How can we get our local politicians and other public servants to post regularly in this forum?

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on September 29, 2014 at 14:43

So we agree that your rights have been ceded, OK?

Do you agree that you should pay your taxes, even though some of those taxes will be spent on things you object to?

Take the public libraries, some people are of the opinion that they should not be paid for from the public purse.

If your Library closes against your wishes, are you part of a community responsible for the lack of libraries, or not?

You think you bear no responsibility, is that right?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by markb on September 30, 2014 at 6:56

"So we agree that your rights have been ceded, OK?"

Yes.

"Do you agree that you should pay your taxes, even though some of those taxes will be spent on things you object to?"

Sure.

"If your Library closes against your wishes, are you part of a community responsible for the lack of libraries, or not?"

It depends. That assumes a single community. I don't subscribe to that simplistic world view. People tend to be part of multiple, independent communities. So, no, probably not.  If it was the party I voted for that did this, then clearly yes.

Permalink Reply by markb on September 30, 2014 at 6:57

"you have ceded rights to your representative, whilst remaining responsible for their actions."

Where does this concept/political contract come from?  Did you make that up?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Philip on September 28, 2014 at 17:31

My emails and letter to David Lammy have been nothing but courteous and respectful. All of what I have said is demonstrable. David Lammy HAS responded to petitioners. He informed me that he supports Israel in its right to bomb Gaza(I have the email) He also supported the Iraq war and voted against the inquiry into it. I don't have a personal grudge against him at all, I just wish he would speak against injustice and austerity, but he supports both. Bernie Grant, his predecessor was such an MP. He campaigned against the framing of the Birmingham Six, at no personal benefit to himself, and was a thorn in the side of the Labour establishment. There was a proper MP. Lammy has achieved nothing, and has failed the people of Tottenham.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on September 28, 2014 at 17:59

You write as if you were stating facts, but you're stating opinions you've created out of thin air to make damning accusations - why?

Imagine if you posted any of this stuff to, say, Wikipedia - it's all get erased as simply contentious.  There's almost no point in having generalised opinions like this - it really doesn't matter and doesn't help. MP's are people and people are not consistent, they are too complex to be summed up in single phrases.

Also, do our reps have a right to be mistaken?  To be wrong-headed?  If so, what percentage of their views and beliefs are obliged to be 'right-thinking'?  80%? Are they allowed to have bad months?  To be a little crazy?  To be inconsistent?

I like Eddie Izzard and he might very well stand for election in future - I'd vote for him! 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by markb on September 29, 2014 at 7:58

Both Philip & I have had interactions with the MP.

Our opinions aren't coming from thin air but from his responses and voting actions.

Yes, they're allowed to be wrong but don't expect forgiveness... Government works too slowly to make corrections quickly so the damage to peoples lives can be massive. Therefore a higher standard applies. I'm not okay with screwing over generations of people because of a mistake.  The war on drugs being one. Anyone that sustained that nonsense is partly responsible for a crime against humanity.

I'd probably vote Eddie Izzard too, though Wolmar looks interesting.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on September 28, 2014 at 12:35

Have you see this research, Chris? 

For me, still the best councillor use of a local forum is by James Barber in East Dulwich.

And there's a strong correlation between more positive perceptions of politicians and public servants and their use of discussion websites. In 2010 when this study was done, HoL had very high participation by the local police (PC Glyn Kelly) and low participation by councillors. With the other two websites, the situation was reversed. James Barber was very active on the East Dulwich forum. With council officers, the other two websites had limited participate from one or two senior council officers, HoL had very little. The change in attitudes found maps directly on to that.

So despite politicians fears, it pays dividends in terms of reputation. However, in the two elections since the study was conducted, no evidence was fond that it influences voting intentions. In thinking about the question you pose, Chris, certainly some food for thought there.

My take on it is that if you're a serving politician and you have any place (online or off) that the people you serve regularly gather to discuss issues relevant to your role, you have a moral duty to take part. I thought many of the 2010-2014 batch of councillors didn't do badly. The current trend for the new group seems to be a failure to participate. That leaves the main interactions they have with those they serve as being with the tiny minority who either attend area assemblies or councillors surgeries. It IS a really pity. I currently have no idea what any of our local councillors are doing on our behalf and what stances they take on the local issues of the day. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on September 28, 2014 at 14:08

Thanks Hugh - I'm glad to know more about means of measuring effects.

