Marty's Guide to Opposition

Post Reply
User avatar
Marty
Posts: 221
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2020 10:10 am
XP: 18
Trait(s): Technical Mastery
Discord username: Martinulus#9514

Marty's Guide to Opposition

Post by Marty »

Marty's Guide to Opposition

The existence of the Loyal Opposition is one of the indispensable characteristics of a democracy, since it facilitates the possibility of alternation in power. It is no less important to any round of PolUK: if the Opposition is ineffective, the government has little incentive to be on the ball, and more often than not, the round will grind to a halt.

Being the Opposition is, in some ways, easier than being the Government. You do not have to worry about a constant stream of legislation, sometimes you can content yourself with just reacting, and you don’t have to keep up with all the pesky questions and potshots from members opposite. But being a good opposition can be surprisingly hard – you do not have control over the parliamentary agenda, and if the government does well, you might find yourselves unable to make inroads.

How to win
It’s easy to get distracted by all sorts of things in opposition as well as in government. Thing is, there is only one job you need to do: by the next election, be seen as a solid alternative to the government. This means that you have to do all of the following (and that you’ll fail if you focus on just one aspect):
  • Discredit the government by showing that they’re not on the ball or discrediting their policies.
  • Build credibility for your own party. Keep a united front.
  • Seize control of the public agenda by not just making your own policies, but making sure people talk about them (ideally to the exclusion of the government). If you force the government to react to you constantly, you’re doing things right.
Discrediting the government
"When the Opposition are here, you tell them nothing except where the toilets are, but you lie about that."
- Malcolm Tucker

This is what everyone thinks of when you say “opposition”: opposing the government’s policies. It’s your most simple task. As the proverb has it, oppositions don’t win elections, governments lose them. Being in government, as it happens, is the ultimate vote-loser. This is because governments have to make choices and set priorities, which will be set in stone once they’re acted upon. This means anyone in government makes enemies, mistakes and u-turns, if you look closely enough.

Rule 1 of discrediting the government: be opportunistic. It’s very hard to plan this out, so you have to seize every opportunity.

What not everyone realises is that it’s not so much about convincingly arguing against the government’s policies, but about showing that they’re a worse government than you would be. This perception consists of a few parts you have to get through to the public:
  • The government is off the ball
  • The government’s priorities are wrong
  • The government is bad for Britain (this need not be their policies; it can just be an unfortunate economic crisis they can do little about. Just ask Gordon Brown.)
  • The government is out of touch.
Another thing not everyone realises is that if the government is doing well and you can’t seem to find an opening, you can create one. It’s like in football: if an attacker is making a great play for the goal, you don’t lay off demoralised, you put pressure on them and force them to make a mistake. The same works for the opposition. Any government is forced to respond to the things you do and the questions you ask, which puts pressure on their frontbenchers. Eventually, this will force a mistake in the form of a rushed bill, an unwise comment in Parliament or the press, or an issue they fail to pick up on. Even good governments make these if put on the back foot enough so keep chipping away if they seem to be doing perfectly.

Another convenient way to deal with a government that’s doing well for the moment is to realise that they probably will not be doing well across the board in the game. This is because of the reality of PolUK as a game: not every portfolio will have an equally active or prolific Minister assigned to it. Chances are you can capitalise on this by proposing your own policies and trying to claim ownership of a policy area the government is unwisely neglecting. If you can’t weaken the government’s hand in the things it does, it might be best go for the things it doesn’t deal with.

Building credibility

“Filter's off, daddy-o! Let it all hang out! Just suppose your free-range no-consequence bullshit was hugely entertaining when we were in opposition and shitting money, but now we're in government and it's all gone a bit J.G. Ballard, it's irrelevant and infantile!”
- Peter Mannion to Stewart Pearson

When you’re in opposition, it’s because you have lost a general election. Unless you’re the boss that took the LibDems to Official Opposition status (in which case why the fuck are you reading this?). You lost for a reason, and usually it’s because the previous opposition dealt a little bit of a blow to your credibility. Or you did so yourself, by not being united.

Here’s some common credibility issues you might have to face:
  • Your party is seen to have ruined the economy. You lack economic credibility and without it, you cannot possibly be trusted in government.
  • You had party unity issues and were plagued by backbench rebellions. Now every hint of dissent spells trouble for your leader et al.
  • You lost an election badly and people are speculating whether this is the end for your party.
You are going to have to repair that image. Mostly, this is a matter of being very conscious of open goals and own goals. Every credibility issue opens your party up to certain lines of attack and gives you particular vulnerabilities. It’s up to you and particularly your leadership to ensure these lines of attack are left meticulously guarded.

For example, a common problem for the Labour Party is that the Tories usually come in on the strength of economic problems that, especially post 80s are usually blamed easily on Labour’s spending policies. This means anything that can be related to spending without a plan on how to pay your way, tax rises and nationalisation in particular leave the goal open. This may be very unfair to you, but you can be sure the other parties will beat you up every time you do that. A solution is easily found, however: just refer every plan with spending implications to the Shadow Chancellor to find a way to pay for it before it goes out (good practice I’d encourage for any party) and avoid the use of certain words and frames. If you have to nationalise, do it in a way that doesn’t look like nationalisation. If you want to raise taxes on the rich, be sure to point out that the government is cutting them and that you’re actually the only party to cut taxes for ordinary Britons.

At the same time, you are going to have to actively confront these liabilities before the next election. I find the best way for policy liabilities like economic credibility problems is to adopt a new paradigm and present your policies as being in touch with future developments. For example, when you’ve lost your economic credibility, focusing on technological innovation might be a good bet in the 90s, 2000s and beyond. That way, you’ll ideally force the government to react with policies that can be portrayed as stealing your ideas. They’ll be hard-pressed to criticise your economic credibility then.

