentary candidates will be taking part.

Posted in Business economics and finance, Cambridge, Charities and Big Society, Housing and transport, Party politics, Public administration & policy | 4 Comments

Five months of mainstream media election coverage

Summary

…and even the politics obsessives like me find this a depressing scenario

Matt Frei of Channel 4 News is spot on at 4m37s

…and then goes for the jugular at 5m00s

An utterly depressing political exchange which felt like both sides had been coached in how to get their ‘lines to take’ into the footage. In my opinion.

Labour and Conservatives retreating to their safe zones at a national level?

Monday’s ‘news’ was depressing in terms of how controlled and stage-managed it was. Labour going after the Tories on the NHS, and the Tories going after Labour on the economy. Lots of shouting across the airwaves, lots of talking about how ‘orrible the other lot were, little discussion & exposition of the policies they are standing on. None of the parties so far have been able to communicate a vision of what life might be like in 2020. A positive vision, a sound strategy and consistent, co-ordinated credible policies on how to make this happen. Too much to ask for?

The thing is, tactically both Labour and Conservatives are content at a national level for this level of debate. Talk to activists on both sides and they’ll say compared to the Lib Dems, at least the other side are principled and as adversaries you know where they are. Thus they are easier to target. ‘Ideological shape-shifters’ was how one local Labour activist described their Lib Dem opponents to me. Harder now though for the Lib Dems because they’ve got the record of being in coalition tied to them. The Tories won’t want to let them get away with: “Well, things would have been even worse if it was the Tories alone in government!” while Labour understandably will be saying “All of this bad stuff happened because you went into coalition!”

Labour’s troubles north of the border

I was astonished to see this from the newly elected leader of Scottish Labour – calling for a mansion tax to pay for Scottish nurses and quote: ‘over and above anything the SNP promise.’

Two issues with this. The first is that they have framed a policy with a massive reference to their political opponents. Rather than having a ballpark figure of the number of medical personnel needed, they’ve said: SNP+1000. So if the SNP for a laugh say: “We’ll have infinity nurses!” …exactly.

The second issue is Murphy framing the funding for this as being one drawn from London. Tactically he can say that because the SNP want independence, they can’t campaign for this extra funding. But it doesn’t make things easier for Labour activists in London faced with a “You’d give our money to Scotland!” message that the London-based media will have a field day with. Even though policy-wise such a tax only hits those with properties valued at £2million.

The result? Policy-wise Labour looks disunited because of the public disagreements. It also gives the impression of a lack of co-ordination and a lack of strategy. Not what you want just before an election.

“What about the other parties?”

In the context of Cambridgeshire, me and Richard Taylor, a fellow community reporter discussed this with Chris Mann on BBC Cambridgeshire. Have a listen below.

There was much more that both of us wanted to say. In Cambridgeshire, any upsets I think will be at council seat level, with UKIP gaining more seats in the north of the county and possibly the Greens with one or two in Cambridge City and the south. The big unknown is where the Greens and UKIP will be taking votes from – assuming they do. Will voters that backed them at the European elections in Cambridge (over 12,000 in total for the Greens & UKIP, at roughly 7,000 & 5,000 each) return to the main three, or are they sufficiently weak vs-a-vs Greens & UKIP for them to stick with their 2014 voting pattern?

TV trying out new things in this election

Newsnight’s Emily Maitlis is trying out joining running clubs, asking members about politics in the process of joining them on their runs.

This I like because there’s a shared activity – one that you have to be passionate about to do it. Getting up early in the morning when it’s cold and wet takes a lot of motivation. Rather than approaching people in the awkward arena of a town centre, she’s embedding herself in community groups who happen to be doing something that she’s passionate about (outside journalism) as well.

Anglia TV are also trying out engaging with schools. (See here). This is something I’m going to see if Shape Your Place can help with too.

Sophy Ridge of Sky has also made a list of things politicians should avoid in this campaign – see here. This sort of links to David Dimbleby’s superb lecture on the future of the political interview. It’s a long lecture but worth watching in full.

So all of this along with the social media commentary I’ve observed is that even the mainstream media are getting sick of the current state of play. It remains to be seen whether something gives (and if so, what) with the way things are. My guess is that it won’t be something major, but rather something seemingly innocuous that sets things off.

We live in interesting times…

Posted in Cambridge, Campaigning, protesting and demonstrating, Party politics | 1 Comment

What impact can you have in the May 2015 elections?

Summary

Some thoughts on how you can take part in this year’s elections – even if you are not a supporter/member of a political party, do not have the vote or don’t rate the candidates standing in your area

The basics

The team at Democracy Club who I met in 2014 said they wanted to help make the 2015 general election less crap than it risks becoming. Although they have their own personal political opinions and biases – don’t we all? – one of their main aims is to help as many people as possible cast an informed vote. At a very basic level, this means ensuring the electorate know:

  • That there is an election on
  • What the election is about – ie for which institutions with what powers
  • How to register
  • Who is standing
  • Where, when and how to vote

An example of this in Cambridge is here, by Chris Rand for the Queen Edith’s ward by-election.

