Archive for January, 2012

There are a number of electoral battles taking place across the globe which should be noted in every keen political enthusiast’s diary. Internationally, elections will be held in Russia, France and the United States to determine the Presidency whilst domestically, we have the London Mayoral election. The results of these elections will determine the political landscape for the next few years, possibly even longer. It is not just a matter of who wins but also who doesn’t.

All eyes will be on Moscow in early March as the Russian Presidential elections take place. The focus will be on whether the elections are fair following reports by Council of Europe electoral monitors of a lack of level playing field for political parties in the parliamentary elections of December 2011. Some time ago, one may have concluded that Vladimir Putin, former President and current Prime Minister would easily receive over 50% of the vote – the amount needed to avoid a second round of voting. Recent polling however has put Putin on between 45-52% with his main challenge coming from Zyuganov of the Communist Party. Even if one does entertain the idea that Putin’s popularity is in decline, it would be foolish to believe that he will not win the Presidency as he still enjoys significantly more support than his closest rival, Gennady Zyuganov of the Communist Party. The battle for the Kremlin will be interesting for three reasons. Firstly, the percentage of vote Putin wins and whether he is forced into a second round of voting. Secondly, what conclusions the electoral observers from the OSCE and Council of Europe draw from the election. Thirdly and of most interest to the international community – what Putin intends to do once elected, as the President serves a six year term and is able to serve two consecutive terms, Putin could realistically be the President of Russia until 2024.

Moving into April and we turn our attention to Paris as the French Presidential election first round is due to take place, which could potentially end the political career of Nicolas Sarkozy who has said that should he fail in his bid for re-election he will quit political life. Sarkozy, the (currently unofficial) Union for a Popular Movement candidate for Presidency is currently trailing in the polls to François Hollande, the official candidate for the Socialist Party and renowned ‘disappearing man of French politics’ (he is known to fade into the background). According to the latest polling, in the first round of voting, Hollande would lead with 30%, Sarkozy would follow with 23.5% and Marine Le Pen, the leader of the National Front is in third place with 17%. It is of great importance to the UK who is elected President because of the ongoing eurozone crisis. One of the interesting aspects of the election will be to see how much support the National Front receives and therefore whether Marine Le Pen has managed to change the public’s perception of the National Front to make it a challenger for Presidency in France in future elections. Similar centre right parties exist throughout Europe which stand on a similar platform and which have all increased in popularity in recent years. A successful result in France could well act as a catalyst in other national elections taking place throughout Europe.

Much closer to home, the London Mayoral elections take place in May. Boris enjoyed a lead of 7% in June 2011 and an 8% lead in November 2011, however the New Year has seen Ken wipe this out completely and he now commands a 2% lead over Boris. The fact that both candidates have so much to lose means that this election will be hard fought and exciting. Boris is desperate to create a legacy. He wants to be the London Mayor for the Olympics and his Boris Island airport dream could well become a reality. Both of these would be instrumental to any future political ambitions he may have (specifically if he intends to one day return to Parliament and become the leader of the Conservative Party). Ken clearly misses the job he lost four years ago and knows that if he loses the 2012 election, it will almost certainly spell the end of any serious role in frontline politics. Expect a very messy campaign from both sides.

November and as the weather cools, the election season hots up as the much talked about United States Presidential election takes place. The (over)hyped lead up to this started in the middle of 2011 and if you are bored now, prepare yourself as this will only get worse as we approach the poll. The Republican candidate has yet to be decided and it is not a foregone conclusion who it will be. At the end of 2011, Mitt Romney looked to be a safe bet for the Grand Old Party (GOP) candidacy. After Rick Santorum won an important victory in Iowa and Newt Gingrich in South Carolina, it is now not clear who will win. Despite a less than successful first term, Obama leads in current opinion polls against all three Republican frontrunners. Romney fares better than the other two candidates in the polls against Obama and therefore appears to be the best chance for the GOP. He also has time on his side as a lot can go wrong for Obama before the November election. If the Republicans fail to win this election, it will not be because Obama is a worthy winner. It will be because of the failure of the GOP to have a credible challenger. A likely scenario and one the GOP may have to settle for is an Obama win in 2012 and the GOP going away and looking to 2016 when they will (assuming Obama continues along his current path) win the Presidency with a more promising candidate such as Marco Rubio or Chris Christie.

The year 2012 is almost certainly not going to be the year the Communist Party seize the Presidency from Putin, nor the year the National Front beat Sarkozy and Hollande at the ballot box. It would probably be a good guess to say that Boris will win a second term, Romney will be selected as GOP nominee and will lose to Obama. Each election will however be eventful in its own right and by looking carefully into these events and not just simply at which candidate or political party win but also behind the main headlines (at the increase and decrease in the vote for other political parties for example) we can get an idea of how the future more long term political landscape will take shape. Ruder Finn UK will be blogging on each of these elections in more detail throughout the year.

What price independence?

When the SNP won the election in Scotland in 2011, independence was a central policy platform which led to a spectacular win.

So, carry out a referendum and implement the result (or not). If only it was that simple. Unfortunately for the SNP, Salmond found himself in a bit of a quandary - there is no doubt whatsoever about the mandate – that is clear enough and beyond peradventure but the pesky Scots, while happy enough to vote his party in, refused to support his central policy. In June 2011, the polls showed 37% favouring independence in a potential referendum, with 45% against and 18% not sure.

