PR and the Prime Minister

The Steven Carter era has been a disaster

Gordon Brown has held one of the four great offices of state for 11 years now. Until recently, he had a good reputation. His decision to give the Bank of England independence was lauded. His decision to block Blair on the euro met with similar sighs of relief from the public. People generally were reassured when he stood up at the dispatch box saying "billions" in his gravelly voice.

Indeed, when the 2005 election campaign was going badly under Alan Milburn's management, Alastair Campbell, who was brought back for the campaign, insisted that Brown be given a big role, and then sent him round the country shoulder-to-shoulder with Blair on a "Vote Blair, Get Brown" ticket.

So why have things changed, and when did they change? They changed in 2008, upon the appointment of Steven Carter in January. Carter was brought in because Brown was getting overwhelmed by the number of people simply walking into his office and wanting to dump problems on him, or have a chat. Carter was meant to control the Prime Minister's time better and handle his PR more effectively.

Unfortunately, the Steven Carter era has not been a success. In December 2007, YouGov showed Labour 5 points behind the Conservatives (perfectly manageable in mid-term), but we suddenly plunged to 24 points behind (the latest poll shows a mild recovery to 13 points behind).

At root were what could only be termed as mishaps or gaffes. All of a sudden stuff started to get leaked to PR Week. So you started to get stories there that Brown was cold-calling people at 6 am. Brown has been calling people for 11 years, but the records showed that no-one was called early in the morning. We've had damaging tittle-tattle that the PM is supposedly obssessed with Tory spindoctor Andy Coulson, stories about who has had rows with whom, leaks about re-organisations. Lots of the stories have no basis.

The leaks can only be coming from Carter's team. If Labour people want to leak (and by and large MPs and their advisors and staff are extremely disciplined and rarely do this), it is to one of the mainstream newspapers and tabloids, not to PR Week.

Even worse is the lack of political nous of the new team. For example the advice to the Prime Minister to dash from one TV studio to another - Blair never did that, his appearances on TV were rationed and other ministers always appeared first. And then there are the oh-my-god-I-can't-believe-they-did-that moments. As Lance Price says in the Telegraph

For sheer embarrassment, the picture of Gordon Brown sitting down to an eight-course dinner just hours after telling us all to waste less food surely takes the biscuit.

........ Somebody should have seen this particular PR disaster coming. It's the equivalent of allowing the Prime Minister to be photographed next to a door with a large sign marked "Exit". Even the most junior press officer should be able to spot a blunder as glaring as that one.


Colin Byrne, ex Labour party press officer, made the same point on his blog, except more pungently:

Quite what prompted the incompetents - as they clearly are these days for all their fat salaries and big job titles and egos - in the No10 bunker to have the PM telling us to eat up our crusts one day and be photographed waving a glass of wine around the G8 dinner table as he tucked into the conger eel the next is beyond this simple communications guy’s understanding

It's hard not to agree that Byrne's characterisation of Carter and his team as "incompetants with fat salaries and egos" is on the mark.

The fact is, Gordon Brown did much better in his pre-Carter days, when he was awkwardly shambling along with his in-house team and open-door policy. Because he was authentic then, till Carter got hold of him, and the public sensed it.

I think Brown should sack his new PR team, and ask old Labour hands to come in to help - Campbell, Byrne, Price and others. At least the Labour hands understand politics. And they are always loyal to the Labour party.

Display: Sort:

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#1)

Brown did PR well at the start, by playing to his strengths. Being quiet, competent, tough, statesmanlike. But then he tried to do PR by triangulating to the right.

Brown had previously been regarded as politically shrewd. At the last election he suggested that the core campaigning point of Labour's campaign should be universal childcare. It has the bonus of appealing to Labour's coalition, and to swing voters. And it doesn't have the nasty connotations of asylum seekers bashing.


Before he statred triangulating, the PR was good because we had an idea of who he was. His current image is confused. Who is he? That seems to be the general mood across the electorate.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#2)

The only person responsible for Brown's woes is BROWN himself. Stop blaming others.

Cruddas for leader.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#3)

"incompetants with fat salaries and egos" is on the mark.

Sounds like Brown and the current cabinet to me.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#4)

The Prime Minister and cabinet are poorly paid given what they do. Secondly they've taken a pay freeze over the next year. Thirdly, they are <i>not</i> incompetant. Think of what has been achieved over the last eleven years - BoE independence, cut to unemployment, cut to NHS waiting lists to the level last seen in the early 70's, minimum wage and so on. These arn't the actions of "incompetant" people. We are governed better than in the past and better than other countries.

Also, I'm not sure you quite realize this, but the Prime Minister's job is to govern the country, not handle presentation. Presentation has been delegated to PR people like Stevn Carter. Therefore the failure of presentation is down to Carter. I know you seem to think that the PM should forget the small matter of running the country and concentrate on PR himself, but that not what being a Prime Minister is about.

Finally, you seem to be a Cruddas fan. But Cruddas has never run anything, not even held a ministry. In fact when he was running for the deputy leadership he stated that he didn't want the job of Deputy Prime Minister as well, as he wasn't up to the job. Yet you want this man to be PM? Grow up.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#5)

"cut to unemployment" - If unemployment has been "cut" why are around 4 million or so people on some form of out-of-work benefits?

