Comments on: My Vote For Sale. Price: Engagement.

By: Scott Gould

Scott Gould — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:47:38 +0000

Love these points. I agree that SM is not making the difference this election – but will do next election. I'm already preparing for that

By: Scott Gould

Scott Gould — Wed, 21 Apr 2010 12:46:52 +0000

Hey SaraSorry I've taken a while to reply.It is indeed interesting how your take on this is different to mine, because of your upbringing.I didn't even know that Cameron and Prescott were down – this is the first I head of it. This shows how I am completely out of the loop. I've been speaking to more and more people my age, some a bit older, some a bit younger, and I've only found ONE who is voting thus far…Thanks for posting the manifestos – wil check them out!

By: sytaylor

sytaylor — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:21:49 +0000

I started thinking about this from the politicians perspective. Just which master do they serve?They have graduated into a world, by being very active in the community, looking after their core vote and dealing with correspondence. If they are a cabinet MP, the day job is at least 12 hours per day, every day. The 3 main parties have huddled around the center ground, to chase an apathetic public. They liked Tony Blair's style, but in my humble opinion… New Labour never had substance. It was effective in being very centrist and at not making any decision that is too controversial.Politics has become about being a safe pair of hands, and managing a relatively successful country. It lacks a “big idea” to get behind on all fronts. The most engaging message getting to voters at this time is “We're not Gordon Brown”.So back to your MP's perspective. They have party leaders reacting to the polls, the media, trying to take on social media, trying to get out into the streets, trying to deliver the big message… In a battle for the middle ground, they are creating apathy not solving it.The public at large, are actually quite comfortable, and just don't care enough to engage either. Yes politicians should learn social media, but with the speed government moves at, is that likely? Not until 2015.10 Things Politicians could do:1) Ask Questions – Chris Brogan is the master at engaging people using questions.2) Admit fault – Our utterly brutal media have taught politicians that there are consequences for being honest. Time to reverse that trend. Brown got a little bounce from it.3) Be Human – Cameron engaged people with a family tragedy. We want human politicians not robots.4) Empathise – “I understand” is about the most powerful thing you can say to someone who is feeling let down by you5) Avoid attacks – I'm not saying we need a charm offensive in politics, we need to restore that grown up respect that came from being Right Honourable. I want to respect my MP, give me a reason to6) Explain – Policy is difficult, and complex. The public struggle to grasp that, yet there are great ways to explain complex problems. It's called leadership. It's there, it's just terrified of being eaten alive by our media.7) Kill the Press Office – Alistair Campbell made British politics less human. We need to reverse that trend.8) Embrace simplicity – Again, taking lessons from copyblogger and social media – We want simplicity, preferably in 140 characters.9) Support Local Heroes – “Social Enterprise” still feels too much like an election ploy from the conservatives, but local is back. Who's doing great things in your constituency? Champion them, give them a platform.10) Articulate your constituents problems – We have become a presidential style nation, which is very London centric. People feel disengaged because they don't know who their MP is, or how those local issues are being solved.

By: saratraynor

saratraynor — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 02:52:46 +0000

Thanks for your post, Scott; it has stimulated an interesting discussion and several great responses. I have always been strongly political and was brought up in a very politically active household so therefore I naturally *feel* engaged with politics. Your post has made me re-asses my expectations of engagement by politicians. I conclude that I am more focused on assessing their policies, than their engagement (that may be because I already feel "politically engaged" due to my upbringing). A few months ago, I went to see David Cameron speak at a local school and tomorrow John Prescott is coming to town. Face-to-face engagement is pretty good in my book. I agree that it is difficult to distinguish between the major parties, so this year I have decided to download and read the 4 major manifestos. I agree that politicians could engage better with the electorate, and equally I agree with Ben in that we have a responsibility to ourselves to find out what exactly we are voting for.Here are the links to the manifestos, I hope they're of use (I've not quite read them, just yet!):Labour: http://www2.labour.org.uk/manifesto-splashLibdems: http://www.libdems.org.uk/our_manifesto.aspxGreen: http://www.greenparty.org.uk/policies.htmlConservative: http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Manifesto.aspxThanks again for the interesting debate.

By: Scott Gould

Scott Gould — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 02:24:26 +0000

Thanks Joanne – really appreciate the kind remarks. Means a lot. A few good words go a long, long way!Appreciate the weight of your understanding as always,Scott

By: Joanne Jacobs

Joanne Jacobs — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 00:45:07 +0000

Thanks mate. I think the slightly older among us (of which, unfortunately, I have to acknowledge I am one) can learn a lot from people like you. And I greatly appreciate what you bring to the debate. Thanks for articulating your ideas and giving us all scope for imagining a better future.

By: Joanne Jacobs

Joanne Jacobs — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 00:42:44 +0000

RE: Lords v Commons… it's actually pretty simple. A majority in Commons is easier to attain as the sheer number of seats and the voting system makes majority rule rather immune to sensible debate. It's also true that most laws are drafted in Committees, and the vast majority of laws drafted in Commons committees that pass in to the upper house are simply drafted along party lines and are decimated on proper inspection. It's still a problem with parliamentary process, not with the 'value' of aristocratic heritage (ie: nil).