Unity problems are a bit trickier to deal with. But remember there is one major force for unity in an opposition party: the wish to stick it to those bastards in the government. Corbynistas and Blairites might hate each other's guts, but they’d much rather see the other in government than the most moderate Tory. As long as your party is winning in the polls, it’s in everyone’s interests to shut up about factional troubles.

This is a top tip for the leadership: you can actually use the factional diversity of your party to your advantage. If you’ve got a clear enough idea of your overall narrative, you should be able to find a place where elements of that vision come more natural to certain factions of your party. The best way to do this is talking to prominent members of other factions about their ideas for various portfolios, with the aim of fitting them into your overall narrative. This way, you forge a strong team.

In addition, the more radical factions offer some of the best attack dogs in the business. There’s nothing like a Thatcherite to lay into the economic policies of a Labour government, even if you’re of a wetter persuasion. The key is communication: make sure you all remain on message and let everyone stick to that message in their own way. It will turn the presence of a lot of viewpoints into a strength. Oh, and do not use the “big tent” cliché to the press unless you need to stonewall serious disunity problems. It’s a lame excuse and people will see through it instantly.

Seize control of the public agenda
"The only thing that's worse than being talked about is not being talked about.
- Oscar Wilde

Here I’m going to get a little bit technical and political science-y. Politics is mostly a game of issue ownership – the party that owns the most important issues of the day will win, in the end. How do we know what the most important issues are? Well, you have polls, but you also know because they are talked about. Public opinion is not a given – it is ultimately responsive to what you say the most important issues are. Your job is to dominate that public agenda with your own narrative of how Britain is doing and where the country should be going. This is your most important job. You may totally discredit the government and deal with all your credibility issues, but if you don’t dominate the public agenda, it will count for little.

The government has a key advantage here: they control Parliament and ultimately, because of their majority, the statute books. Their chief way of dominating the public agenda is through passing their agenda and continuously reminding people how great their agenda is. As the opposition, you don’t have that advantage. A single opposition day doesn’t weigh up against the full might of the government monopoly on time in the House. Besides, it’s not your job to fix problems – it’s your job to point out problems and signal that you’d be better at fixing them. This means that while the government agenda game is parliamentary, yours is actually public. Luckily, you have a few advantages of your own:
  • You’ve got a wider array of tools to grab attention than the government has, each with its own fortes in generating the much-needed attention you want.
  • Because you’re not confined to Parliament, you do not have to muck about with small details of implementation that become final the moment you present them. This gives you a degree of flexibility the government lacks. A good opposition can do away with (parts of) policies that don’t work that well inconspicuously, simply by not talking about them that much.
  • You don’t have to get the votes to pass something. Parliament does not have to judge your policies, the only ones who have to like them are the public (and their friends, the press and interest groups).
  • While scenarios can derail the government’s policy agenda, you don’t have to respond to them, only to the government’s response. This means that while scenarios are always potential problems for the government, for the opposition they only present potential opportunities (unless you fuck up badly).
  • Ultimately, I have a hunch that what people in 21st century British politics really vote on is not so much policy substance (doing everything right) but policy salience (talking about the right issues). Look at Jeremy Corbyn (in 2017): his policies were widely criticised but people only cared to a limited extent because they felt he was talking about things they cared about. The opposition can get away with this. The government, not so much.
In summary: you have to get people to talk about your party’s issues and policies. This is a game that mostly plays out in the press arena, and your success in it depends on utilising the tools at your disposal to the greatest possible effect. You know you have succeeded when the government is forced on the back foot and starts getting distracted into criticising your policies to the exclusion of building up their own. Then you can say: “If you want to ask the questions, then call that election and we’ll be happy to send you to opposition.” And isn’t that exactly what the opposition wants to project?

Another thing to remember in regards to the public agenda: it’s very hard to do it on the basis of dispersed policies. What you really need is to present all these policies as part of a single overarching plan with a number of core objectives and values. This is ultimately the leader’s job: they have to come up with the big narrative of the party that you can all fit your work under, and nudge you in the direction of policies that will tell that story. Disconnected policies are hard to sell – but if it’s part of a bigger picture, every new thing you add keeps reminding people of the points you’ve already driven home.

If the government screws up a policy area, be sure to put extra effort into it. It’s a big win if you can present your own alternatives to policies of which you have demonstrated the failure.
[hr]
The opposition's arsenal

As I said above, the opposition has a broad array of tools at their disposal. Parliament is not as central to them as it is to the Government. Anything – the press, Parliament, media appearances, conferences – are best seen as part of a toolbox designed to achieve the three goals the opposition needs to work towards to win. It’s actually harder than it looks to get a feel for when you should use which of them. This section is intended to give some perspective on this.

The Parliamentary toolbox

I can’t emphasise enough how Parliament is not as central to the Opposition as it is to the government. While the government has to keep Parliament busy and has to go to Parliament first with everything at risk of a reprimand from the Speaker, the Opposition can really only use it to pull stunts to underscore whatever their message is.

A few ground rules on how best to use Parliament:
  • Keep up. Unfortunately, your duty is showing up in every debate the government starts. Have at least the responsible frontbencher pitch in. But remember: if you’re doing your job right, you’re doing the same twice over forcing the government to respond to your stuff.
  • Don’t default to Parliament. Since you don’t stand a chance in hell to push anything through Parliament under normal circumstances, it’s not for everything. Only use Parliament for your initiatives if you have a solid PR reason that makes it worth the fuss.
  • Be a team. Multiple people should pitch in.
Contributions in debate

This is mostly a reactive duty. Whenever the government starts a debate on a motion or a bill, you need to be there to stick it to them. It’s not good form to be late to the party either – ideally you’ll have to have a response ready within 24 hours so that they can respond.

