Yesterday evening and tonight, football fans all across Europe will have settled down with their cans of beer, pizza boxes, team colours on and watched the people they support deliver hopefully their best performance of the season. Games are played at a convenient 7:45pm and the only barrier to entry is typically having Sky Sports and an interest in football.
However, for the world of politics, despite the lack of barriers, there is no prime time equivalent.
Ed Miliband delivered his set piece speech yesterday early afternoon, arguably his most important of the year. The speech itself had been heavily trailed such that those lucky enough to see it live largely knew what was coming. So, not many people will dig out the footage and watch it in its entirety and certainly very few people, if any, will call in pizza, get their friends round and have a few beers on the go for the occasion.
Most people, probably myself included, will learn of Ed’s speech through the prism of the television and newspaper media. I’m certainly not going to give in to the Labour leader’s game of kiss-chase to see what was said, as it was said, for the same reasons for why I wouldn’t watch games of football in the evening if they had been played during that day.
I believe this is a terrible shame.
The expenses scandal, the tuition fees issue, the too-centralised party structures and so on has resulted in a public regard for politics being stuck in a rut. There is too little access to the decision-makers of parties these days and, even when they do appear on our screens, it is often to deliver well rehearsed lines that have had their life spun out of them. Who can forget let alone forgive Robotic Ed’s delivery of the same line over and over again?
Well, here was a chance for Ed to show that he has some life about him, to cut out the middle man and tell us all something from the heart, with passion, in the hope that we’d sit up and take notice. Hope that we’d fall a little bit in love with Politics again. Just a little bit.
Alas, Ed went with the media-friendly option of remaining largely anonymous to the UK and deprived us of getting to know him a bit more.
The Telegraph can’t say Barcelona didn’t score a goal when they actually did, but it can say Ed Miliband missed an opportunity with his speech when he actually delivered a barnstormer, because barely anyone is going to tune in and watch the delivery to check.
The thing is, Labour even know this is the case. Ed Miliband has been talking for months about how he needs to stand up against the old broken ways of the mainstream media and stand up for Britain and yet here is providing advanced copies to journalists and delivering speeches to their timelines. Furthermore, Sadiq Khan MP told a Fringe event “many of you will wake up tomorrow and be disappointed by the coverage Ed gets”, which makes it all the more bizarre that the message isn’t sent to us directly.
It’s not for me to say how political parties should run their affairs but imagine David Cameron or Alex Salmond or Nick Clegg or Ed Miliband taking to the lectern in the evening and noone knowing what they are about to say, nothing has been leaked to the press. The speech is delivered to sizeable television audiences and a packed to the rafters conference hall. The public discusses the content from sofas in the evening and, who knows, maybe even the next day at work with colleagues. Meanwhile delegates at the Conference celebrate the end of a hard day and head into the hotel bar or local pub, swiftly followed by the party leader, also done for the day, who is welcomed with rapturous applause before he or she does the rounds talking with party members from the top of the tree to the bottom in a scene of general bonhomie.
You can keep your Man Utd vs Basles or your Celtic vs Udineses, that’s your Theatre of Dreams right there, that’s a political Paradise as far as I can see.
So come on, let’s bring back great political speeches. Let’s not just leave it all to Obama. A good place to start is bringing a bit of theatre to proceedings, or even just showing some of them on TV.
Anyway, I might as well go off and watch the end of the Man Utd game now, there’s precious little else on after all…
#1 by Indy on September 28, 2011 - 8:01 am
Lol. It’s got nothing to do with political parties Jeff. Give any politician the chance of a prime time TV slot and they would jump through as many hoops as you like to get it. But political parties don’t make decisions on programming. They have to use the slots they are given by the broadcasters.