Faced with the likelihood of defeat in an early poll, Salmond had little option but to play the long game and the long game has consisted of two elements, drum up support and pride for Scotland itself and help to present the Scots as being unfairly treated and unite the country against the English, making support for independence more likely.

Whatever anyone thinks of Alex Salmond he is an experienced and wiley politician and his tactics appear to be working. There is increasing antagonism against the perceived unwillingness of the English to allow the Scottish nation to carry out its central policy (but let’s not quibble about the legality of the referendum at the moment). The second stage fell into his lap. The anniversary of Bannockburn, so simple, yet so galvanising, coupled with the Commonwealth Games and a grand gathering of the clans - how can he lose?

As things stand, his strategy appears to be working. Despite the clear necessity to pass legislation and the clear willingness of the Westminster government to pass it as quickly as possible, this is, to the SNP, clear evidence of English interference and opposition to the will of the Scottish people.

In a recent poll, those pesky Scots seemed to agree. Support for independence overtook opposition for the first time since 2008, with 39% support, 38% opposed and the remainder undecided or refusing to say. So far, so good.

However, David Cameron, the coalition government and the Labour Party do not owe the SNP any favours and Alex Salmond may yet be effectively silenced on the timing of the legislation as the coalition government has given every indication that they will introduce it as soon as possible. To compound this, English backbench MPs may feel inclined to seek to introduce amendments to the Bill (no doubt with the coalition’s encouragement) to include a specific date (not of the SNP’s choosing) and specifying the question for the referendum. All of which would need someone with extraordinary political skills to counter…unless the modern day Bruce can persuade the Scottish people to really start supporting the central policy.

Voltaire famously stated: “injustice in the end produces independence”. The question is can Salmond drum up enough injustice to carry the day? Only time will tell if it is a price worth paying.

The Leader of the Opposition has had a tough 2012 so far. Photo courtesy of EdMiliband's Flickr photostream.

Ed Miliband has had a Christmas to forget. A series of gaffes have fermented pre-Christmas critical rumblings into a particularly distasteful cocktail of dissent. Several unions, one unruly peer, two racial slip-ups and a distinctly average set of public performances have conspired to cause him undue woe. And a great deal of it is due to a seemingly confused communications strategy. Fishing in the dark has never been more relevant. If a PR agency had committed and presided over the sort of gaffes that have taken place since Christmas Day then you’d expect a swift termination of contract to be followed by PR Week advertising for accomplished crisis management agencies to send their credentials ASAP to The Rt Hon. Ed Miliband, House of Commons, SW1A 0AA.

Before Christmas he was holding it together, just about. It is well documented that he lacks certain presentation skills, but he does have strengths, which he was playing to: he comes across as impassioned and caring with a strong handle on policy. He may not appear a natural leader at times, but by accident or design this has actually troubled David Cameron. In the cauldron of PMQs David Cameron’s polished put downs have given rise to accusations of a bullying and angry style, which is not Prime Ministerial.

Playing to these strengths, putting in a solid lent term of public performances and solidifying his Cabinet and policy direction seemed like the natural order of business for 2012. Consolidate and build.

But, Team Miliband had an ‘edgy’ moment around Christmas. Rather than regrouping under the radar and picking holes in the Cameron machine, responding to a packed and difficult news calendar for the Government in Q1 2012, they decided to play David Cameron at his own game in the New Year. They wanted to artificially create an equivalent of Cameron’s ‘Conference moment’ to dispel any doubts about Ed.

The Miliband media team put out the news that the Leader of the Opposition was gearing up for a major speech (or relaunch) in the New Year and a string of public performances. They then prepped the media, told the Government to listen up and turned the spotlight over to Ed.

And sadly there has been no way back. Problems began when the much-vaulted major speech was delayed, lacked originality and the set up highlighted Ed’s oratorial weakness. Bit of a non-event, not helped by the BBC calling him David Miliband.

Oh dear, and now there was no way to turn off the spotlight. Shortly afterwards one of his own Peers called him c**p and Diane Abbot began a race row on Twitter. In an ironic twist Ed then mistweeted at exactly the wrong time, ushering in Blackbustersgate.

Ed Miliband's ill-fated tweet. Taken from his Twitter Account.

Now the media were on the hunt for blood, Miliband was weak, And the organised publicity just made things worse, he was ill-prepared for a Today Programme interview with John Humphries; asked an ill-advised question at PMQs, which backfired embarrassingly and he then decided to start a fight with the unions, who are feeling more militant than ever.

All of this at a time when the Government’s Health and Welfare Bills are struggling, one of their MPs was caught in a very public and embarrassing stag do controversy and Europe is on the brink. David Cameron may well still be chuckling. Miliband seems one slip-up away from finishing his act early and letting the final curtain fall.

If only Ed could go back a month. But sadly he has found out that 24 hours is a long time in politics and a month can be transformational.

And I don’t blame Ed. At a time when Nick Clegg alone has 7 special advisers each on £68,000 you feel that the Labour party should be able to turn out a stronger policy, strategy and communications team than they have. This team have made basic mistakes on all fronts: mistweeting; poorly researching questions for Prime Minister’s Questions; organising big set-piece public speeches, when Ed’s strengths lie elsewhere and choosing his nadir as the right time to attack the organisations who paid for his leadership campaign, helped him best his brother and have spent all autumn spoiling for a fight.

It is a sorry state of affairs and one that could surely be used as a ‘what not to do’ case study for many agencies. Ed Miliband, who by all accounts make a big impression when people meet him face-to-face needs some emergency communications help because If they thought he was in a hole before Christmas then 2012 has delivered a crater.