Your main tactic here, beyond offering a solid argument, is to wrongfoot the government. A solid argument will get you parliamentary momentum, so don’t neglect it. More importantly however, wrongfooting the government will give you a media circus you can exploit.

Here’s a few pointers on the tactical use of debate contributions to wrongfoot the government:
  • Lay traps for them. There are certain things that might not be wise for them to say but which you can bait them into saying.
  • Put pressure on them. They can simply ignore difficult questions (this is not Question Time after all), but if you keep chipping away, chances are they’ll drop the ball.
  • Offer amendments they can’t possibly accept. This is largely subject to the same guidelines as PMBs. In effect, an amendment is a mini-PMB. They’re possibly worth it if you can force the government to oppose an amendment they should otherwise be supporting, or if you can generate attention with it even if they are accepted.
In budget debates and the QS debate, everyone has to show up. It’s as simple as that.

Parliamentary questions

There’s a common misconception about parliamentary questions, which is that they’re about getting information. They really are not. For the Official Opposition, the true aim of parliamentary questions is to show that the government has no idea what it’s doing. There’s a reason the PM walks in with a huge-ass brief every Wednesday: if he drops the ball on anything, the opposition will have a field day.

So your aim as an opposition frontbencher in particular is to show that the right honourable gentleman or lady at the other despatch box hasn’t got the foggiest. You can do this in a number of ways:
  • Show that they don’t have the facts handy
  • Show that they can’t properly defend their policies
  • Show that they aren’t on top of their portfolio, particularly in a crisis scenario.
  • Maneouver them into leaving you an open goal.
Ultimately, your chief aim should be to get quotes from your member opposite which you can use to hit them in the press or brandish on unflattering election posters. Alternatively, you should nudge them into a corner where you can unleash an awesome withering putdown that you can hawk to the press. I’m not sure whether the A-team always reads the questions threads, but they’ll surely read your Press Office stuff on it.

Here’s a few do’s and don’ts for questions.
  • Do make a plan before you go into Question Time. What do I want to achieve with this question?
  • Do think a step or two ahead for your opponent. How are they going to respond to you? How do you want them to respond? How can you exploit this?
  • Do ask a question about every major press scenario in your department.
  • Do use questions to highlight policy areas in which the government is weak and/or in which you have a strong policy of your own.
  • Don’t ask questions simply to get information, or ask for the government’s priorities. Nobody cares, they can simply read the manifesto. Moreover, you’re giving the government an opportunity to sell their vision.
  • Don’t expect them to answer your questions. It’s not their job.
  • Don’t overdo the drama. If you’re overly bombastic about your question time performances, chances are people will not take you seriously. Only use fire and brimstone where such is due. Sarcastic politeness is usually the way to go.
  • Don’t go in on issues on which your party is vulnerable without thinking very carefully on how you’re going to ensure your member opposite cannot exploit it.
Live PMQs
"Yes, Malcolm, I'm prepped, I'm fucking prepped. I've got the lead question, the sarcastic followup question and I've got the withering putdown."
- Nicola Murray

A special addition which is especially potent and requires extensive thought and preparation is Live PMQs. Your attendance is absolutely essential (and hugely fun). Real life oppositions coordinate Prime Minister’s Questions to get their message to come through in most backbench questions as well as the Leader’s moment of glory.

If you’re not the Leader, still attend. I’ve personally found that having boisterous party colleagues shouting all sorts of crap at the opposition has exactly the same morale-pumping effect as I imagine the real House during PMQs having. It really helps, so come in to cheer your guy!

If you’re the Leader, this is your moment. Time to send the PM running scared. Preparation is absolutely essential, since you’ll have to be able to think on your feet to make the most of your six questions. Use all the Do’s and Don’ts above but especially take care to think carefully what image you want to project to the people watching the event. Absolutely tie this in to your larger message and strategic agenda. Plan a few lines in beforehand, particularly your withering sarcastic putdown. If you have a plan, all you need is flair to see it through.

I’ll give you an example from my round as Emily Greenwood, the Labour Leader of the Opposition. We had just fought a by-election campaign in which the government had made a lot of spending pledges. Now my objectives for this session were to use this to further damage their economic credibility and paint them as unreliable. The plan was to steal away “long-term economic plan” as a theme from them and dangle it in front of them to force them into making bold claims… which they did, playing right into my hands. At the same time, my plan was to use an old debating trick “generously” asking less examples of the PM, which he fell for by not giving any.

As you can see below, I also wove in some of the government’s earlier record. This is essential. You want to paint the image of continuous failure and keep hitting them on things you know you hit them successfully. Also, remember you have little time to type up your answers once you’re in the session. Be sure to have some sentences and answers prepared which you can tailor to the occasion.

As you can see, I also replied to interjections from the other lot. This is a do for the Leader of the Opposition, which is to interact with what’s happening in the House around you (the A-team specifically hinted I should do this).

This is the exchange in question (albeit abridged):
The Leader of the Opposition (Mrs. Emily Greenwood): Mr Speaker, let me first join the Prime Minister in congratulating the four new members for Waveney, Chester, Great Yarmouth and Berwickshire. I'm sure ALL of them will do a great job and be assets to this House *cheers from the Labour benches*. After the bluster and bullishness of the Tory campaign on the economy, which saw some of the people in these constituencies frown on the government's use of national statistics not reflected in their local situation, it was most heartening to see the right honourable member for Windsor go on national television and acknowledge with quite a bit of humility that the government had to try harder to spread the benefits of the recovery among all communities. However, shortly after, the right honourable member for South West Surrey, being responsible for Communities, implied that this merely extended to the issue of Europe, leaving some confusion as to what the government means. Will the Prime Minister offer reassurance to the people of communities up and down the country left behind in the recovery in the form of three concrete measures he will be taking to finally share out economic prosperity to them?

