Feeling fed up?

Labour bad. Labour desperate. Labour no listen to clever Vince. Tories can't win.

That's the Lib Dem message as I've seen repeated about a squillion times now and it's starting to annoy me.

Verdict

The letter begins, "Feeling fed up?" Answer: Yes.

Lynne's record of action

After their last few bitchy mailings, the Lib Dems needed something a bit more positive. They seemed to have managed it with this letter and insert about Lynne's record of ACTION.

It's another example of the typographical inflation that I noticed earlier this week - at this rate they're going to have to start printing on A2.

But more to the point it does tell us some things about Lynne and the stuff she's done before it moves on to banging the tactical voting drum again.

It describes her more than once as "a saint", a quote from the Daily Telegraph which has been taken rather out of context. For the record she is not literally a saint, unless she has died and been canonised since her last Twitter update.

Verdict

Much better than their other recent stuff. Some actual reasons to vote. Hurrah!

It's time for change in Haringey

More post from the Tories (would've thunk) and this time they're declaring that "it's time for change in Haringey". This contrasts sharply with Lib Dem councillor Robert Gorrie's view, expressed in a letter I got from him this week, that "it's time for a change in Haringey".

The choice between Tory and Lib Dem apparently boils down to an indefinite article. Sigh.

Anyway, how bitchy are these mailings? Well the Tory one, like their last offering, is actually quite positive, listing lots of reasons to vote Conservative, only some of which involve the dastardliness of Labour.

The Lib Dem one disappointingly, kicks off with Labour-bashing, and finishes on tactical voting.

Verdict

Tories 1, Lib Dems 0 (Labour, prepare to be beaten up in the pub after the game).

Localness

Lynne Featherstone has been making quite a bit in her campaign of being a 'local girl' (check out this video). I wondered whether this was her taking a veiled pop at other candidates who aren't. So I asked Richard Merrin and Karen Jennings via Twitter how local they were, and whether it mattered.

Richard said:

"mother clinical nurse at whittington, family live in muswell hill but I am not making an issue of it"

and Karen said:

"I have lived in HWG for over a decade, imp to live in area but this election is about big issues jobs, economy, public services"

You heard it here first.

More from the Haringey Lib Dems

This one's about 50-50 Lynne-worship and Labour-bashing.

"Haringey officially worst council in London" the headline yells. Looks like they're getting frustrated at the limits of typography. It's bold and underlined, and I'm sure if their desktop publishing package had offered a 'flashing red' option, they'd have done that too.

Verdict

Not stellar.

Introducing Rohen Kapur

Until this week I'd only had election post from the three main parties, but they have now been joined by independent candidate Rohen Kapur.

Rohen's postcard says: "The three main parties want only three things: your vote, your TAX money and your unswerving obedience. Why not try real change instead?"

Since there wasn't room for much on his postcard I proceeded to Rohen's blog to find out a little more. Here's how he introduced his candidacy:

"I am not asking for your vote. I am here to give you a real choice. Let me make that very clear from the outset. The thought of being an MP scares the bejesus out of me but I am prepared to see the truth delivered on the television and radio and internet rather than the state sponsored lies, sponsored with your hard earned money. For that I am prepared to stand up and say I will help to bring that change about"

Not asking for my vote? Interesting campaign tactic. 

Verdict

So Rohen is a protest candidate. Which I suppose is, by definition, negative campaigning, except I forgive him, because he's only doing it to make a point, which, I have decided, makes it OK. And his blog is pretty funny too.

Dear oh dear oh dear

Dear oh dear oh double dear. The latest mailing from the Lib Dems is a fairly depressing read.

"Who is standing up for Hornsey and Wood Green?" it asks me in big letters. "Not Gordon Brown's Labour Party", it answers. Then there's a whole bunch of Labour-bashing, about how they backed Bush on the Iraq war (bang up-to-date, guys!) and how we shouldn't be "conned by desperate Labour".

Most of this nasty piece of campaign 'literature', though, is about tactical voting. The only reason that the Lib Dems seem to be able to come up with for voting Lib Dem is that... some other people are.

Verdict

Yes, you've had a surge in support. Yes, you might get some votes. But what have you got to say for yourselves? Full marks for elucidating what the other parties are up to, zero for telling us anything positive about yourselves. Boooo.

All about Richard

The Tories have hardly hassled me at all during this campaign (not like Lynne Featherstone, who sends me more post these days than all the local taxi and pizza firms put together).

