Gatecrashing The Third Party

Last night, I went to York to attend a public meeting hosted by the leader of the Liberal Democrats, Nick Clegg. I went along because I wanted to hear him speak “in the flesh”, and I wanted to see how a politician dealt with a live crowd in the modern world of media communications.

As I took my seat, I spoke to a couple of Chemistry students from the University of York – not the Political Science wonks I was expecting. I asked them why they were there and they made noises about being curious to see the man speak and wanting to “get involved.” They were not members of the Liberal Democrats but were considering it. One of them said that he definitely wanted to play an active part at the next election, but it seemed that he was driven by being against things rather than for things – he was against the BNP, he was against tuition fees, he was against Trident.

I agree with all those positions, but when I asked him what he was actually for, he went back to his previous line, adding for good measure that he was sick of the two main parties. As York is nowhere near our constituency, I wasn’t particularly trying to recruit people to the cause, but I asked them if they would consider supporting an independent candidate. Their positive reaction really encouraged me – it seemed that they were disillusioned with Labour and the Tories, and that they were falling into Nick Clegg’s arms, almost by default.

I know that I have a positive message to give to people, and I feel positive that there are plenty of people in NPC who would agree with my approach. For me, the challenge is how to reach those, and to get my message across.

Striding confidently into the room and taking the mike, Nick Clegg gave a short introduction before inviting questions. He addressed the MPs’ Expenses Affair and described “a crisis in British politics.” By way of explaining the purpose of these meetings, he said he was concerned that people were “completely turned off by party politics,” and that he wanted to address the disconnect between politicians and the people. These concerns were exactly the same as mine – he was trying to make a difference, and so was I.

The reason I am running as an independent is so that I can follow my conscience and not toe a party line. I guess when you’re a party leader, you can take much the same approach.

Next, Clegg invited questions with no subjects off-limits. “I assume that you’re not all Liberal Democrats. But I want to talk to as many people as possible.”

The format for questions was to invite three consecutive questions before then going back and answering them in turn. At first I thought this was a device to give him time to think about his response but in fact it was quite the opposite – it was to give the audience time to forget. By distracting our attention between question and answer, this enabled him to respond on his terms, rather than answering the precise question.

It was very subtle, and very well executed, but I spotted it because I was making such prodigious notes, and unlike most other people in the room, I was studying the format and process of the meeting, rather than just the policies.

For example, one trio of questions saw him asked about the controversial Mansion Tax that Vince Cable had announced a week earlier at the LibDem Conference. Then he was asked a question about tuition fees, and finally a very specific question about British soldiers returning from Afghanistan.

He addressed all three subjects in a great deal of detail, giving thoughtful answers. But it was when he got to the third answer that I realised he was simply repeating the appropriately spun policy for the relevant subject.

Having spoken with great articulacy about Mansion Tax and tuition fees, he went on to talk about the war in Afghanistan with great passion: “It may not feel like it, but we are a nation at war…” He went on to discuss the ways of managing a future withdrawal without completely abandoning the people of Afghanistan to a chaotic vacuum of our making.

It was all great except for one thing – he didn’t actually answer the question. The woman had asked a specific question about medical care for soldiers returning from Afghanistan, and although he had briefly touched upon medical facilities, he hadn’t really addressed her concerns.

With the exception of the woman who asked the question, I don’t think anyone would have noticed this subtle distinction because so much time had elapsed between question and answer. But it didn’t matter anyway because by now we had moved onto the next three questions and the cycle was repeated.

Essentially, what Clegg did was give the relevant section of his stump speech to address each issue. The picture I am painting here is of an evasive politician, but it really didn’t come across that way. To all intents and purposes, he impressed the crowd. I suppose this is what I am up against.

Perhaps I’m being too cynical. He did give a very good performance, but as I walked to my car and tweeted that phrase from my Blackberry, I realised that the relevant word here was performance. That’s not to say that his views weren’t sincere – his passion, for example, on overseas development and his honesty on tuition fees were genuine. It’s just that it had a feeling of being well-rehearsed and somehow the delivery was just too polished.