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Saxon): Mr Speaker, for a start, the recovery is the result of the economic mess her party dumped us all in. To quote the member for Nottingham North, a Labour MP, said that the Government's economic plan is an attempt "to steer the sunken ship back to the surface". That would be the sunken ship that Labour left on the ocean floor then. We will of course reassure the public that we are working on a economic plan that will provide stability, creating jobs that pay well. It is not about a wider economic message it is about promoting the creation of wealth through lower taxes which we will strive to do.

(sundry Hear hears)

Mrs. Greenwood: Mr Speaker, the benches opposite might be cheering for that but I think that it's not at all worth cheering for. It's simply disgraceful, Mr Speaker, that the Prime Minister of this country can stand up and give the same tired old message that its all the fault of a government almost a decade ago when I asked him about concrete measures to help communities like Waveney in the next decade - it almost seems like he's so confident in its new MP that he think he doesn't need to bother. Let me indulge him, Mr Speaker: if he can't name three concrete and specific measures, then can he at least give me two?

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, i will not take lectures from the leader of the opposition around the economy. We are unlocking billions of pounds in investment. We are creating new jobs, we are encouraging business investment into this country. Let's turn to Labour's "grand design" shall we? For a start they may have very little policy they can narrow down but we have a clear agenda. Labour are as clueless on the economy now as they were back in Government. The Leader of the Opposition's" grand design", fronted by the Shadow Chancellor, is nothing more than more regulation and a list of items on welfare. They've proposed statutory maternity leave and government funded insurance but have said no idea how they are going to pay for it. It is going to cost us billions of pounds and the only way that can be paid back is to raise taxes, whether that’s VAT, income tax or National Insurance or more borrowing. So although this is Prime Minister's Questions, I think she should answer the question, will her party rule out raising taxes, particularly VAT, income tax or National insurance.

Mrs. Greenwood: Mr Speaker, I will tell him what we WON'T do. We won't try and cut tax credits for the poorest, we won't cut taxes for the richest and we won't continue with inheritance tax cuts for the largest estates. And we won't, when a member asks about it, refuse to answer the question. If only the Prime Minister had a bit more concern for the people who have been left behind in the recovery rather than for his big donors, he could fund the long-term economic plan he's now leaving to us. Mr Speaker, in case the Prime Minister hasn't noticed, there is a huge lack of trust in politics especially after the last expenses scandal. So he really owes us an answer - let him take his time, look at his brief and see if he can find an answer in there. And I'll be generous: I'll settle for ONE concrete measure to help these forgotten communities.

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, I saw the Shadow Chancellor seems extremely fustrated, shes almost jumping out of her seat!. She hasnt answered the question though! Her own brand new revolutionary grand design for the economy to "save" Britain in the eyes of the labour party and she will not rule out raising taxes. It is the same old Labour. This Government is not leaving communities behind, we will follow through with our promises on local issues in Waveney, we will carry on with our economic plan that is working. WE have guaranteed NO VAT rises, no income tax rises and no National Insurance raises, the Labour party wont rule it out!. We are working to abolish the deficit and we will get there. The Labour Party have dressed up this new economic policy to be something magical, it is not Mr Speaker, it is a farce.

Mrs. Greenwood: Mr Speaker, I will note one thing and that is that I have answered the question, whereas the Prime Minister has instead given us a question that almost makes me suggest we should change places *laughter from the opposition benches*. It's absolutely disgraceful Mr Speaker - Labour has offered communities left behind a green jobs plan and through our New Economy Agenda we'll create billions of high tech jobs. And all the while, this Prime Minister can't even follow up the expectations raised by his own Regions Secretary with a single concrete measure to help these communities!

I'm glad that he has mentioned promises though, Mr Speaker, for we have some unfinished business in that department. Last month we saw the Prime Minister shaft the progressive tax system he promised the Liberal Democrats, but that still leaves an end to austerity, ringfenced public services, tax cuts all around. Now to that impressive list, the Prime Minister have added investment almost everywhere. I asked him last month in this House: no answer. I asked him in the by-election: no answer. It's not very hopeful for the people of Britain, Mr Speaker, so let me ask him again for clarity: how will he pay for all this?

An hon. member: Billions of pounds of new debt!

Another hon. member: Millions of pounds in tax rises!

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, well that me say there aren't bllions in the country but we will let that pass as i know what she means, saving the world again? They are making promises that they cannot keep. They are the ones with the plan that they can't pay for! We have set out an economic agenda, reducing the deficit, cutting wasteful spending, encouraging business investment. I'm not sure the Leader of the Opposition is familar with how the economy works but let me explain, through economic growth brings new revenue which we can then use to pay off our debts, we are doing it now, the plan is working. We are set to have a surplus in 2020, can Labour give you that under their economic plan? No! Can Labour promise you that they wont raise VAT, NI or Income tax, No! Communities are and will be supported by the Government, under this Government we are moving forwards, under a Labour Government the country will be moving backwards.

Mrs. Greenwood: Mr Speaker, I heard some very smart members on the benches opposite just now, shouting out answers more informative than the right honourable gentleman's! I asked him a very simple question, so let me reach the very simple conclusion - he can't pay for all this. The promises he made to his better half in the Liberal Democrats who is boasting an end to austerity, the ringfencing of public services, the tax cuts he substituted for a fairer tax system, the investment he promised the people of those constituencies, it all adds up to a huge figure in the red to such an extent that I hope he kept that note from 7 years ago he likes so much in order to reuse it! So let me change my tack, seeing as the Prime Minister obviously has answered the previous question by that evasion, and let me ask him. Fair taxes had to go, so what's next? Take your pick.