#2 by Jeff on September 28, 2011 - 1:07 pm
Indy, that’s kind of what I’m getting at. Why do the politicians agree to kow tow to the media? If Miliband did his speech at 7pm as opposed to 2pm (or whenever it was), you don’t think it’d be shown on TV? How about BBC News? Or BBC Parliament? I just find Ed’s arguments that he is for the people and will fight the media a little hollow when he just goes along with the way conference speeches have always been delivered because it suits schedulers but deprives the majority of us of hearing what he has to say.
PS Not entirely sure the Lol was appropriate. *going in a huff now* 😉
#3 by Indy on September 28, 2011 - 2:01 pm
I am absolutely positive it wouldn’t be shown. Broadcasters – well, certainly the BBC don’t know about the rest of them – are under an obligation to cover party conferences but they decide what time the coverage goes out.
I know that SNP Conference is scheduled around when the live broadcasts will take place. If HQ decided that Alex would give his speech at 7.00 p.m. it would not be broadcast live.
What- take off Escape to the Country for a speeh by Alex Salmond?????
At the risk of destroying our relationship for all time lol.
#4 by Erchie on September 28, 2011 - 8:03 am
It wasn’t a great speech.
It was more triangulation, taking some votes for granted, other votes as never available so fighting for a perception of the floating voter.
Ed continues the Labour demonising of those on benefit. The system his Government imposed sees terminally ill people found fit to work http://bit.ly/qGv9iP but he characterises benefit as easy to get and readily abused. Patently untrue
Of course Ed has superpowers, he can diagnose people with a glimpse in the street, and now we learn he can do the same with businesses.
Nope, Nick Robinson, Tory though he is, called it right, it was a speech designed for soundbites, not to be listened to
#5 by Jeff on September 28, 2011 - 1:09 pm
That’s a very good point Erchie. A speech delivered at prime time, directly to the people, would change the speech itself as there would arguably be less media soundbites and more genuine organic dialogue, which can only be a good thing.
And I’ve not seen the speech so I can’t agree or disagree with your conclusions on it.
#6 by Keith Roberts on September 28, 2011 - 9:48 am
What! Expect the BBC to give coverage and publicity to the devil incarnate, as they see him, and cover Salmond live? Now that would be a field of dreams. For where else are we to find excellent political speeches? Certainly not from the mouth of Miliband, or Cameron. Can you imagine giving Rennie a prime-time slot – he won’t need a microphone to rant to his gathered quad, and there won’t be anyone else listening.
Now remind me again what it was Ed had to say for Scotland, even about Scotland. Oh yes, absolutely nothing wasn’t it, but if Elmer is to be believed he does ‘get’ Scotland doesn’t he?
And who will Scotland’s MPs answer to next year, will it be Ed’s whip in Westminster or whatever Ken or Johann (please no) dictate for the northern branch. And who was the mole querying the quality of leadership candidates?
All that aside I don’t disagree with the sentiment. Forget the ‘leaking’ of speeches and the spin. Stand and deliver. Get me a seat in the hall. But I want to know that I am going to hear an artist at work, to be uplifted and motivated. So I guess that’s why I’m not in Liverpool then.
#7 by Doug Daniel on September 28, 2011 - 11:39 am
The pre-speech briefings annoy me. “Ed will say this, the government will say that”. Why bother? Why not do your speech or policy announcement or whatever, and THEN the papers can cover it?
It just adds to the falseness I think many of us feel about politics. I mean, we all know speeches are written beforehand, but still, it would hear them and think “this is the first time I’ve heard this”. What’s the point of speaking to a bunch of people who already know what you’re going to say? Might as well just skip the actual speech in that case.
#8 by Jeff on September 28, 2011 - 1:12 pm
Amen. I fully agree.
#9 by An Duine Gruamach on September 28, 2011 - 3:23 pm
“we all know speeches are written beforehand” – and usually by somebody else.
#10 by James Morton on September 28, 2011 - 11:56 am
The first problem is that this generation aren’t capable of making great speeches. sound bites – yes – speeches not so much. what you get a carefully rehearsed and sanitised speech. Devoid of any real intellectual content and more importantly difficult to get a sense that he holds an opinion on anything.