But this week I received this confusingly folded (that's why some bits of it are upside down on the scan) leaflet from Richard Merrin, depicting him with an angelic glow. What's he got to say, then?

Firstly, I'm not sure his mantra of "Five more years of Gordon Brown or change with the Conservatives" really holds in this Lib/Lab marginal, but whatever.

I'm pleased to report that Richard has mostly got positive stuff to say, and he's devoted the whole back page of his little leaflet to "three positive reasons to vote for Richard Merrin". Good on you son.

There's a bit of Labour-bashing (they're "the party of unemployment", apparently - presumably not in their own words), but at least it's mostly in the context of saying what Merrin's been doing / plans to do about it.

Verdict

I have to say, I was expecting worse. Wonder how much more post the Tories will bother sending me.

Noel Park Labour News

I have got tons of new bumf to get through, from all three parties and an independent. Let's get going.

Firstly, God be praised, it's a miracle: from Labour, an entire double-sided A3 leaflet free of any negative campaigning at all. They've pointed to some real things they've done and not slagged anyone off in the process.

Verdict

Good show. For once.

More Labour News

As the incumbents on Haringey Council, Labour can't afford to be as negative as the other parties (who would they slag off?) And so it is that Labour News is quite a positive affair compared to most of what's landed on my doormat these past few weeks. The whole of the front page is about their "five key promises" from their manifesto, and a map showing off their achievements.

Overleaf, though, we have a large panel about the "savage" Lib Dems (that's right - it literally calls them savage). The new nasty party, apparently.

"Their leader has made a promise of 'savage cuts' and now they have even refused to rule out cuts to the NHS - not even the Tories go that far."

What follows are some predictable misrepresentations of fact by people who should know better. They've used the fact that the Lib Dems want to "review the use of CCTV" (gasp) as evidence of them being "soft on crime". Please.

I'd be interested to know how quick these printed mailings are turned around, and whether they're able to respond to unexpected events like... ooh... Nick Clegg winning the leaders' debate. In this case though I think the viciousness is just a function of Hornsey & Wood Green being a close-run Lib v Lab seat.

Verdict

One of the starkest contrasts so far between positive elucidation of policy and vicious negativity against the other parties. What a shame.

Real change for Britain?

The Lib Dems' latest mailing, titled REAL CHANGE FOR BRITAIN divides the positive and the negative nice and neatly. On one side of the A4 sheet  is devoted entirely to the awfulness of Britain under New Labour. They maek the place sound almost as bad as the Americans did during their daft healthcare 'debate'.

On the other side, we get some homely pictures of Nick and Vince ,including one of Nick with a pensioner (which is second only to a baby on the list of desirable photoshoot companions).

They set out some not-very-detailed ideas about cutting "waste and red tape" and "cleaning up politics", with each point introduced by a sentence in bold slagging off Labour.

Verdict

There are about eight words of substance in this leaflet. They are: "give people the power to sack corrupt MPs". The rest is mostly negative and a waste of time.

Are we negative voters?

In what became a rather shouty interview on the Today programme this morning, the Lib Dems' home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said Nick Clegg's surge in support this week is partly a result of the negative way people have typically chosen how to vote:

"For many years now we've had indications in the polls that the support for Labour and the Conservatives is much more fragmented, much more negative, for example, nearly half of Conservative supporters don't actually like the Conservatives, they simply vote Conservative to keep Labour out, and similarly a very substantial proportion of Labour people vote Labour to keep the Tories out." 

Mark Steel made a similar point in yesterday's Independent:

"For several years, and especially since the Iraq war, many Labour voters haven't really voted for 'Labour' but for 'Oh blimey, pwww, Labour I suppose'."

So do we get the campaigning we deserve? I'm not so sure. Politicians have a chance to set the tone by offering something to believe in, and for the most part in recent times, they've failed.

Time for a clean up?

I'm surprised there hasn't been more focus on the expenses scandal in the bumf I've received so far this electiontide. This weekend I got quite a fancy leaflet from the Lib Dems (fancy in that in folds in an interesting, concertina sort of a way) titled 'Time for a clean up?'

It lists some headlines about how naughty Labour and the Tories were in the expenses scandal (I'd like to check the details of the news stories for veracity but time doesn't permit), and goes on to say that when the Lib Dems put forward plans to clean up Westmister, "Labour and Conservative MPS voted them down".