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, and this is the party that left us in a heap of debt. This is the labour party that left a note in 2010 informing the new Government there was no money left. This is the labour party who will not rule out taxes. To answer her question, something she hasnt heard of doing, Fair taxes might have to go under Labour's plan for the economy, but under our plan we will continue to cut taxes for millions of hardworking people. The economy is on the right road to economic propserity, a change in tack to the Joke of a plan that Labour have sprung all upon us will plunge this economy back into more and more debt, we cannot afford that. We have been taking millions out of tax by raising the personal allowance and we will continue to do so, Under a Conservative Goernment there is more money in the pockets of hard working britons, Why dont she sit down and let this Government continue to lead this country onto a better and brighter future.

The Chancellor has a word with the PM. (In this situation, it's salient to note that just before, the Chancellor had taken the unusual step of openly coming out against the spending efficacy of a Government Bill)

Mrs. Greenwood: Mr Speaker, I could see the Prime Minister having a word with the Chancellor of the Exchequer just now. I hope for his sake that she's trying to tell him what to say and not questioning the efficacy of the answer he just gave!

I think the Prime Minister has a very strange definition of fair taxes, Mr Speaker: if reforming the tax system to have the strongest shoulder the heaviest burden is unfair and if inheritance tax cuts for the richest are fair, then the Prime Minister might want to read up on the definition. And if the Prime Minister still think that to have a long-term economic plan, you have tax cut after tax cut, then he needs to be smarter! His plan is a stone age club compared to our forward-looking economic plan for the next decade, no matter how much he wants to draw attention away to the periphery. But enough of our plan for the economy because the Prime Minister has once again evaded the awkward question and it's letting people up and down the country, not least on the LibDem benches, down in uncertainty. A tax on unearned wealth had to go - what's next?

The Prime Minister: Mr Speaker, I can see the Leader of the Opposition is trying to be a stand up comedian, perhaps she should take it up as a full time job instead of leading the party of robbers, robbing millions of people of more of their hard earned money through raising taxes to fund this abject failure of an economic plan. I can tell her what had to go, and thats the deficit that we are getting rid of. By 2020 we will have a surplus , the Leader of the Opposiiton is waffling because she knows the Shadow Chancellor hasnt thought through the economic plan, if i was the Leader of the Opposition, i would expect her the Shadow Chancellor's resignation on my desk tomorrow morning. We are leading this country out of the dark and into the light economic prosperity, lower taxes, lower defecit , cutting wasteful spending. Finally Mr Speaker, She's quoting Margaret Thatcher like no tomorrow, it's nice to see that she is a fan of the former Prime Minister who led our country out of dark times like we are doing now. The leader of the opposition seems to be fond of the Iron Lady, but the country will send a clear message to her when they go to the ballot box: we're not for turning.
Opposition Day Motions and Bills

Opposition Days are the sparing moments you get control of the House agenda for your motions and bills. Now the thing to remember here is that these are not for every single policy. As a general rule, if you’ve got a big flagship policy that, for example, majorly overhauls the NHS, it’s probably not suitable for an Opposition Day Bill.

This is because when you submit an Opposition Bill, you subject yourselves to some of the same constraints as the government. You have to get into detail, which is then on the record, and you have to submit yourself to a vote, which you’ll almost always lose. As a way to get your policy out there, this is not ideal since the government gets to talk back and immediately have a debate.

So what can you use an Opposition Day Bill or Motion for? Well, exactly because the government is forced to respond, there’s two major ones I can think of:
  • There’s no way it won’t get passed. If you manage to pass an opposition day bill, that counts as a rare legislative victory. Beware not to neglect the press side of the government co-opting your bill.
  • You can embarrass the government by forcing them to vote against it, or forcing a rebellion. For example, if you know the government is divided on Europe, offering a bill to open up the wound might be a good move. Forcing the government to oppose something popular is another way to make hay.
You can technically use an Opposition Motion or Bill to raise the profile of any issue, but chances are you could do as well in the press. Generally, if having the government able to respond is essential, then you could consider an Opposition Day. If not, then it’s probably better to keep control and keep it outside Parliament.

Votes and whips

The standard vote for the Opposition is Noe. No doubt about it. But consider carefully before you whip. In some cases, it might be better to support the government to appear constructive. In any case, a few don’ts about votes:
  • Don’t vote Noe if by doing so you can come across as being unsympathetic.
  • Don’t change your vote if your frontbencher has argued forcefully for the other side.
[hr]
The media toolbox

This is actually more advantageous for the opposition than Parliament in many ways. Remember how your goal is to set the public agenda? Well, with the media tools, you have the chance of direct access to it. Talk something up in the press and people will start talking about it.

A few ground rules on how to use the media effectively:
  • Try to coordinate everyone to stay on-message. To do this, it’s probably handy to accompany everything major (attacks as well as policies) with a short campaign guide giving people some ideas on how to help the party.
  • Try to get in on every major debate even if you’re not initiating them.
  • Don’t forget that presentation is key. Think ahead of what people are going to say and try to cover vulnerabilities as much as you can.
Press Office
"OF the moment, I told you to say OF the fucking moment! It's the difference between 'Nicola, I'd like to go FOR a lovely walk with you' and 'Nicola, I want to make a hat out OF your fucking entrails!'"
- Malcolm Tucker

The press office is crucial to the Opposition. While the government has Parliament, this is where you make your mark. To capture the debate, you have to capture the public opinion and the media. The Press Office is the forum to do it, and without it you'll find you'll struggle.

