One of the interesting things I noticed when watching tv coverage of the campaign over the last week is that Anna Bligh is much more persuasive when interviewed, and when she has a chance to be spontaneous, than she appears to be when reciting the scripted grab for the nightly news vision. Lawrence Springborg, by contrast, has improved his delivery of his lines, and appears to be cutting through in the political messaging game, but is incoherent and unconvincing when talking at greater length – the Leaders’ Debate being one of the most telling recent examples.
That contrast comes across in the two leaders’ successive appearances on the ABC’s Insiders. Have a watch of Lawrence last week, then compare with Anna this morning.
This contrast raises a similar conundrum to that of the dissonance between leaders’ ratings and the party vote in the polls, evident in the latest Galaxy poll.
It’s not a Gordian knot that needs cutting, though. As I’ve previously argued, the leaders’ images are separable from those of their parties (and in Bligh’s case, the long term government she leads). There’s much political science research that suggests leadership is not the be all and end all campaign strategists – and others – seem to think it is.
But, inevitably, the leader has to carry the burden of communicating the message. Here’s the crux of this campaign’s dynamic – Labor’s themes aren’t politically effective. It’s as if the strategic concepts had been sketched out, and the details left blank. Something like an unfinished tattoo awaiting colouring. I’d have expected, for instance, the “strength” theme – tied up with the economy – to generate a constant accompaniment of “trust”. But that’s not been there. Instead we’ve had the negative message of “don’t risk Springborg”, which throws the spotlight back on Labor’s negatives. While Bligh talks of her “vision”, it’s a bit contentless and filled out only by managerialist themes.
The cut through has also been marred by Labor’s defensive posture, and the impact of Cyclone Hamish and the oil spill in crowding out the ALP’s message shouldn’t be underestimated. Today’s Sunday Mail didn’t get to state politics until page 10, and the Galaxy Poll wasn’t reported until page 12. The first nine pages of the paper were taken up by the oil spill. It’s truly a campaign that’s been buffeted off course, and Captain Bligh is yet to right the political ship.
Bligh herself observed to Barrie Cassidy that Queensland elections rarely play to script. As we enter the last week of the campaign, she needs to rewrite the one she’s been handed by the machine men of the ALP apparat. To adapt a phrase that some might recall in a different political context, as we slouch towards the finishing line, the Labor Party should “let Anna be Anna”!
15 Comments
When people come to vote it’s those negative messages that will stand out. People do prefer Bligh and by a large margin. Trust will out.
Maybe, maybe not. But it’s a sad and sorry day for Labor supporters in Queensland when that’s the best that can be done.
My point, though, is that the messages aren’t designed properly. You need a positive as well as a negative – “trust” and “vision” are implied instead of spelled out. If you’re just shouting “don’t risk them!” it makes people think about why they’re contemplating doing that in the first place. Labor hasn’t communicated why a fifth term government would be any different from more of the same, and people don’t want more of the same. Peter Beattie was able to do that effectively, and I’m sure that Anna Bligh could work out a way to offer people the reason they need not just to vote against the LNP if only the campaign wasn’t scripted by the grey suits of the Labor Party machine.
In my view, anyone who really has the best interests of the ALP – and Queensland – at heart should be in a very angry mood.
Yes, the apparatchiks at HQ and in Bligh’s office needs to cleaned out, win or not. It’s funny at Andrew Fraser’s campaign launch last week both Arch Bevis and Andrew can clearly draw the lines of difference – and they are fundamental ones – between Labor and the Nationals. Maybe that’s because they are talking to the true believers, but seriously, given many people like to say ‘there’s no difference’ when there’s really basic philosophical and policy differences, and head office still comes up with the bland don’t-scare-the-horses gumpf.
For a start, given the uncertain times, maybe just stating the bloody obvious would cut through to people – the ALP believes that government can be made to do at least some good for working people, and the Tories believe that government only gets in the way of the bosses making money. Just stating that puts the lie to the LNP-as-a-better-service-deliverer line they’ve been trying on. They don’t believe in the services in the first place!
All this ‘strong QLD’ business smells like a campaign designed 12 months ago.
Seems to me Anna’s campaign has lacked vision. Where’s her slogan..people love slogans! The whole world knew Obamas!! Where’s the hat, bags, balloons and all that gear that helped put “Your rights at work” campaign to the forefront and Kevin 07 T shirts.. seems to me there’s a lot of young inexperienced academics running some of the branches too as well as Head Office. The experienced campaigners have been side lined.
This election has been squandered because the overall tactics of the campaign strategists have been downright terrible. All campaigns have an overall theme. Kevin Rudd was all about ‘New Leadership’ in 2007, John Howard spoke ‘For All of Us’ in 1996, even Mark Latham had his ‘Ladder of Opportunity’. This year Anna Bligh talks about ‘Keeping the Economy Strong’. Translation: ‘We like what we’re already doing, vote for us if you want more of the same’. This is not the message a party should be sending after being in power for 11 years. Voters in Australia don’t vote for more of the same after 11 years, they want something dynamic.
