“We are the One Nation party,” Nick Clegg will tell the Liberal Democrats in his speech to their spring conference tomorrow.
Remember this headline? Probably not. Yet it dates from March 2012, just six months ago.
So what happened? Two key things, I suggest. First, Nick’s ‘One Nation’ message was drowned out by the furore over the NHS reforms which dominated the party’s spring conference this year. Secondly, it was one line among many which was uttered and quickly disappeared, like a whispered greeting on a windy day.
There was some snarky commentary from journalists who heard Ed Miliband address the Labour party conference yesterday complaining that he used the phrase ‘One Nation’ 46 times in his impressively delivered, policy-lite speech.
They miss the point.
If Ed’s speech is remembered at all in a few months’ time it will be for two things. First, the feat of memorising an hour-long speech. And secondly, his naked grab for the ‘One Nation’ mantle David Cameron and Nick Clegg have both sought to make their own.
This lesson — that repetition is fundamental to getting your message across, and that it is only when folk close to you are bored with it that you know your primary audience, the general public, might have heard it even once — is one which applies to national and local campaigning alike.
A week ago, I suggested Nick Clegg should ditch the traditional leader’s speech — the 40-minute box-ticking exercise which riffles through all the major issues — and instead focus punchily on the party’s core conference message, Fairer taxes in tough times (which was actually a pretty good line).
Those of us who inhabit the political world are aberrations. We not only pore over all our own party’s campaign messages, we scrutinise our opponents’ also. How many potential voters do the same?
Lib Dems need more message discipline, to recognise that we need to stick consistently to a key message — not a vapid marketing slogan, but an easy-to-remember message which speaks to our values and policies — and repeat it time and time again.
All of which might sound a bit New Laboury for many Lib Dem tastes. But ask yourself how many of New Labour’s lines you can still, a decade or more later, remember: ‘tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime’, ‘traditional values in a modern setting’, ‘same old Tories, same old lies’, ‘education, education, education’. And then ask yourself, honestly, how many Lib Dem lines you can also recall.
To repeat my point: we need more repetition if we want our core message to be heard.
* Stephen was Editor (and Co-Editor) of Liberal Democrat Voice from 2007 to 2015, and writes at The Collected Stephen Tall.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Dominika the roving Braybrooke skunk is found again - in Corby
Starmer kills off Leveson two
Michael's weekly ward surgeries today! #dundeewestend
Bye bye coal: A Net Zero milestone
Helen Dudden
Roland
Suzanne Fletcher
Joseph Bourke
Steve Trevethan
27 Comments
The problem being that these memorable lines are only lines and they conceal the vapid, shallow nature of the thinking behind them.
That is the mistake that Ed Miliband is making – confusing slogans with a consistent analysis of Britain’s problems and how to deal with them.
Labour will NEVER be a one nation party because it is fundamentally incapable of protecting the interests of the whole nation, only those of its special interest groups i.e. those dependent on state spending.
The problem with the message ‘Fairer Taxes in Tough Times’ is that it is at best a bromide and at worst a reminder that tough times are perceived as not being shared by our coalition partners
The crime message resonated so well because everyone had a stake in it.
Alternatively, say nothing, have no policies, and duck all the tough decisions, but talk for long enough in simple enough language and hope no-one calls you on it.
Oh, there were some memorable lines in Nick Clegg’s speech this conference. “There’s no way back to being a social democratic party” and “if you’re left wing go and vote Labour” stick in my mind. Maybe that’s not the exact wording, but it’s certainly what I heard.
Nick is remembered for “no more broken promises”, “I pledge to vote against any increase in tuition fees”, “miserable little compromise”, and more recently “I’m sorry” and “best of intentions”, all of which made me proud at the time.
I don’t remember his One Nation speech, but that is probably because I tend to put out of my mind Orwellian doublespeak I disagree with such as:
One Nation = Big Society = Totalitarianism = Intolerance = Centralisation = Uniformity
It’s not so much repetition as saying something genuinely different from our opponents we can be proud of. So now more than ever we should be pitting ourselves against the Labservatives and speaking up against onenationbigsociety uniformity and for unpopular values such as pluralism, internationalism, localism, tolerance, freedom, diversity, democratic accountability and human rights.