The key to winning in the Press is coordination and preparation: unless you're responding to the government, you have control here, so exploit that advantage. Do not send out any new policy initiative without backup from the rest of the party saying how great it is. Do not let government slipups in Parliament go unnoticed. If not to the point of spamming the Press Office, be active there and work in a coordinated fashion so that you get your message across.

A few do’s and don’ts when it comes to the press office:
  • Do keep lists of talking points for major debates and topics. This definitely includes anything to do with the defence of your own policies.
  • Do use a proofreading thread. Not because everything needs to be kept on a tight leash but because two people know more than one. You might’ve missed that soundbyte, but chances are your colleagues can find it.
  • Do check the press office first when you log on to see if there’s something you have to respond to. This is like your Question Time. If you’re absent and it’s your portfolio, it’ll hurt the party.
  • Do attempt to win every press cycle the A-team launches.
  • Don’t go negative without also giving an alternative. Criticising the government can only get you so far.
  • Don’t get personal with members of the government unless there’s a solid reason for it. Personal attacks backfire more easily than substantial attacks.
  • Don't get repetitive! If you use the same argument twice, the A-team will mark it down or ignore it completely.
  • Don’t ever forget your soundbyte in a comment-form PR.
  • Don't leave any PR by the government unaddressed. When you're a number of PRs back and forth in, you can assume the A-team will at some point get bored, but never leave any first salvo unattended.
  • Don't send out a speech without talking points for a PR offensive backing it up.
  • Don't keep a press offensive going after the A-team has given feedback to the effect that attention has died down. It's a waste of your and everyone else's time.
The best advice I can give you is to carefully pace out publicity-grabbing moments (these can be speeches, parliamentary stuff, press conferences, well-placed leaks, etc.) and prepare talking points for them in advance. That way you can catch the other lot off guard.

Press conferences
"We made a press conference so boring none of the press would even touch it!"
- Oliver Reeder

The above quote denotes the never-happening occasion in PolUK that you have to pull out of a Press Conference. You want your Press Conferences to be the opposite of this. That means they’re best used sparingly: if you’re going to summon the entire British Press to a school in Oxfordshire, you’d better not do it for a trifling small thing.

Sometimes I’ve seen beginning frontbenchers call Press Conferences for almost everything. That’s understandable. They sound cool, after all and we’ve all seen one on television. But the effect is that nobody cares the moment you and your party have anything to say. So don’t. Press conferences are best reserved for the major things, things you want brandished over all the papers the next morning.

A few Do’s and Don’ts:
  • Do realise that you are not speaking to an unresponsive audience, but to the press, part of it almost always hostile. They will talk back to you and try to trick you into making their headlines even bigger, and worse for you. If you’re not sure you can handle the press, don’t call a press conference.
  • Do prepare extremely well. Give a provoking, short statement and be prepared for any potential questions. If you don’t know the answer, let a party colleague help you out.
  • Do ideally hand out a policy paper at the Press Conference with all the details. This saves you from having to do it all in your statement and bore the audience to death. Besides, it lets you confine yourself to the highlights and overall message.
  • Don’t leave questions unanswered in a press conference. It looks bad, and the A-team took the time to read your stuff. Reciprocate by handling the annoying questions they did their best to come up with.
  • Don’t answer yes or no questions by stonewalling unless you’re really put on the spot, but be prepared for a media backlash.
  • Don’t overdo press conferences.
  • Don’t call a press conference without substance. That includes one that just summarises how nice the new Shadow Cabinet is, or outlining vague priorities. It doesn’t work. Don’t waste anyone’s time with it.
Speeches
“Don’t try to be Obama. I’ve not served with Obama, I don’t know Obama, Obama is not a friend of mine. But take it from me, you’re no Obama. Keep gestures to a minimum. I don’t want to see your impression of Shiva working a Diablo while doing a Rubik’s cube.”
- Malcolm Tucker's Guide to Public Speaking

Speeches are the most important way of getting your policy out there. Their major advantage over press conferences is twofold: you can get to pick who is there when you make the speech, and they don’t talk back. As a rule, therefore, speeches are one of the best ways to get your policy out there in front of a sympathetic audience, and they’ve historically been the way in which PolUK oppositions have made most major policy announcements. A good speech can start a debate, so this is an important advantage.

On the content of it all: everyone has a different style. Mine’s broad rhetoric with policy added in for the crunch. Others are very good at presenting their policy. But every speech has to has hard policy facts at its core. People want to know what you’ll do (for them, for Britain, to get their vote without hugging puppies, you name it), not what you’re saying. Importantly, ain’t a good speech without a few government potshots but like the advice given on PRs above, don’t go overboard and don’t forget to talk up your own party.

Some advice on picking your audience: ask advice from the AVs. Sometimes it could be a good idea to start writing the speech before you pick the audience. Think carefully of the impression you want to make and the strategic goals of your speech. If you want to bolster economic credentials, you could go to the CBI or to the LSE or to some other important location. It’s always nice if you can include the background of where you’re speaking in your speech.

Sometimes the audience picks you. You might get an invite, or you might have to do one of the obligatory numbers. In that case, try to think even more carefully what they want to hear.

Always keep in mind though: the press and through them the wider public are watching. In one of my earlier rounds, I was Shadow Health Secretary and I presented an internal market plan for the NHS to Reform. Reform loved it, of course – but the left-wing press had a field day. Even when speaking to a sympathetic audience, you need to think of the vulnerabilities and account for them in your presentation (as a Tory, it’s best not to say “internal market” but rather something like “money following the patients’ choices”; as Labour, it’s best not to speak of “railway nationalisation” but instead “create a public train operator called BritRail”).