"We deserve much better than this," they say.

Verdict

I'm going to let the Lib Dems have this one. Yes, it's the same old same old playground politics, but I think they earned themselves a bit of smugness in the expenses scandal and they're spending it now. However I fear that we may all realise soon that comparing an opposition party with the government is a bit like comparing your to-do list from this morning with a list of things you actually did today.

Is proportional representation the cure for negative campaigning?

Is proportional representation the cure for negative campaigning? I'm looking at all the campaign nonsense I've received, and much of the negativity surrounds tactical voting  - which wouldn't be such an issue if we had a PR system. Lib Dem candidate Lynne Featherstone is saying the Tories can't win in Hornsey & Wood Green, while Tory candidate Richard Merrin tweets from a nearby council ward that the "vote yellow get Brown" message is sinking in.

I was quite shocked recently when I checked out voterpower.org.uk, which does some maths to show you what your vote is (or isn't) worth based on how marginal your home constituency is. Not that I didn't know how the system works, but it hadn't occurred to me before just how massively undemocratic it is.

Would PR make our politicians grow up and have sensible conversations with us and with each other?

More pseudo-news

It bodes well for news journalism that politicians are so keen to ape it at election time. My latest bit of 'literature' from the Lib Dems is the Hornsey & Wood Green Focus, a journal of whose existence I was not hitherto aware.

It's a mixed bag. the bulk of it is about the same 'pledges' that they wrote to me about the other day, with hardly a hint of bitching or eye-scratching against the nasty reds and blues.

Overleaf it's a bit of a different story, with an 'article' (is that the right word?) titled  "Local Tories must come clean on climate change denial" and another one about Labour apparently "admitting" that there's no case for closing the Whittington Hospital's A&E department. Yawn.

Verdict


Descends into negativity like almost everything else I've received, but at least Lynne gets some proper arguments across in the process.

Another letter from Lynne

These days if I get home from work and haven't got a letter from a PPC, I feel neglected.

It's mostly the incumbent Lib Dems bothering me this week.

Another letter from Lynne today, with a usual bit of Labour-bashing in the context of the tactical voting by which the Lib Dems are so preoccupied. It's accompanied by another flier telling me there's no use voting Tory, which again mixes up the figures for parliamentary and council elections rather confusingly (and pointlessly). One set of numbers at a time please, guys.

Verdict

In a single sentence, it's "Labour are bastards... but I'm great!" Nothing new here, then.

Lib Dem pledges

My latest bit of post from the Lib Dems is this letter asking which of their pledges "matter most" to me.

It kicks off with some typical Labour-bashing but goes on to set out some policies. Well done.

Overleaf it lists six 'pledges' and asks me to number them in order of preference, presumably so they can send me more bumf in a few weeks time on the topic of my choosing.

It's pretty light stuff, and a lot of it mentions or implies the wickedness of Labour, but they are making an attempt to say what they're gonna do.

Just as things were going so well, I glance at the flier that accompanies the letter, bearing the slogan "Don't be conned by desperate Labour!" in big friendly letters. "Labour have little positive to say about their own record," it hilariously claims. Nick Clegg, on the other hand, does have something positive to say... in a smaller box on the right. Tsk.

Verdict

Positive substance balanced by bitchiness. However, it's much less dull than the Labour literature I got last week, which was full of the kind of pointless claims (better policing, fairer society, more funding for schools) that only the likes Hitler and Ming the Merciless could possibly disagree with.

Lynne vs Gordon

I get more post from Lynne Featherstone these days than I do from my mum. Three items in the first half of this week from the Lib Dems. So what do they have to say for themselves?

Firstly there's this big shiny leaflet asking who will deliver FOR ME as my next MP. Lynne Featherstone is "the positive choice", they claim. How positive, though?

To answer that question they've provided a handy checklist showing how Lynne weighs up against "Gordon Brown's Labour candidate" (that's Karen Jennings to you and me). This is rather unfair, especially with the picture of a tired, sad-looking GB (not that he ever really looks otherwise). However it can only reflect well on Karen that the Lib Dems have shied away from going head-to-head against her. Par for the course so far.

Overleaf we hear "what local people say about Lynne Featherstone. Turns out they like her, and for three out of five of them it's for positive reasons, and not just because she's not a Tory.