>>no evidence was fond that it influences voting intentions

Yes but you and I know instinctively that it does, don't we?

Politicians are surely interested in making people aware they exist. We know 40% of us don't vote in Haringey and so many people I meet cannot name a single one of their three local ward Cllrs and have crazy ideas as to what they're for. They blame them as if it were Cllrs themselves who should be out here emptying bins and, as they're not, they're clearly rubbish at being Cllrs.

People may claim to select because a Cllr is 'hard working' but that's not true in my experience.  One of the Cllrs (the excellent Lyn Weber, an Independent) here in Crouch End was effective, extremely hard working, visible and universally respected for those qualities as far as I could detect yet didn't get re-elected in May, not even coming close.

I understand that the Lib Dems have plenty of money and certainly seem to have spent loads in Haringey judging by the difference in the quality of the various leaflets that came through my door, and were fierce door-knockers for years here - out-knocking all the other parties by a huge margin yet they lost big-time in May, so I don't think propaganda or doorstepping work either.

I think it's maybe true, as has often been said, that people vote 'one third local, two thirds national'. If anyone sees a politician who is in the public eye, that person 'becomes' their party and they vote for the values they detect in them.  PMQ's for instance, tend to give the incumbents more benefit. Caroline Lucas, who I think gets more exposure than her voter base merits, seems like a thoroughly decent, lovely person who broadcasts a sort of 'green wellness' that surely causes anyone who comes across her to want to vote Green.

In other words, just being exposed to your candidate's values is what makes you vote for them - that's why they're all in love with meeting people but they fail to get those values across.

The web is a place for the propagation of values and that's intensely political.   It provides an efficient way of getting exposure for your values and creating a direct impression that reaches far, far more potential voters than door-knocking ever could at practically zero cost.  Not to mention garnering more donations - many people will donate to your cause who would not pay you at the door or come to your events.

Most Cllrs I've met around here are pretty much ordinary people (as they should be) with the courage to stand up, fight for what they think is right and be counted. As such, their mastery of this harsh medium is low and they're afraid of it.  That's why they don't use it.

It's partly a generational thing but a surprising number of young Cllrs are not into the net either - it's part of the 1st world political culture that insists that 'real' politics is done face-to-face. The other classic method we all suffer is the 'pravda-like' broadcasting 'spin' the centre emits:

In these days of good-quality video cameras in phones, it wouldn't take much setup to equip Cllrs to be a 'roving reporters'. The exposure that would gain them would surely lead to them being regarded as politically successful - that's when the politicians will start using HoL in numbers, when one or two begin to up the ante by using the web to get noticed, making it more or less mandatory to be web-savvy in politics. Who's going to be first round here?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on September 28, 2014 at 15:39

Instinctively, you would think that a solid record of online (and offline) activisim and interventions would effect voting, but I have a number of reasons for strongly believing the effects are minimal, at least in local politics.

I think most people have such a low awareness of local politicians and how local politics works that voting tends to reflect people's reaction to national politics. Only in the minority of cases do I think that people vote for a particular individual or local party.

What I have observed both in Harringay and HoL and in doing the research on other local websites backs this up. Prior to the 2010 election, James Barber was very present both online and off and there was very high awareness of him and what he did. In the 2010 elections however, there was no discernible effect on his vote compared to the hyperlocal, local or regional pattern.

The same lack of effect was seen in the 2014 elections in Harringay. Sad perhaps, disappointing certainly, but I think, true. Yet who knows, things are constantly changing. So if I were a local politician, I wouldn't be taking it for granted that this situation is part of an unchanging status quo.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on September 28, 2014 at 16:33

Hang on, that's a doom-laden claim - can we try and be a bit more objective?