Instead why not pitch Anna Bligh as a completely different leader to that of her predecessor? Superficially she is different from Peter Beattie. She is from the ALP Left, she is a woman, she is an inner city suburban dwelling ‘working mum’, whereas Beattie was the larrikin boy from the bush, from the Centre of the ALP who you could take to the footy, and had the potential to knock a few heads together if need be. This is chalk and cheese, not more of the same.
The campaign could have been built around the theme that Bligh knows what it takes to confront the odds, (both personally and politically) to lead the government in unreliable economic times. More importantly she has a different approach to achieve this, by being socially, environmentally and economically responsible, creating ‘New Pathways for the Future’.
To me ‘New Pathways for the Future’ emphasises all that Bligh has going for her without trashing the Beattie legacy. This would allow Bligh to project a new, vital image of a leader who can respond to the problems of the present and challenges for the future. It could also open up the ALP to the Greens a bit more, (including abandoning the Traveston) rather than the current mess the party faces now where we are preferencing them in all 89 seats and the Greens are giving the ALP scant regard in just 12 seats. This strategy also allows the opportunity for the ALP to run a mostly positive campaign.
The conventional wisdom of the campaign should have been to completely ignore the LNP, as Springborg is an horrendous campaigner (as has been proven this time around too) and the only angle of attacks should be focussed upon party unity. Even now do the voters of Queensland know who will be holding the key portfolios his Cabinet? As it stands the campaign ads have been far too negative and have been focusing on Springborg rather than the fractured party he leads. When the party has attempted to stray from this formula it is using a pale imitation of the Kevin 07 strategy.
Anna says: ‘…protecting jobs is in Labor’s DNA’
Kevin says: ‘…being an economic conservative is in my DNA’
The Queensland ALP says: ‘Sorry Mr Springborg you won’t get my vote’
The Federal ALP says: ‘Sorry Mr Howard you won’t get my vote’
Tired strategies from a tired campaign.
The only consolation I take from a probable LNP victory is that they won’t have much of a majority, and combined with their own internal struggles they will struggle to govern effectively for the next three years. Unfortunately that doesn’t help the people of Queensland, because given the quality of the two campaigns thus far neither major party deserves to lead the state.
“In my view, anyone who really has the best interests of the ALP – and Queensland – at heart should be in a very angry mood.”
I heard a few days ago that the Party boys in P&C have been full of self-congratulation for the cleverness of this campaign. “Keeping the focus on the economy” has been a masterstroke, a work of political genius, apparently.
With friends like these, I tells ya…
d
d
This page of posts reads like an internal ALP members bitch. Take it behind closed doors please people.
Bligh has looked very uneasy and cardbord during the campaign. She looked like a string puppet today at her launch with her arms going up and down like a Thunderbird. The borg has had a lot more experience than Bligh at campaigning and has handled things like the radio stunts better, and the protesters with the tug of war better. Bligh is so managed and scared that she wouldn’t even tell people where her launch was on her website.
As for the debate Bligh was trying to keep it very boreing and unexciting by reading of a pile of rehearsed lines. So she looked like she kept her cool. She was trying to send people to sleep. Like she has been doing all campaign – smal target. Borg had to risk a few hits at the debate and at least got some media on the line that Bligh had made all her ministers de-neseccary.
Sorry Susan, the impression Lawrence Springborg gives is of a used car salesman trying to sell us a load of unsubstantiated promises based on questionable claims of where he is going to find THE MONEY. (see Pro John Wanna’s report)
And the voters will wake up to this on Saturday
@1934pc The LNP are going to bring in a 3% efficiency dividend. The Fin Review reported last Thursday “Four economists and a public policy expert contacted by the Australian Financial Review yesterday agreed the $1 billion in savings were achievable after 11 years of expanding government in QLD…
3% is not really a big number. That’s what the private sector is achieving. It is possible to do for at least 10 years…”
It would seem to be reasonable that you could achieve significant efficiency gains not by reducing services, but reducing administrative costs.”
Joe, it seems you have not read the John Wanna report, State expenses go up about 7% annually, that’s going to help Springborg, right!.
pc – No one is listening to this Wanna guy. Sounds like he would do more good for your party if you preselected him from your ranks at the next eleciton and made him treasurer. None of the Labor members in parliament seem to know much about economics.
joe
The only people listening to “this Wanna guy” are the one who may think their jobs are a little less secure if Mr Springborg wins.
I think these guys vote – dumb Debnam style politics – especially with WA cutting PS jobs.
I wonder if there is any image of the Borg’s launch yesterday? I heard this completely distorted crazed yelling on the radio this morning. It was Springborg. Really, him screaming “LNP! LNP! LNP!” must be worth an attack ad from the ALP, in the vein of “here’s this angry unstable man who wants to be premier”. Anna Bligh’s nervy hesitancy is really a blessing next to this bloke.
That may have been Mark McArdle, Scot. He was doing that as part of the warm up act.
Though I didn’t watch the whole thing so maybe The Borg got into the groove too…
It’s meant to be their Obama moment – did it come across to you more like Howard Dean?
John Wanna is not to be disparaged, but what Joe is saying is equally legitimate. 3 per cent efficiency gains can be achieved.
LNP campaign launch much more upbeat than the ALPs which looked like a funeral party.