Action: Could you create a similar poster for your local area to share online or perhaps to print out and display in a shop window, coffee shop, library or community centre?

Why this might help: At a very basic level they help remind people when voting day is. You might be interested, informed and passionate about politics, but are others?

Let the candidates know you exist – and are interested

  • You can find out who is standing for Parliament in the 2015 general election at http://yournextmp.com/
  • You can find out from your council (see https://www.gov.uk/find-your-local-council if you don’t know which council is responsible for elections in your area – it’ll be the district or borough council if you are in an area with county/district/parish councils) if there are local elections.

What I did in 2010 was to ask all candidates the same set of questions on the issues that were important to me. That way I got to frame the conversation rather than allowing the politicians to do it for me. If you have social media pages – Facebook, Twitter, blogs, tumblr or others, feel free to share the responses. Others may want to quote the responses in their follow-up questions.

Action: Could you find out who is standing in your area and share this information with your family, friends & contacts?

Why this might help: You may just catch someone at the right time who can then fire off an email about an issue on their mind. It could be a big picture international issue or it could be something very local or personal where a political advocate could help bring in proper support from a public service.

If you have a smartphone, learn how to use it to record audio and video

Websites such as http://iphonereporting.com/ have links on how to use them to record what politicians are saying. Follow the candidates on social media to find out when and where they are campaigning, and ask them questions face-to-face. You can upload the footage you capture onto Youtube or Vimeo for video, and Audioboom or Soundcloud if you are recording audio. Here is an example of where I recorded Cambridge MP Dr Julian Huppert at a recent event in Cambridge.

Given the huge range of issues you could ask questions about, you may want to focus either on your local area, and/or you may want to pick one or two important issues that you can research in depth so it’s harder for politicians to catch you out or bluff their way through your questions!

Action: Do you know how to use the video and audio functions of your phone? If not, how about learning how to use them for this specific purpose: local democracy

Why this might help: You are creating an evidence base that other people can then follow up in their own time. It also helps the candidates because people get to hear them in their own voices and as human beings. This sort of footage is more likely to be informal, therefore the candidates are shown as they are rather than as the polished products of central office. You can also tie down candidates to very clear commitments once it is recorded and shared.

Organise a debate or a hustings?

For those of you who are members of community groups, you can organise community gatherings to allow people to meet the candidates. It can be along the lines of a formal hustings – see the videos here for an example. Alternatively, you might want to set aside a regular gathering at a community centre for candidates and politicians to drop in and have informal conversations with people in your community.

Think about audiences that might be excluded by the political process – in particular those not allowed to vote whether by age or status. They are still part of your community, so how can you organise an event for those that might otherwise be and feel excluded?

Action: Ask your community group if there is interest in organising something that allows your community to meet and question the candidates

Why this might help: You never know, but there might be others in your community feeling similar. You might also have ideas on how to organise something more exciting than traditional hustings.

If you have children or friends who are under-18, invite them to suggest questions for the candidates.

If you are a very busy person with little time to research and find out about who is standing for what, why not mobilise the next generation? Drop an email to the candidates to say that you are going to vote based on the recommendation of your children/young friends, and that you expect the candidates to answer their questions factually and honestly. See what happens.

Action: If you can, try it – and suggest it to family friends. What would it look like if a group of parents got together and put their power of the vote into the hands of their children?

Why this might help: If more and more adults got together and told candidates their vote was going to be the direct result of recommendations from under 18s, would the issues young people and children face be taken more seriously?

And finally…

Whatever you do, follow it up! Let the candidates know whether you voted for them once the election is over, letting them know why you did or did not vote for them. The feedback for all might get some of them to change their policies, behaviours and actions over time. Keep tabs on them once the election is over. It might be that what happens in the 2015 election might inform future electorates in future elections.

Posted in Cambridge, Campaigning, protesting and demonstrating, Party politics, Social media | 1 Comment

My personas of the year for 2014

Summary

Foxy has hers below, 

…and here are mine

[My personal] Hero of 2014

Without doubt and by an effing country mile…

Andrea Cockerton of the Dowsing Sound Collective

Here’s a glimpse why…

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmgyQdOlBO8 …and that’s just the fundraising.

Her arrangement of this Basement Jaxx number not only impressed me, it impressed Basement Jaxx who were also in the audience – so much so that they invited her to collaborate with them – the result being Dowsing’s version of ‘Power to the People’. This was quickly followed up by recording Reality Checkpoint for the Cycle of Songs/Tour de France in Cambridge – leading to a live performance on Parker’s Piece in the summer. Clashing with the World Cup Final were two performances at The Apex in Bury St Edmunds – where this video was recorded. Finally we had sellout gigs in December at the Cambridge Corn Exchange, and a smaller one at The Maltings in Ely.