By: Martin Howitt

Martin Howitt — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 00:29:23 +0000

totally agree that getting people interested and informed is the major task.http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/ap…Interesting idea, and is the future I think. When I saw Tom Watson live-tweeting in the #debill debate and passing on opinions from the Twitterati I glimpsed the future.Your comment about the Lords made me chuckle. It's true that the system is utter tripe: the problem is that in practice the Lords often make better, more rounded, wiser judgements than the Commons. I have absolutely no idea why this is the case, but it is true. I'm all for reform of the Lords but I think we need to identify which bit is the baby and which is the bathwater before we even start on it

By: Scott Gould

Scott Gould — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 00:13:16 +0000

Hey JoanneThanks for the thought through and giving comment – reading it has given me also the benefit of getting to know you better and your history.I'm so glad you question how participatory the system, and call it 'positively medieval'. It is. In the same way that you had to have land to vote, today we have swapped land for understanding – a premium that few have. I don't know many people who understand our political system – and if I don't understand it, I'm unlikely to vote – let alone know who to vote for.It is unfortunate to see all the press now praising Nick Clegg, like you said, because of a few well performed minutes on TV — who even knows about the policies.Thank you as well for actually getting what I mean, when I say 'selling my vote'!

By: Joanne Jacobs

Joanne Jacobs — Sat, 17 Apr 2010 21:44:52 +0000

I've been meaning to respond to this for days and it's only because I have been focusing my idea development on work that I have failed to do so. But here goes…The points you make on engagement are crucial: in order to facilitate a truly participatory democracy it is vital that all citizens feel their vote counts and that their values are being supported. But my concern is that politicians themselves shouldn't be regarded as an embodiment of values – and in an age of brands and televised debates,it's an unfortunate fact that a 90 minute tv programme can swing a vote in favour of a politician rather than policies.I'm dismayed but not surprised you never learned about politics in the home or at school. I did study politics at school, but I don't think that's where I learned about political systems in Australia. I'd say my understanding of politics was grounded in two primary experiences: my brother's time at an elite private boys school (which he attended on an academic scholarship) when compared with my own public schooling, and a thorough dose of Australian history and anti-authoritarian sentiment percolating through my childhood. The dismissal of Australia's Prime Minister in 1975 by the Queen's representative in Australia when I was just 4 years old set the stage for a lifetime of education about political systems, and the machinations of power. It did eventually lead to studying politics but I was never very good at it until I got to university and started to apply political understanding to issues – in particular to the development of policies and legislation pertaining to public sector broadcasting, pay television and telecommunications at the cusp of the development of the WWW. But as a result of these diverse experiences I learned that the exercise of power in a vacuum of ignorance of political process was inherently undemocratic. And I spent a great deal of time contributing to public education and developing curriculum that educated about processes and properties of governance in the new media sector. I even took on a political role, when I ran petitions in Queensland, Australia, campaigning for daylight saving to be adopted in the South East, in the face of phenomenal opposition in the north. But the curious thing I also discovered through all these experiences, is how difficult it can be to get people to accept responsibility for their own participation. Citizenship – the active involvement in one's community – is being mistaken for community service, and involvement in the *development* of policies is being regarded as a problem for politicians.Nowhere is this more pronounced than the decision to draft legislation in Committees appointed from the House of Lords. Instead of generating policy statements through engagement with stakeholders, there's a tendency in the House of Lords, to get a small number of high-profile personnel from industry giants to contribute to a *report*. The report includes little if any analysis of relevant and impacting legislation and includes no legislative instruments of its own. Then another Committee of appointed politicians in the House of Lords go about drafting the actual legislation which may or may not have any bearing on the wording of a Bill. How is this remotely participatory? And why are not more stakeholders demanding a say over the wording of legislature, before it goes to debate in parliament? (And don't even get me started on appointed peers in the House. Personally, I regard the current system positively medieval.)But, as they say, baby steps. It is indeed marvellous to have a politician actually providing individuals with an opportunity to help draft and vote on pledges. And it is wonderful that a few souls have taken the initiative to contribute. But again, few have taken up the challenge.I believe it is Citizenship that should be taught in schools, not history. I don't disregard the value of history – I'm a huge history buff – but there are different channels through which history can be explored – in museums, art galleries, and in tourist ventures. But the value of active Citizenship and collective decision making (which can indeed result in better communities) is something that is not just lacking in education now, but which has been lacking for centuries. We have an opportunity to redress that inadequacy in a more digitally connected age. And I'm hopeful that a new generation of voters will use technologies to put pressure on the exclusive processes of policy making and legislative drafting and debate. I like your style in 'selling' your vote for engagement. I think you don't actually mean a financial trade, but a trade in representation of your interests. That's true citizenship, and it's something that should be applauded.