Below are the 2014 election results for the Harringay ward of Haringey:

Name of Candidate	Party	Votes	Elected
ADAMOU Gina	Labour Party	1,683	Yes
ALEXANDER Karen Jane	Liberal Democrats	1,182
BURLAND Patrick	Trade Unionists and Socialists Against Cuts	165
CUTHBERT Matthew James	Green Party	657
IBRAHIM Emine	Labour Party	1,372	Yes
KAPLAN David	Trade Unionists and Socialists Against Cuts	219
KAUR Asha	Liberal Democrats	878
PATEL Kan	Trade Unionists and Socialists Against Cuts	132
RIVERS Sean	Conservative Party	219
RIVLIN Lydia	Conservative Party	212
ROSSINI Massimo	Conservative Party	200
RYAN James Andrew	Labour Party	1,395	Yes
SCHMITZ David Reuben	Liberal Democrats	1,139
SMITH Tristan James Law	Green Party	572
SMITH-JEFFERYS Kerry Frances	Green Party	558

Percentage turnout: 40.52%

------------------------

There were what, 10,500 votes cast in Harringay in May?  

Emine's 1372 votes, for instance. She does post on HoL, but how can anyone possibly say that HoL affected any of her votes in a secret ballot? What about the effect Emine has on voters in other wards who form an impression of her party from her conduct and the responses she provided?

How can we say how many of her votes came from those voting for her party because of the national policies advocated? How many because of her local presence? Knowing her, I'm guessing that she was very active visiting people at home - how many were convinced to vote for her who otherwise would not have had they not met her?

If we knew, for instance, that she had 1,000 contacts with 'swing' voters (she might tell us if we asked) - that's a huge amount (I don't think the parties bother with those they know will vote for them). How many of those did she persuade who would not otherwise have voted for her?

Could be so small a number as to be undetectable. If her presence on HoL had an equally small effect, it would be equally undetectable. The difference is the huge amount of time spent to obtain the extra votes!

Let's imagine that Gina did no internet stuff at all.  Did the people who voted for her also vote for Emine? If so, does that mean that Emine got in on the back of Gina's campaign?

Be good to find a way of quantifying it.  How about we al split the entry fee and you stand for the next one on a Pirate Party platform Hugh and we see how many votes you get?

I'd vote for (stolen from another party):

a 99p coin

luminous pet food

I reckon you'd get at least 300 votes - it's the HoL effect!  You could do it each time and we've have a 'control group' of results...

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Hugh on September 28, 2014 at 17:11

There's no doom here, Chris, only facts and their interpretation. 

I wouldn't use any data as it relates to Emina since she only made two posts on HoL prior to 2014 and I don't recall being aware of her at many community events prior to 2014 (She may have been there unrecognised, but travelling 'incognito' should count as absence for our current purposes). So she cannot be said to have much of a 'community track record' that would have affected her vote

Gina, however is a great case in point. Let's compare her with David and Karen, the other two councillors between 2010 and 2014. I don't think I remember attending one community event when either David and/or Karen weren't in attendance. I'm sure Gina also attends events, but perhaps different ones. David and Karen were also regular contributors to HoL.

Now look at the votes each received. It doesn't take much figuring to connect the voting patterns across the city with what happened here. Whilst Harringay votes went with the national mood-swing, there was no discernible counter-effect for Karen and David from their community and online involvement.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on September 28, 2014 at 17:46

>>there was no discernible counter-effect for Karen and David from their community and online involvement.

I don't see how this can be true - we can't know anything, it's just an opinion, not based on anything verifiable.  What if Karen and David 'rescued' votes from people who would otherwise have turned away from the Lib Dems, which is what actually happened on a large scale throughout the ward?

If K&D did 'rescue' votes, their hard work and dedication could be expressed as vote-winners, as could their online-work and the web could turn out to be a big factor in them getting so many votes when many of their Lib Dem colleagues got so few. In fact their losing margin could have been much lower solely because they post on HoL!

We could maybe do exit polls in Harringay next year at the nationals - that could provide some objective 'evidence'.  Even that is hairy - people are hard to assess and many postal vote anyway. Still looking for a more objective basis to decide on - could we do a survey?

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 11
• Next ›
• Page