PC 12: Shadow Budget(s)

Locked
User avatar
Blakesley
A-team
A-team
Posts: 292
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2020 5:19 am
XP: 14
Trait(s): None
Discord username: Blakesley

Re: PC 12: Shadow Budget(s)

Post by Blakesley »

PC 12: Shadow Budget(s)

We're going to break things down a little differently here and go through the various themes of the responses.

First, I would like to discuss "the tyranny of statistics". If your argument uses the phrase "in real terms" (meaning, holding steady with inflation), a percentage, or another abstract value - this does not help you. If your audience is FT, maybe it does (or Paxman) - save it for a live event. Have you ever spoken to granny and had her say, "Well, actually I'll be 2.5% better off with my pension increase this year"? Probably not. And that is, unfortunately, where a lot of weakness comes in here.

Second, (wonky) specifics aren't soundbites. Soundbites are a crisp and clear message. Soundbites are what stick with the public. Soundbites are not unnecessary specifics. I'm going to pick on Mac here because he made the first contribution to this thread and it's a good example.
Not a soundbite: "Under the Liberal Democrats the average family will be £800 better off just from the reduction in Income Taxes, abolishing the lowest rate altogether and equalising the Income Tax and National Insurance thresholds to deliver a tax cut for everyone from Surrey to Sutherland and from Essex to East Antrim."

Better soundbite: "Under the Liberal Democrats the average family will be £800 better off, just from the reduction in Income Taxes, abolishing the lowest rate altogether and equalising the Income Tax and National Insurance thresholds to deliver a tax cut for everyone from Surrey to Sutherland and from Essex to East Antrim."
Okay. Moving on.

We start with Rebecca Flair giving us an earful about the Liberal Democrats plans. There are some good lines in here. People like to hear "£800 better off". The policies on crime and pensions are well received. The comments on the surplus are a swing and a miss (this, in part goes to the statistics bit - "current surplus" vs "surplus" is not a distinction to most people). The statement on localism came so close to being excellent - just replace numbers is tangible things! What was missing overall? A narrative that pulls it all together. My best advice is to find a theme and make your comments around that theme.

The Conservative Shadow Budget will be divided into their actual proposal and critiques of that and critiques of everything they left out. Starting with the proposal itself, William Croft comes out and there is a theme here. This is a tax cutting budget. And there is message discipline, for the first time all round, from the Tories on this front. A lot of voters come out of this knowing that the Tories will cut your taxes.

And now the negatives. As soon as the Conservative Shadow Budget comes out there is sh*t flying in every direction. No green investment, no flood defences, no x/y/z - yeah, there's a lot to process here. There was a narrative to be made here about the disconnect between Croft and Mountstuart, fortunately for the Conservatives nobody made it. Amelia Lockhart probably goes the farthest in the "how can we trust Croft and Co" narrative - with some impact. Brown also gets in a few good jabs. But again, what's missing is the coherent narrative - the buzzwords. Once we get to Calamity Croft, Rebecca Flair really starts landing some punches.

At some point things devolve into a shouting match between Ashbridge, Mountstuart, and Flair, in what can only be described (in an inclusive all budget debate way) as a tactical win for Labour, because people really seem to have forgotten about the Government and are leaning in on the "race for Official Opposition" narrative.* It's also around this point that Frederick Sackville-Bagg has potentially the best one liner of the cycle.

We're now on page 6 and the big guns come out with Sir Jack, Andy Edwards, and Amelia Lockhart going after the Conservatives. Lockhart and Flair then have a technocratic exchange that nobody really has time for. Astrid Goldman then comes in with probably the best summation of Labour's arguments re: the two shadow budgets on hand. And with that, just over six pages later, we're done.

*NB: This comment is meant to be inclusive of both this, the Budget PC, and the actual budget debate in Parliament.

So where does that leave us? The Conservatives have a message, but their overall credibility is damaged. The Liberal Democrats have ideas, but need to better communicate them. Labour is sitting pretty high and mighty and critiquing everyone else from a place of competence. And that makes this hard to assign points for, but here we go anyway. It'll be a points win for the Liberal Democrats, but a tactical win for Labour - because everyone really got distracted away from their budget.

The points

Labour: +3 Momentum
Liberal Democrats: +4 momentum
Conservatives: +2 momentum

XP to Rebecca Flair, William Croft, Frederick Sackville-Bagg, Amelia Lockhart, and Astrid Goldman.

Note: There will be separate grading of the live events.
Blakesley
Treasury | Labour
Locked

Return to “Marked Press Cycles & Speeches”