It’s depressing that while the phrase “miserable little compromise” has stuck in the public consciousness, the context for it has not – it wasn’t Clegg’s opinion of AV, it was Clegg’s opinion of Labour offering AV in coalition discussions as a concession when it was already in Labour’s manifesto.
The competent (and abhorrent) work done by No2AV in muddying that water has led to a phrase which will be misremembered for generations.
When it comes to the ‘forgotten 50%’ – it was Labour who forgot them! The few policy points that Ed M made are just wearing coalition clothes. Break up of banks, those with the broadest shoulders etc… However – a competent if somewhat contentless speech was spoilt by the finish – with partner coming up on stage for kiss . That is something I was hoping our political culture would and should avoid. I expected better from Ed! Having watched the US wives having to sell their husbands – I had hoped Labour would turn back from the Sarah Brown voyage into this territory. Miriam is a much better role model as a modern day political partner. I can just about live with the shots of partner in audience and then walking out with leader – but the going up on stage is just yuck!
If the best criticism a government minister can came up with of Miliband’s speech is that he kissed his wife at the end of it, then my goodness are you lot in trouble.
Ed Milliband’s party is in opposition. He probably believes (and I would agree) that it is the best strategy for Labour to carry on with relatively low detail anti-coalition mood music for a while longer yet: why offer hostages to fortune when nobody really knows the circumstances under which the next election will be fought. If the posters above genuinely believe that Milliband is wrong to offer no clear vision or firm policies, then stop whinging and celebrate if you believe he is gifting us the next election.
However, I don’t think that Clegg offered much clarity or detail in his speech and he’s in government, supposedly able to implement the policies he discusses now.
I think the importance of any “good” conference speech this far out from an election is hugely exaggerated. However, to use a football analogy whilst you cannot win the league early on you can loose it. Milliband had to avoid losing as there is nothing to win at this point and I think he probably did. This is particularly true if you consider most of those who see snippets of this will not be very politically involved with many feeling they are among the 50% he refers to.
There was one loser though, I listened to Balls’ speech the day before and it was so poorly delivered with him constantly missing the emphasis those who wrote it were looking for. Irrespective of what is in the speech, the delivery is always seen to be a reflection of the understanding of the subject area. Cameron won the Tory leadership not with content, but with the smooth, confident delivery hen up against Davis. Balls was already very low in my estimation, but now I consider his “political” abilities to be as poor as his economic ones.
And I hate to point this out to Lynnee (who I think has done some brilliant work herself) but there are a large number of people who feel forgotten by this government too.
Sorry Lynne not Lynnee !
I quite like Lynnee!
Ed Milliband is quoted on the BBC as saying:
“People are fed up with politics which feels like it is reading out something that someone else has written for you. I tried to say what I believed and that is the best thing to do.”
If I thought he would listen, I would refer him to my thoughts on the other Ed’s speech…
Democratic politics, not the “Lab Con”.
Why aren’t Labour offering to reverse the benefits cuts? What are they going to buy the NHS back with?
Angry Party? Nasty Party? OR Lib Dem?
Lynne likes Lynnee, I like Hope.
We are not all as lucky as Bill Clinton who could truthfully say, “I still believe in a place called Hope”. (Having been born in a town called Hope).
Frankly, ” Fairer Taxes in Tough Times” doesn’t provide what people want in dark times. People are smashed so low by these ‘tough times’ that is a growing public mood of being reconciled to the hopelessness of the situation.
One Nation – ism is what we should have forced the Tories to accept in 2010. I wrote then in Liberator of our chance to Dizzify Cameron – instead we made him into a Baldwin.
My father literally mutiny-ed at the time of the Geddes axe. Along with other sailors he risked everything in their protest at Invergorden. Where is the fight now? The inspiration to beat this economic winter?
Give me hope, any day
Ed Miliband doesn’t do speeches, he does highly irritating nasal whines.
@oranjepan Please, play the ball not the man.
@Stephen
“ask yourself how many of New Labour’s lines you can still, a decade or more later, remember: ‘tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime’, ‘traditional values in a modern setting’, ‘same old Tories, same old lies’, ‘education, education, education’.”
Paul K (above) gets close to the reason why we remember these lines. It’s because they have an internal dissonance, which leads to an inability to deliver the message they supposedly contain.
