POLITICAL COMMENTARY

What every politician should know

PETER PATERSON

There must be quite a number of candidates fighting this election who have never before experienced the hustings. (It is possible, given the national addiction to television, that these tyros might avoid the ordeal even now, simply by turning up to meetings ar- ranged by their agents in church halls or schoolrooms only to discover that the au- dience has stayed at home to watch whatever alternative programme there is to the party politicals on the telly.) Always ready, however, to serve democracy, this column has decided at the outset of the campaign to offer what assistance it can to politicians who do happen to find themselves confronted by live electors. Apart from the most obvious piece of advice, which the candidate's wife or husband or agent would have supplied on the way to the meeting ('For heaven's sake, don't panic'), it is important to remember that people who actually turn up to meetings are the type of voter to beware of.

First of all, the presence of at least a por- tion of the audience denotes an aching boredom on their part which cannot be satisfied either by television, the cinema, bingo or any other of the sophisticated delights of modern Britain. The fact that they have dragged themselves out in the rain, perhaps even relying on the local bus service to get them there and home again (Reminder: Don't go on too long. If they lose the last bus, you lose a vote) means that they expect some decent sport. If you can't provide it, they might; and whatever your theoretical views of participatory politics, it's very frightening in action. Then there might be children, also out for fun, and a scattering of old age pensioners who have arrived at that particular place on that particular even- ing from sheer habit, perhaps expecting a lecture from the welfare on how to make potato peel soup. Just because the children have no vote is no reason to get cross when their running races in the aisles distracts you from your speech. Remember, they will be electors one day.

The problem of audience-analysis—which you will become more adept at with ex- perience--does not end there. Lurking on the uncomfortable benches, either in a nervous giggling group or more cunningly scattered about the hall, may be supporters of your opponent, attending deliberately to ask you awkward questions to embarrass you and to test your powers of repartee. (A talent for dealing with hecklers is something you have to be born with. If you are not sure whether you can do it or not, the best advice is, don't try. It is better not done at all than done badly.)

Perhaps the most effective technique for dealing with agents provocateurs is to

discover whether a reporter is present from the local press and then, at the first sign of opposition, accuse the other side of deliberately trying to break up your meeting.

The necessity will not arise, of course, if you are fortunate enough to have a bunch of students in attendance: antagonise them sufficiently at the outset and the din they create will not only guarantee you headlines, but also conceal the inadequacy of the speech you were preparing to make.

Which brings us to the question of the speech. We do not take a cynical view of politics, nor are we guilty of the sin of in-

differentism : to us, Labour, Conservative, Liberal, Nationalist and Communist (beg- ging the pardon of all other varieties of can- didate left out for lack of space) are by no means alike. It would be quite wrong, therefore, to present a universal do-it- yourself speech for use by any candidate of whatever political complexion. Which is not to deny that some of the clichés of electoral politics are universal, or that on some issues whole sections of speeches could be ex- changed by candidates belonging to different parties without even the most perceptive voter noticing.

What follows, then, is a brief resume of a political speech to be delivered by any Labour candidate who feels uncomfortable if he is not telling the electorate exactly what every other Labour candidate is saying, with a Tory descant to enable candidates of that party to cover the same ground; which might well be quicker than sitting down and writing one for themselves.

'Comrades,' (do be careful about this: if you use it on the wrong audience they will think you are a dangerous leftie) 'I am stan- ding as the Labour candidate in this con- stituency fairly and squarely on the record of our Labour government. Under the inspired leadership of Harold Wilson and his winning team, we have done what we promised to do when we took over the mess created by the Tories and set out on the long, hard slog to national recovery six years ago. Britain is now Great Britain again, with a balance of payments surplus second to none in the world. Let me remind you, my friends, that after their thirteen wasted years in office, the

Tories left behind them a deficit of E-i-g-h-t h-u-n-d-r-e-d m-i-1-1-i-o-n p-o-u-n-d-s. (Pause for effect.) Roy Jenkins, that great man, was able to announce that that deficit has been turned into a surplus of F-i-v-e H-u-n-d-r-e-d M-i-1-1-i-o-n P-o-u-n-d-s'. (Pause for cheers from wife and agent.)

Conservative version: 'Ladies and gentlemen, let me say at once that your presence fiere tonight, and your votes on polling day for my party, show how deep is the desire of the British people to sweep out of office the most incompetent government of modern times. For six years this once great country of ours has been unable to hold up its head in the world, weighed down as we have been with an unprecedented load of foreign debt. When the Conservatives left office, after a golden age of unequalled prosperity for the British people, the Socialists—as Sir Alec warned—completely ruined it, their incompetence and mismanagement plunging us into a devalua- tion of the pound sterling. Let me remind you, ladies and gentlemen, of what Mr Wilson said at the time.' (Follow with pound-in-your-pocket quotation, which we

will not reprint on the grounds of its boring familiarity).

`Comrades, I am proud of Labour's record. Never before has this country spent more on education than on military spen- ding: we do so now. Never before have so many homes been built, never before have we built so many schools and hospitals. Never before has a government paid so much attention to the regions. Industry, as we promised, has been restructured, yet such is the ingratitude of some City interests who put profit before country that money has poured from the coffers of big firms into Tory party funds. We have lowered the voting age to eighteen, and ushered in a com- passionate revolution which Roy Jenkins has so rightly described as the civilised society.' (Most of the figures backing up these wildly extravagant claims may be gleaned from Labour's manifesto published this week.) (Conservative version: 'For doctrinaire reasons, the Socialists are neglecting the defence of this country, retreating from parts of the world in which we have invested millions of pounds, reneging on our obliga- tions to our friends. It is a despicable record. Things are no better at home, with a trail of broken promises: Remember Mr Wilson's solemn pledge on housing? (Remind them.) Remember Mr George Brown's three per cent mortgage scheme? And what about unemployment (remind them) and the Prime Minister's abysmal surrender to the trade unions? Meanwhile, the forces of law and order are faced with a challenge the like of which has not been seen since the French revolution. Mr Callaghan has caved in to the threats of long-haired student demonstrators and exerted unfair pressure on the Cricket Council to abandon the South African tour. Under Labour, ladies and gentlemen, the wrongdoer goes unpunished, abortion is ob- tainable on demand, the sanctity of marriage is undermined, and people have lost faith—faith in country, faith in saving for the future, faith in themselves. Under Mr Heath's inspired leadership (careful about this, it might even antagonise your wife and your agent) the Conservatives promise you good government and that, as we all know. means less government, lesi interference in the life of the individual, more chance for the enterprising to get on.' (There's a lot more like that to be culled from the speeches of more senior Conservatives who should, perhaps, know better.) Labour and Tory candidates in unison : 'A moment of national destiny has arrived. We have to decide at this election which party is best equipped to take Britain into the Com- mon Market. Let me hasten to assure you that we shall not go in unless the terms are right for this country, and Mr Wilson/Heath is the toughest, most experienced negotiator. Let us go forward together ...'

It might be possible for the enterprising Liberal candidate to use the above ingre- dients for his own message to the elec- torate—perhaps by using the Labour passages for speeches to obvious Labour supporters, and the Tory criticisms to more middle class audiences, or by combining the whole lot into the one speech and thus pleas- ing everybody. My only hope is that in trying impartially to serve the cause of democracy, I haven't actually deterred anyone from the profound and moving ex- perience of attending a live general election meeting. At least no one can accuse me of giving away the end of the story.