I have no desire to sit there and lose precious hours of my life listening to dogmatic drivel. There is no passion in these speeches, just box ticking.
The talking heads before and after the show would really tear it apart to decide if something was a gaff or “lets go over to our exclusive poll and see what you thought about it”
I’d rather watch looped tapes of yes Minister.
#11 by Jeff on September 28, 2011 - 1:12 pm
My concern is that there may well be great speeches out there, not necessarily by leader but maybe MPs or, jings, MSPs. We just don’t get access to them because nothing makes it onto the 7pm-9pm tv timeslot other than the briefest of brief snippets of any dialogue, hence the depressing need for soundbites. I genuinely believe a lot of people out there want to be treated like adults, hear long speeches for themselves and make their own minds up about politicians, without the need for Nick Robinson and Laura Kuenssberg (fine commentators as they are) to tell us what we should think.
#12 by Doug Daniel on September 28, 2011 - 3:06 pm
I suppose it depends what you’re meaning by “this generation”. I’d make brilliant speeches, but then I’m hardly likely to be allowed into front-line politics anytime soon. But the ability to deliver a quick soundbite rather than an impassioned plea or call to arms is part of what makes the modern day politician, and as a result you get passionless, soulless drips who have no real political idealism or desire to change things, and as a result they need to have their speeches written for them by committee.
I, on the other hand, would take a few notes and pretty much rattle it off the cuff, and not in the way David Cameron did when he memorised his speech word-for-word – I genuinely wouldn’t know what I was saying until I went out on stage and started ranting. That might be good TV, but it’d also get torn apart by the media.
I would suggest there is one politician who is capable of making impassioned speeches, or at the very least delivering them in a manner that makes you feel he really means what he’s saying, rather than displaying the synthetic anger we saw Gromit doing yesterday: Alex Salmond. But then, I would say that.
#13 by James Morton on September 28, 2011 - 4:03 pm
I meant to say this generation of politicians 🙂 But yes, it’s all rather passionless and predictable. I can’t think of a worse idea than putting these idiots into their own TV show. The desire to control the message would be too great for their spin doctors.
#14 by An Duine Gruamach on September 28, 2011 - 12:14 pm
I think I’d probably take Cowdenbeath vs. Airdrie on a grim Wednesday night in November over most political speeches.
#15 by ianbeag on September 28, 2011 - 12:34 pm
Your comment “The expenses scandal, the tuition fees issue, the too-centralised party structures and so on has resulted in a public regard for politics being stuck in a rut.”
Perhaps if Ed and the other Westminster party leaders were to mention these mid-deeds of their own making they might get a better hearing from a sceptical public!
#16 by Barbarian on September 28, 2011 - 8:21 pm
This “pre speech” nonsense is bit presumtious as to Milliband’s status. He’s the leader of the opposition, not some high ranking royal or president.
If he wants us to listen, then he should have something new and unexpected to say. Leaking policy ideas has always been part of politics, in order to gauge public reaction, but only when your party is either in government or there is an election coming up.
Political speeches do not necessarily need to fire the blood. Policies are what count.
#17 by daveinmaryburgh on September 28, 2011 - 8:49 pm
I managed to catch some of Ed’s Q&A session and although getting a bit of a hammering on the twitter feed I think that the format is something that TV stations would be willing to air in a higher profile slot.
Although there were lots of “friendly” questions there were enough from either the public or those within the party that don’t agree with the leadership that made it more challenging, politics seem to be very stage managed and I hope the other conferences will duplicate the format and get non party members in to challenge the party leaders.
For Ed I think he seemed more comfortable with that format than the set stage, although he still messed up, and it is that element that would make it more attractive to TV.
#18 by Barbarian on September 30, 2011 - 12:05 am
One thing is for certain, Ed needs some memory lessons!