In summary, do’s and don’ts:
  • Do think about your audience carefully. If they don’t love the speech, the entire affair certainly tanks.
  • Don’t think about your audience exclusively. The press will be there and they will comment. Don’t leave them open goals.
  • Do prepare a list of talking points for your party colleagues to be able to back you up after an important speech. Do this before giving the speech. Also do this taking into account the possible lines of attack the government might throw at you.
  • Don’t ever send out a speech without proofreading (except perhaps in a campaign where there’s time pressure, but even then, think twice). These are big. You can send out a PR without proofreading in a pinch, but make sure there’s always a second set of eyes on a speech.
  • Don’t attack the government without giving opposition alternatives. If it’s not your portfolio, ask the responsible frontbencher for ideas.
  • Do talk up the overall narrative of the party wherever possible. This is of great help to your leader, who is constantly trying to weave slogans and themes into a larger whole.
  • Do take care not to make your speeches too long or too short. 1000-2000 words is usually the acceptable range, but higher quality writing can let you get away with more. You can’t get away with less.
  • Do integrate speeches in selling parliamentary policies like PMBs. It’ll give you an extra moment to shine.
  • Do include facts and figures wherever possible. The AVs love them. (but check them first).
Live events
“PAXMAN: He’s still the daddy. You can’t beat him. When cocky youngsters occasionally try he slaps them down, steals their wallet, fucks their wife and buys a new fridge with their MasterCard.”
- Malcolm Tucker's Guide to TV Interviews

Live events are incredibly exciting. Not only do they give all players in them a moment to shine and feel like a proper politician, they’re also representing high-profile moments on television. As a rule, think about who should go to a TV interview or show as a group: who is best placed to talk about this? Do we want the official frontbench spokesperson or our backbench attack dog to go on? What issues will be discussed?

Then, I would strongly advise, in Malcolm Tucker’s words, “a preparatory fucking verbal course”. Much like PMQs, the other person will be trying to trip you up. Especially if it’s Paxman. Ask Paul Dolan what I mean (sorry Paul). Better to try to be prepared for the traps they’ll definitely set you. You could run through probable questions with a sparring partner to help you think on your feet. In a one-on-one interview, there’s all sorts of options depending on the situation. Be aware that if you have to stonewall you shouldn’t do it too obviously because you’ll get caught, that’s all I can say. Stick to your talking points, is another. If you wander, you’ll get Paxed more easily.

By the way, if it Pax, keep it short and concise. He eats waffle for breakfast, lunch and dinner and even then he’s hungry.

The same goes for debates. Think about who else is going to be there, and what they’re going to say, and where you want them to end up after it. For Question Time, be aware of the possible topics, think about your answers, maybe even write some stuff down. And prepare what the other parties will say. Especially look at prior statements from the government so you can catch them out on any sneaky discrepancies.

There’s not much more I can say except preparation is key.

Editorials

Very underused, but definitely worth it if they’re allowed: the occasional editorial or letter to the editor of a newspaper. If you pick the newspaper right, you might win some favour with the press. Much like writing a speech, but a bit more thoughtful perhaps.

IF you are attacked in the press and they talk shit, be sure to consider getting a right to reply in in the form of a letter to the editor pointing out how they’ve perhaps missed some of the point. But don’t be too belligerent or defensive, or it might backfire. If you can’t do it right, don’t do it.

Leaks
"The ship of state is the only ship that leaks from the top."
- Sir Humphrey Appleby

You might think of leaks primarily as a way to screw over your colleagues and of course, you’d be right, but the Westminster gossip machine is hard to ignore as a serious way to kick up a fuss. This has never been tried before in PolUK to my knowledge, but in real life, leaking is also a way to test the waters for a major policy idea. If you’re off the record when telling a reporter about the exciting new plans you have for Transport, you could get speculation going that might give you a clue as to how to better present the policy. Also, it builds anticipation and sets expectations. It could potentially be a very potent tool.

By the way, concerning leaks of the “screwing over your colleagues variety”, be sure not to make a bad situation worse. Leaks attract the press like flies because they’ll know something is wrong and these vultures like that. As an AV, a leak once prompted me to start digging for explosive information on budget negotiations between Liberals and Tories, and I found it. If a journalist comes asking you about a leak, it might be best to tell the Chief Whip and the Leader so as not to screw up the response, especially since you might be on the record.
[hr]
The information toolbox

This is a sometimes neglected part of the Opposition’s arsenal. The government has got an advantage in the form of the Civil Service here, but who says that a bit of research can’t dig up facts you might use to your advantage? Information you don’t have to ask the government for is extremely potent because you can blindside them with it. They probably won’t have looked at a lot of figures.

In by-elections, for instance, it ALWAYS pays to look at constituency-level statistics. The House of Commons Library has a large amount of constituency-level economic data in particular that’s excellent if you want to know the economic situation. After confirming with the AVs, you can certainly put those on posters (and cherrypick them to some extent, very few people will check).

But when you’re raising problems in the House, it might pay to do your research about the problems and ask the A-team if they have any information from constituents for you or something. Private polls on good issues might also be a good way to go, especially if you’re pushing a delicate policy.

Another way in which you can use information to your advantage is to keep talking to people in government. They might let things slip about what they’re doing. But beware – don’t give away the opposition agenda. Macmillan in particular fancies himself very good at fishing for clues.
[hr]
Opposition Policy-Making

“Pay the unemployed to drive ambulances.”

“YES AND HO.”

- Stewart Pearson’s policy jamming session from the Thick of It.

Here’s some pointers for coming up with new policies. It’s hard to come up with stuff like that from scratch and some are better at it than others.