Two professional recordings and four live performances with one of the most buzzing and supportive of groups of people I’ve worked with in years. That’s the difference Andrea made to me.

Taking a risk with me award

Goes to…

David Cleevely and Anne Bailey

Both invested not just their reputations but a huge amount of time in the Be the change – Cambridge project. What started out as a meeting over coffee led to our first event, our Conversation Cafe at Anglia Ruskin University in September – see here for a write-up and video footage.  My thanks also to all of the sponsors and supporters – especially as we prepare for our community action event on 14 March 2015.

Honourable mentions also go to the Cambridge Buskers Festival and to the Campaign for Better Transport for giving me my first paid digital video commissions, and to the ADC Theatre for my first panto film commission too!

Standing up to be counted in the face of hostility award 

Goes to…

Rahima Ahammed – Labour candidate for the Queen Edith’s by-election in November 2014

Given the amount of hostility generated by the media towards women and to Muslims, to put yourself forward for election and to campaign actively takes a huge amount of courage in the face of such a hostile environment. Having experienced what it’s like to campaign in Puffles’ campaign earlier this year, and having heard anecdotally some of the backlash she faced, Cambridge isn’t immune. To face this head on deserved commending.

The One Cambridge Award

Goes jointly to…

Anna Malan and Emily Dunning of the Cambridge Hub

This is for their work with the Cambridge Hub in trying to bridge the gap between Cambridge students and local residents. Emily is currently halfway around the world on her http://www.seekthechange.org/about/ project. Here’s an interview I recorded with her just before she left.

 

Anna is now the manager of the Cambridge Hub and in the space of a few months has turned two ‘Wouldn’t it be nice if Cambridge did this?’ blogposts and turned them into actions & events. The first was one that brought many of Cambridge’s environmentalist groups & activists together for an open space session – which is being repeated in the New Year. The second is the Volunteer for Cambridge event on 28 February 2014. She’s creating the safe space for ‘town and gown’ to come together to solve our shared challenges.

The ‘I’ll stand by you’ award

Goes to…

Ceri Jones – a Cambridge community activist

Because she was the only person who campaigned with me publicly when I stood as Puffles for the Coleridge Ward in the Cambridge City Council elections in 2014. She was also at The Guildhall for the results count, staying up all night in the media gallery with journalists from national as well as local news.

Journalist of the year award

Goes to…

Chris Havergal, formerly of the Cambridge News, now of The Times Higher Education

A well-deserved move from local to national news earlier this year, Chris had more than earned this move with his local government reporting for the Cambridge News, attending local council committee meetings that hardly anyone else wanted to attend. Honourable mentions go to Jayne Secker of Sky News – conversing with me over Twitter between advert breaks while she was on air, and Julian Clover of Cambridge105 for broadcasting my first radio reports.

Unsung political activist of the year award

Goes to…

Ellisif Wasmuth of The Cambridge Green Party

Two years ago I criticised The Green Party for having such a small presence in the city following a fall from their 2010 high point. Ellisif came to Cambridge and from scratch and formed what is now a vibrant Cambridge Young Greens movement and was instrumental in supporting Rupert Read’s campaign in the Euro elections, where the Greens polled over 7,000 votes across Cambridge – a record.

Political innovation of the year award

Goes to…

Cambridge Regional College Media Students & Hilary Cox

For organising and delivering a broadcast standard version of Question Time – see here. This for me has set what I hope is an annual precedent: of Cambridgeshire County Councillors being cross-examined by college students while being live broadcast online.

Musician of the year award

Goes to:

Grace Sarah

Grace did her GCSEs this summer, yet still managed to record and perform some amazing music this year. I saw her at The Junction in Cambridge (see here) and in St Ives just outside the city, and filmed both performances. Honourable mentions also go to:

…all of whom played some tremendous sets this year.

The big theme that runs through many of the nominees and winners is that many of them tried out new things for the first time, or enabled me to do the same – eg allowing me to film them perform. This chimes with challenge I set in my last words of my final blogpost of 2013.

1) “What is the one action that you are going to undertake this year that you have not done before in your life?

2) What behaviour change will you make this year? What are you currently doing that you will stop doing or change, what are you currently not doing that you will start doing?”

The same challenges apply this year.

I’ve avoided having a villain of the year. If there was, it’d be the tabloid media. But giving them such an award would only give them more publicity and feed the demons of hatred that need vanquishing. So no award for them. For many, it’s been a difficult year. I hope we can make 2015 a vast improvement. I’m going to do my bit.

Happy New Year!