‘Tough on crime…’ needs to be taken together with Michael Howard’s riposte (“I know what causes crime, criminals!”) and we can see how Labour found being tough on criminals was what they really wanted; ‘same old tories…’ didn’t work because they weren’t, and their lies were a whole new set; nobody learns anything while you’re getting banged over the head with ‘education, education..’ ad nauseam; “are you thinking what I’m thinking?” was just as good, because it’s one of those questions which the only answer is ‘no’.
All these lines ultimately failed, we remember them because they failed, and the lines resonate because they contain within them the reasons why they were always going to fail.
It is the twist which hits home.
I’m actually quite shocked that Miliband has been quite so enthusiastic about dumping the multicultural theme of diversity by claiming ‘One Nation’, and Alec Salmond must be rubbing his hands with glee now that Labour is telling all their Scottish MPs that Scotland doesn’t count.
@Peter
that reference is to a marketing slogan for a popular grocery chain. I’m sure you know the one.
“Ed’s speech …. his naked grab for the ‘One Nation’ mantle David Cameron and Nick Clegg have both sought to make their own.”
Look, for all I know the BNP might have called themselves the “One Nation” party. It doesn’t matter. What matters is, when you make a claim like that, does it sound plausible or doesn’t it?
The Coalition is blatantly a bunch of toffs working for the toffs, and Clegg is not personally distinguishable from Cameron and Osborne in that respect.
Given that situation, Ed’s claim that his party is at least a little bit closer to the “One Nation” ideal is – well, not entirely fair, but, not ridiculous.
To agree with Lynne, I think a large part of Miliband’s ‘content’ were pushing at open doors. The break up of banks is happening post Vickers, although I agree with Ed this could be pushed forward quicker. In fact, this might be a danger, that Labour grab the positive things the Lib Dems bring to the coalition and take ownership by being more emphatic on its implication. Thus, leaving the Lib dems holding the rubbish brought about by the dreadful economic circumstances or having to compromise with the Tories (ie, 45% Tax band ). The ludicrous stuff about Cameron personally writing out cheques to Millionaires, is probably more resonant than the fact the 45% was ‘traded’ for movement on raising the threshold for low and middle earners or cranking up capital gains tax.
The style aspect is of interest. I thought it was less presidential and more ‘holly roller’ revivalism. The many mentions of ‘faith’ and the ‘one nation’ mantra, the glossy-eyed staring into space. Although on the latter point I favour the conspiracy theory (which I’m about to invent) that his ‘improvised’ speech was in fact being beamed to a pair of AR (Augmented reality) contact lenses. 🙂
Which Lib Dem lines have stuck with me? Well, outside of the appalling “oppose/propose” set from 2005, and the out of date “penny on income tax to pay for education”, two have stuck with me. Ed Davey’s “time for tea with the Taliban” as shadow foreign secretary, and “Don’t pay our lions peanuts” from the armed forces pay campaign (did Nick Harvey ever get this implemented?)
Our key messaging has been based around putting two contradictory things together and saying “tada, this is Liberal Democracy!”, when this never works locally or when other parties try it. It’s definitely ineffective in government. But the idea of paying someone in the party to manage national communication messages in that way is probably anathema to HQ staff, so the only option is listening to Stephen and Bill.
“This time next year Edders, we’ll be miwyonnaires!”
Robert Carruthers wrote: “Labour will NEVER be a one nation party because it is fundamentally incapable of protecting the interests of the whole nation, only those of its special interest groups i.e. those dependent on state spending.”
Actually Robert, the whole nation IS dependent on state spending. Where would any of us be without the NHS, schools, roads, public transport, the police, bin collections, and so forth? There are debates to be had about the level of state spending but the fact is that publicly-funded services are essential to our individual lives and the smooth running of the economy.
The Lib Dem slogan that for all that it’s over 20 years old I still like the best is one that’s never been used nationally, even though it’s simple, resonates with electors and differentiates us credibly – A record of action, a promise of more
The only memorable quote I can recall is David Steel’s : “Go back to your constituencies and prepare for Government!”…..It may have taken over 30 years but we got there in the end.
@John Heyworth – I agree that one has a great ring to it, but it is lacking something as a campaign slogan, no?