Ultimately, coming up with policies in a successful opposition team is not an individual job, but a team job. Not all of us are policy heroes who just can keep it flowing (though they should probably be the first to present some of their policies). It’s crucial that the party and Shadow Cabinet chats are used to pick the minds of others in the party. Always keep the Shadow Chancellor involved with anything that costs money, at a minimum, and keep your leader in the loop on what you’re doing.

If you’ve got a policy idea, even if just an issue the party could address, be sure to drop the responsible frontbencher a message with it or put it in the party chat or party forum. The opposition needs a constant train of ideas to keep working out their own policies.

In general, the leader and his team should guide the formulation of policy by use of his vision. This helps keep the party focused. If, for example, you’re going for a community solutions theme or decentralisation theme, then that helps every Shadow SoS to think of something.

Some policies can be in the pipeline for months. This is not a bad idea, especially if they’re in sensitive areas and you want to be absolutely sure (see “how to work up to a potentially controversial policy launch” below for some pointers).

Some questions to help you flesh out policy
  1. What is the problem we’re trying to solve? Who does it affect?
  2. How have we tried to solve it in the past?
  3. How can we solve it?
  4. What does it cost?
  5. What is the government doing to solve it? What have they done to try and solve it?
  6. What will the government say when we propose this? How can I address what the government will say when we propose this?
  7. How does this fit into the overall narrative of our party?
  8. Finally: how do I present this policy in such a way that it will become a success?
Some places to start
  • Your real-life manifesto
  • Plans of like-minded parties in other countries (providing you can read their language; the US is probably too different from Britain to implement many policies found there one on one).
  • Think tank reports, particularly those related to your party.
  • The way things are organised in other countries, especially on the continent. This has the advantage you can point to good policy performance abroad.
  • Sometimes, you can even use the policies of devolved governments.
How to deal with a tricky policy launch
Some policies are tricky. This is mostly because they’re liable to leave open goals for the government to take advantage of. On the flip side, they can be very powerful when handled correctly because by definition a tricky policy sets you apart from your competitors. When you’re in charge of launching a potentially risky policy, it’s best to be careful and deliberate about it. Don’t rush things.

I’ll illustrate some of the strategies below with my beloved example of BritRail, my Labour Party’s rail nationalisation policy.

You can use one of several strategies to slowly prepare the way for the launch:
  • Talk up the problem you’re trying to solve and slowly work up to the launch. For BritRail, we deliberately let our Party Conference pass a motion urging a look at the quality and fares on the railways to prepare the way.
  • Use similar solutions in a related area. If you want to nationalise the railways as Labour, it might be good to tackle local public transport with a solution like rolling out the TfL model nationally first.
  • Tie the policy in to other parts of your agenda that are definitely going to make things easier for people. For example, we set up a National Oyster Card and tied it to BritRail.
When you’ve launched a tricky policy, be sure not to be forced onto the defensive. It’s very important that you keep talking up the benefits of the policy and stick to the talking points.

The only time you ever should allow yourself to concede to the opposition is when you’ve made a mistake adding a flaw into your proposal. In that case, if you can get away with it (for example if it’s an omission), try to make it out that it was always your intention to do it in a way that doesn’t include the flaw and that you had thought of everything. In any case, abandon the policy silently before you let yourself be forced to publicly concede you made a mistake. That’s the perk of being in opposition.
[hr]
Some troubleshooting strategies

Everyone makes mistakes. It’s only human, after all. Even in the most well-prepared plan, there can be a spanner in the works. Luckily, as the opposition, you have the advantage that no mistake you ever make is ever put into law. Therefore, a screw-up by the opposition is theoretically more easily addressed than by the government. Here’s some of my strategies for when you’re put on the defensive.

In general terms of advice, always tackle problems together as a team. Talk things through before responding, or you might risk making things worse.

These are probably not all the tricks, they might not even be the best ones for your situation but for what it’s worth I thought they needed to be included. I’ll add to these if I find more of them.

1. Subtly change your message
One of the perks of being in opposition is that nothing you present is final (unless you’ve definitely said it and that’s your problem). If you’re not too obvious about it, you can subtly change some of the details of your message after launch and pretend you’ve always been at war with Eurasia. This is best used on the details of policy launches: you’re bound to have failed to see some criticisms coming and by spinning to meet them, you can minimise or neutralise these attacks.

2. Go on the counterattack to distract attention
If you should get attacked on something, then it might pay off to try to switch attention back onto the other side. For example, when at one point through human error a manifesto lacked a number on NHS spending, and we were called out on it, we challenged the governing party to publicly declare they would meet it whatever the cost or coalition they’d have to form. If you do it long enough, you could turn criticism into a debate (you could still lose said debate but at least you had a chance to win it too).

Don’t use this strategy if the trouble is personal. After all, you don’t want to be Donald Trump.

3. Take your loss
Sometimes, you can’t do anything about it other than face the music. In that case, trying to spin it might only result in more attention being put on the trouble you’re in. In such an event, you should simply admit the mistake, take the consequences and try to move on as quickly as possible. If you’re a frontbencher and you’ve got a resigning issue, be aware that there is such a thing as a good resignation.

4. Distract attention with activity in another area
Easily combined with 3. If you want to help people get bored of talking about what you did wrong, then give them something else to talk about. There’s nothing like a good policy launch to distract from a PR fiasco. At worst, the government neglects it to keep focusing on your scandal and that earns you points.
Dr. Marty of the A-team
Technical Wizard
Education and Children, Health and Social Security, Environment and Energy, Constitutional Affairs
Scenarios
Conservative Party advisor
Post Reply

Return to “Game Library”