The reality [admitted by the office of National Statistics] is that many of the 1 million+ jobs created under Labour, about 800,000 of those have gone straight to foreign nationals who have arrived in the country within the last decade.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#7)

Most of the people on incapacity benefit (I assume that's what you are referring to) came on the books in the early '80's as Thatcher deliberately sought to create a recession and raze all our manufacturing industry to the ground, while also cutting unemployment benefit. What happened was that many compassionate doctors put their desperate patients on sick pay, simply so they could live. By the time Labour came to power, some of these people were in their fifties and had been on sick pay for a good 12-15 years. Despite the govt's best efforts,  employers simply won't take them on as they've been out of employment for so long. Some are also genuinely ill due to heath hazards incurred at work (asbestos, miners lung and so on) when health and safety standards were lax (thankfully the good old EU has tightened on these things and fewer people are getting ill un-necessariliy).

The best way to judge employment is to look at the labour participation rate. Those who don't participate in the economy are the unemployed, the sick, housewives and the early retired. The participation rate is now 74.9%. It was 67.9% in 1994.  That should tell you everything about how employment opportunities improved. And it was a Labour government that delivered it.


P.S. there are some people on incapacity who are genuinely sick. I know Tories think that people who have Downs Syndrome, multiple sclerosis, cancer and all the rest should not get disability pay, so that money is freed to give some Tory housewife a tax break. But here's some news for you - there will always be some sick people with us, and a civilised society takes care of them and other vulnerable people. This has been the definition of a civilised society ever since the Augustus Caesar provided child poverty relief to be administered to everyone under his protection whether Roman citizen or not. It's actually shocking that it took the Labour movement of the 20th century to tackle child poverty in a way people in the Roman empire took for granted. But Tories tend to have difficulty with the words "civilised" and "society", do they not?

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#8)

Indeed. At least two-thirds according to polling, of those on IB want to find work but can't. I think we should implement Carol Black's recommendations on incapacity benefit, to help people into work.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#6)

I should also have added that Stevn Carter is paid the same as the Prime Minister - £180,000, while Carter's secretary gets £70k - which is more than an MP gets.

Given that the PM is responsible for the whole government, defence, NHS, economy, you name it, it is not unreasonable to ask Carter to take responsibility for his comparitively small task of handling PR. It's absolutely breathtaking for people like Rosie to say that Carter should be able to claim the huge salary and take no responsibility and that it's all down to the PM. Come on!

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#9)

However you look at it, the media handling is disastrous. I was never a fan of Alistair Campbell but there was no doubting his effectiveness in understanding and handling the press (nor his ultimate loyalty to the party). We obviously need someone of his stature now.

But it also looks pretty clear that Brown is also being undermined from within the government - it is only that kind of of briefing from within that could account for this level of media hostility.

I would certainly support a complete revamp of the media team - and quickly too.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#10)

Either:

(a) Gordon is incompetent that this endless succession of blunders is his fault. or

(b) Gordon just has incompetent people all around him and takes their advice, but otherwise would be competent.

But the key skill of a competent leader is to pick the right team and lead them effectively.  And every single one of the "incompetent" people around Gordon has been hand-picked by him.  So even if (b) is true, Gordon is still incompenent. He may or may not have been a good chancellor, but he is a hopeless PM.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#11)

Polly Toynbee has an article out in the Guardian today, asking why Labour isn't selling its good policies in a better way.

Why wasn't the Equality bill sold as the radical transformation for the lives of OAP's and underpaid women? Why is no one talking about the GI bill?

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#12)

... and why do we have to pay for our own ID cards. If they were freely given out like NI cards, the public would accept them without any fuss.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#13)

Oh my, that's a good argument for charging!

But seriously, our party needs to understand that the tide is beginning to turn on issues of liberty. The Tories have understood this, but we haven't... yet.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#14)

I think we need to concentrate on real issues of liberty. I'm mildly against ID cards, but largely indifferent. I just don't see it as a massive violation of my liberty. I'm just worried about the practicalities of the system.

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#15)

Interesting anyalysis Snowflake but I'm not sure these leaks have come from Carter and his team - it's just too obvious. 

Not that I'd wish to speculate but it's probably someone outside the PR team with a grudge trying to pin it on them.

I'm sure Carter's team are far too busy working out the strategy to be leaking organagrams that would so easily be traced back to them.

I've written about this on my blog but Polly Toynbee has nailed it (as she always seems to do.)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/19/labour.gordonbrown


There does seem to be a general lack of co-ordination on announcements across departments and no overall arching theme to string new policies together.

The briefing to the Sundays on the AE visits - which  DID happen - served to put us on the backfoot all last week when we had really good things to say.

But none were really given the chance to claim there share of shout.

Brown should enjoy his rest in Southwold, come back refreshed and get back to the Grid - phased announcements which correlate with thematic messages of meeting people's aspirations, fulfiling potential, providing a safe and secure environment and enabling social justice.

As for Carter and his team, they really shouldn't get sidetracked by the day-to-day and plan for the long-term.

I still believe it will turn and I know from experience Government's approval ratings always tend to go up during the summer recess!

The public need a break and hopefully Darling will live up to his old reliable reputation of taking a politicial brief out of the headlines. Nice and dull, please!

As Reagan used to say to his hyperactive officials:
 
"Dont just do something, stand there!"

   

 


 

 

Re: PR and the Prime Minister (#16)

SNOWFLAKE - You lied on another post that I only needed to wait 3 months for an NHS operation,  It's 18 mponths now and I still don't have a date.

I will post this on all your blogs until you confess that New Labour's statistics are rubbish, or they are true and it's you that lied.

Take your pick.  I'm not arsed either way.