 

Posted in Cambridge | 2 Comments

Community conversations in the run up to the 2015 general election?

Summary

How can local political parties make themselves available for face-to-face conversations with voters, potential supporters and fellow activists beyond door-to-door canvassing and organised hustings?

This post stems from a number of conversations I’ve had with activists of various political colours (and those independent) locally in recent times. It comes at a time when – in Cambridge at least, all of the main political parties should be showing an increase in membership and volunteers given that we are less than six months away from a general election.

The five main parties in England – Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrats, Greens and UKIP have all been out campaigning visibly in Cambridge in the past month or two. All of the parties here have selected their candidates:

My take remains that it’s too close to call between Julian and Daniel. There are many factors that make Cambridge a particularly volatile seat – and one more difficult when it comes to campaign tactics & messages. My analysis just after the May 2014 elections here remains broadly the same. Perhaps the only contextual change is that UKIP and The Greens have already started campaigning aggressively. Not a week goes by without a letter from Cambridge Greens being printed in the Cambridge News. UKIP are also targeting safe Labour wards where other parties in recent years have only stood paper candidates. With UKIP continuing to benefit from mainstream media amplification alongside the more quiet but steady growth of the Greens locally – membership in the city now having exceeded 200, how best could Labour go about campaigning against opponents on two opposing political fronts?

Any places to informally gather new activists & introduce them to each other?

Whether it’s the Lib Dems in Coleridge, the Greens in Queen Edith’s or the Conservatives in Abbey wards, it can’t be much fun being a lone activist for your party in your part of town. Nne thing that has struck me about all the local parties is the lack of publicity for organised informal gatherings to introduce new members or supporters to each other. I’m aware that Cambridge Greens have now started doing monthly pub gatherings (with about 12 attending this one that I popped into on the way back from filming another event).

With the canvassing & leafletting that they are already doing, where are the regular informal social gatherings from the other parties that allow potential supporters and new members to meet with seasoned activists, candidates and elected representatives? Could they be advertised on the next round of leaflets that they all distribute? Could you send personalised targeted correspondence (or a phone call) to members and supporters in your databases to come along? (Which is more likely to have an impact – a mass email/leaflet drop or a personalised invitation?)

In the conversations I’ve had regarding the above, the Greens have shown the most interest in the idea – in part because they have signed up dozens of new members locally in a very short space of time. The challenge remains for the Greens to turn these new members into trained and effective activists – ones that can sustain their campaigns long after the adrenalin of the general election has died down. For various reasons, they failed to do this post-2010, despite getting three councillors elected. In anycase, since then, two of their former elected councillors have since passed away and the third left Cambridge altogether.

Other formats for community conversations and campaigning?

I’ve always wondered what it would be like if activists from two different political parties teamed up together to go door-to-door campaigning, thus creating a three-way conversation on the doorstep. For example what would it be like if the Lib Dems and UKIP or The Greens and the Tories teamed up in pairs to go door-to-door? How would the dynamics of conversations be changed? I know it’s highly unlikely to happen – party hierarchies wouldn’t stand for it. But it’s a thought.

Another format – one we use for Be the change – Cambridge, is collective problem-solving. Rather than having a traditional ‘audience vs the panel’ set up, scatter the politicians into groups who have self-divided into groups according to the issue they would like to discuss. These gatherings are very difficult to organise – as I’ve found out. But local community groups & organisations – esp those with their own venues are in an ideal place to host such gatherings. Transition Cambridge demonstrated how to do this recently – see my videos here.

My role in the 2015 campaigns in Cambridge?

I’m not planning on standing this time around – although it remains an option if things stay quiet in South Cambridge! As far as my aim of increasing participation in local democracy is concerned, I’m probably better suited to filming & reporting from gatherings, meetings and events than participating directly. My experience from the Queen Edith’s hustings (see the videos here) and the number of plays the videos got shows that there is likely to be demand for such content in the run up to the elections.

As I’ve said to the three parties represented on Cambridge City Council, I’m happy to film ‘point and record’ pieces to the camera and upload or hand over the footage I capture free of charge. The reason being I want to use digital video to help dispel some of the negative myths around local democracy. Part of that means getting footage of local candidates introducing themselves in their own words. This is what I did in the November videos below:

My aim with these is to get people to the stage where they can relate to the candidates that are on camera and think: “Yes, I could have a reasonable conversation with them” and overcome the ‘All politicians are the same’ mindset. As far as digital video with local candidates go, that’s pretty much my limit – leaving it to the public to then ask any follow-up or policy-specific questions. I had my say by standing in the May elections – in which I learnt lots. Now it’s time for others not just to have their say, but to join in some wider conversations. Through community reporting & digital video I hope that more will be able to take part.

Posted in Cambridge, Campaigning, protesting and demonstrating, Party politics, Social media | Leave a comment