We then get to hear about how she's battled to get Hornsey Hospital reopened, to keep police stations open longer and to hold people to account for the whole Baby P mess.

Verdict

It's a bit rich calling oneself "the positive choice" without naming the opposing candidate. Instead the Lib Dems have fallen back on Brown-bashing. Still, they have backed it up with some positive stuff about Lynne, so we'll let them get away with it this time.

All about Karen

After getting to the end of Labour News, I was running low on patience with Karen Jennings and Labour, but the second item I've received from them is less irritating.

This one focuses on Karen herself, and, would you believe it, the content is mainly positive. Dull, yes, but positive.

She kicks off talking about Labour's handling of the recession, about how she's supported "job-boosting measures and extra help for families, businesses and home owners". It's all very vague, of course, and she's appealing to people's trust in Labour as competent administrators rather than people who might have any kind of vision or principles. But she doesn't get bogged down in taking pops at The Other Guy, which is what I'm judging her on.

The next page, headlined "My priorities for Hornsey", puts her in the lead so far. My doormat and I currently don't know what the other parties' priorities for Hornsey are because they haven't got round to telling us. Again, it's very vague, but at least Karen's trying. She tries to pin it down using the word  "guarantees" four times (of jobs for the young, police response times, education standards and NHS treatment standards), although to me this sounds like the centralised targets that New Labour have become so notorious for.

Then she lists "local achievements", and again it's positive in an innocuous sort of a way - campaigning for education funding, supporting voluntary organisations, yadda yadda. The only example that could really be described as taking a stand is that she opposed lap-dancing clubs in Woodside and Crouch End. There - now we know something about her.

Verdict

Well done Karen, you barely mentioned the other guys once. But next time let's have more specifics.

Labour News

My first election campaign mailings from Labour arrived this weekend - not one but two items: a copy of 'Labour News' and a little leaflet addressed to me about the candidate, Karen Jennings.

Labour News declares proudly that it's "delivered free... at no cost to you". I should jolly well think so too, but I suppose in the wake of the expenses scandal they feel they have to make these things crystal clear at the outset. The cover is emblazoned with the obligatory photo of Karen with a baby in a hospital (the cynic in me imagines an orderly queue of parliamentary candidates just out of shot, waiting their turn to be photographed).

Anyway, the 'news' that Labour has to report is as follows:

"In the coming weeks, you will make a big choice about the kind of future you want for Britain. Lots of people are rightly worried about a Conservative Government and the Liberal Democrats refuse to rule out a deal with the Tories. Labour is the only clear choice."

From the outset, it's weasel words. Who is worried about a Conservative Government? Why? If you have something to say, say it, don't hide behind "lots of people".

The number one reason for voting Labour, it seems, is that they're not the Tories. If that sounds familiar it's because the Tories' number one reason for voting for them (as far as I can gather from what they've sent me so far) is that they're not Labour.

Labour also argues that a Lib Dem vote in Hornsey and Wood Green "is a vote for Cameron", which is confusing because Lynne Featherstone was saying just the other day that a vote for the Tories was a vote for Labour. I'm going to have to draw myself a flow chart.

To be fair to Labour News, however, it does go on to talk about Labour's own policies and plans. There's a barrage of stats about the wonderful things they've done for schools, pensioners and the NHS, before it veers back into doom-mongering about the spending cuts planned by the other parties. No talk of the cuts Labour are planning.

Overleaf it talks more about supporting diversity, what Karen's been doing to try to save the Whittington Hospital's maternity service, and 'Sure Start', which she's very proud of, although she doesn't say in much detail what it is.

Next, something interesting happens. First it takes a few pops at the Lib Dems for a bunch of stuff they've done in Camden (where they're the largest party on the council, followed by the Tories). Then, without breaking stride, it manages to have a go at them for negative campaigning against Labour-controlled Haringey Council. "Ask yourself whether the constant deriding of our community provides the leadership you want," Labour News urges me. I'm starting to feel dizzy.

Verdict

I'd be exaggerating if I said there were a lot of substance in this, but there is at least some attempt to set out something positive about the candidate and the party. On the other hand, Labour has managed to slag off another party for slagging them off, while, in an adjacent box, doing precisely the same thing. It's best summed up, I think, by the tagline which appears repeatedly: "Labour is the only clear choice", which, like the 1997 Tory slogan, "You can only be sure with the Conservatives", smacks of desperation.

Letter from Vince Cable

This week I received an actual letter from the actual Vince Cable. Not just a bit of paper but an actual letter in an envelope, addressed to me. Look, it's got his signature on it, and a little picture and everything!

So what does it say? Well, first of all he says the economy's in a bit of a mess. Next, he says I really ought to vote. I'm agreeing with him so far. Then he says in big bold letters, "After thirteen years of disappointment, you've seen what Labour can do."

Sigh. We were getting on so well. He goes on to dedicate a paragraph to the wickedness of Gordon Brown with his failure to end the bankers' bonus culture, and the stoopidness of David Cameron and George Osborne with their planned "swingeing" (my new least favourite word) cuts.

Only then does he go on to talk about the Lib Dems ,who, he says, are going to beat the banks into shape and sort out a fairer tax system to put money back in the pockets of "ordinary families".

Verdict

Nice try Vince, but after all that complaining about how dreadful the other guys are, I'd stopped paying attention by the time I got to the part about you. Still, nice of you to write. I look forward to the Christmas card.

'News' from the Tories

I do enjoy it when they dress up their election propaganda as 'news'.

The Noel Park Tories will have to excuse me for not turning to a political party as a source of news.

In this case, though, I can almost forgive them, because it's just so funny.

"HARINGEY LABOUR SNEER AT NOEL PARK RESIDENTS' SAFETY WORRIES" booms the headline. Apparently councillors looked on in disbelief as Labour councillors "laughed and jeered" when Tory councillor Alan Dobbie highlighted local safety fears. Tory candidate Gulcan Gul says she was "disgusted".

On the basis of 29 years of experience on the planet Earth, I sincerely doubt that this is a fair and accurate depiction of what went on in that meeting. The Tories seem to have anticipated this reaction, though, and have provided a handy URL for me to go to to "watch Haringey Labour show total contempt for you". Thanks, guys, but I'm just not quite masochistic enough to type in a 90-character URL (another example of Tory internet illiteracy - try using bit.ly next time guys) just to watch my mean, wicked Labour councillors being mean and wicked.

Verdict


Although there is a small box at the bottom of the front page very briefly outlining what the Tories might do about neighbourhood policing, this is viciously, viciously negative. Calling this playground politics isn't fair – I remember having some quite sensible discussions on the playground when I was at school. Poor show.

Letter from Lynne

I received this letter and accompanying flyer from Lynne Featherstone this week. She's the current Lib Dem MP.

I like Lynne Featherstone. She is consistently responsive to my hassling her on my chosen cause, she came out of the expenses scandal looking unusually good (I did see a receipt of hers printed in the paper for a Tesco chicken salad wrap or some such, but I think we can forgive her that) and from what I know of her actions and writings she seems to have, you know, principles and stuff.

But this is a bit disappointing. The whole letter is about Labour. Well, that's not quite true – most of it is about a particular housing issue that a particular resident had, which Lynne clearly thinks illustrates everything that Haringey's Labour council are doing wrong.

What about the Lib Dems, Lynne? You haven't even told us who the candidates are, for heaven's sake.

She also merrily conflates the general election with the council election - using results from the last general election (and bookies' odds from last year for the current one) to try to convince us it's a 'two horse race' in the council election. They are quite a long way from being the same thing, as evidenced by the fact we have a Lib Dem MP and Labour-controlled council. Based on these figures I'm none the wiser about what the best tactical vote would be for the council election.

Verdict

This is almost entirely negative. And it appears to be designed to confuse people by mixing up figures for general and council elections. And it puts a depressing amount of focus on tactical voting. Don't you have more to say for yourselves than that, guys? Poor show, poor show.

Playground politics

This blog is my informal survey of campaign literature received in the Hornsey and Wood Green constituency.

My heart sank when the first bits of election propaganda started landing on my doormat, and they were concerned almost entirely with slagging off The Other Guy rather than saying anything positive or setting out any policies.

So I thought I'd blog it all here and see how it goes. Anything that lands on my doormat from any of the parties gets scanned and posted here, and gets reviewed and rated for positivity/negativity. I have my opinions about their policies, of course, but my aim is to look more at how they conduct themselves (on my doormat).

I think it will be at least a little bit interesting. I hope you think so too.

I'm not saying which way I intend to vote, but I'm a youngish lefty liberal type who's concerned about social justice and the environment and whatnot, and is in a state of constant disappointment with the lameness of mainstream politics.