Labour Party woes: only connect
On Friday the Observer asked me for 100 words on Labour’s problems. They only used the last forty, but this is what I sent:
‘ It’s easy to say what Labour needs to compete in the next election; signs of economic recovery, a compelling policy programme, credible dividing lines with the Conservatives. The political pendulum has swung several times over the last 2 years and the Conservatives still have some frayed edges. From where he is now any improvement could create momentum, but Gordon Brown’s biggest problem as a politician is how hard he finds it to relate to the public at large. Unless he can find a way to connect, it won’t matter what Labour’s message is it simply won’t get through.’
Behind all the talk of conspiracies and betrayal, Labour faces a simple dilemma. Gordon Brown is in some ways a very good leader and in other ways he is not. Arguably his greatest flaw is that the public find it very hard to relate to him; which for a politician is fairly fatal. To say that anyone who expresses this view is obsessed with personalities is a bit like criticising a modelling agency for being obsessed with looks.
Over ninety percent of human communication is non verbal. If this emotional communication is going wrong it gets in the way of the other 10%; the words themselves. For some reason our Prime Minister finds it very hard to get over this non verbal barrier. A friend once said something like this:
‘When I listen to Gordon Brown it reminds me of watching the weather forecast. It all sounds very clear and I think I am paying attention, but if at the end someone was to ask me if it was going to be sunny tomorrow in North Wales I wouldn’t have a clue.‘
This isn’t just about winning votes. Political leaders need to be able to appeal to our better nature, but to do that they must be able to form an emotional bond. I have argued before that the biggest challenge facing the political class as a whole is to get us, the people, to own the dilemmas facing the country; to stop making impossible demands (‘Swedish welfare on American taxes’ as pollster Ben Page says) and to recognise that we are all responsible for making a better future possible. This is as much an emotional appeal as a rational argument.
The Labour Party faces a very tough choice. In some ways its apparent willingness to stick with Gordon Brown despite his failings is commendable (the Conservatives have traditionally been more ruthless with their leaders) but for MPs and activists to ask for an urgent answer as to how the Prime Minister intends to overcome his demonstrable inability to connect is entirely reasonable.
Why the ATL (and The Observer) should be ashamed of themselves
I said yesterday that the ATL’s methodology for its attack on parents and children couldn’t possibly be as dodgy as the one I used for the NASUWT twenty five years ago. This morning David Aaronovitch confirms that it was! The ATL (usually a serious and thoughtful union) should be ashamed of itself. I wonder whether there are any maths or statistic teachers at their conference and if so whether they would teach their GCSE pupils to rely on a self-selecting, unrepresentative, deliberately skewed sample in order to legitimise a major attack on the behaviour of large sections of British society. As for The Observer – which dedicated four pages to this tendentious nonsense- well that’s the last time I’ll be parting with £2.
Are parents and kids really that bad?
In a strange editorial decision, The Observer decided yesterday to dedicate its front page splash and nearly three full internal pages to research by the ATL (Association of Teachers and Lecturers) which claimed to show that children and their parents are not only vicious and nasty but getting worse. The Today programme featured the same survey this morning. For the media to report the ATL’s claims so uncritically is lazy and reactionary.
Twenty five years ago, when working for the teachers’ union NASUWT, I undertook a survey about pupil violence. We sent a questionnaire to every one of the 150,000 or so members and then analysed the responses. Of course, this is a completely unreliable method. Teachers who had experienced violence were much more likely to return the questionnaire than those who hadn’t. Not that this stopped us sending out press releases claiming ‘one in three’ teachers has been the subject of some kind of assault. The media lapped it up. I remember being in London and seeing lurid billboard headlines about classroom violence being out of control and only later realising it was my research that had justified the claims.
I’m sure the ATL research was somewhat more rigorous than mine – although there is no information about methodology on either union or media websites. But I still find the story highly suspect. Asking people whether they think things are ‘getting worse’ and asking them to give examples of bad experiences is a pretty hopeless way of getting a valid picture of reality. It is interesting that none of the coverage seems to feature statistics on actual reported incidents of assault or exclusion. I am pretty sure that data shows a gradual improvement in discipline.
As there is no powerful voice for parents or pupils there is no one to respond to the sweeping assertion that teachers are the victims of a tide of abuse and violence. There is no one to ask, for example, why it is that so many schools are still completely useless (neither interested nor effective) at engaging parents. There are no children to account for the times when hopelessly immature teachers make inappropriate and snide comments to pupils. There is equally no one to explain how powerless parents are when their child is being taught by a clearly incompetent or uncaring teacher.
The survey takes quite a low threshold for parental abuse so maybe I should hold up my own. My older son loves sport so when he had endured two years of virtually no organised activity at his inner city secondary school, I finally rounded on his head of PE about how his lack of commitment and imagination was denying kids the chance to do the one thing that gave many of them a sense of self esteem.
Which is not to say that there is a growing tide of incompetent, child-hating teachers. If anything, my sense is that teachers are getting better, parents are getting more useful feedback on their children’s progress and more schools are taking parental engagement seriously. Not that this would be the picture I would necessarily get if I asked parents to offer random examples of bad teaching or invited them in a questionnaire focussed on school failings to confirm ‘things are getting worse’.
Getting school discipline and relations with parents and guardians right is a challenge. Although some schools work in very difficult areas, the more schools put into positive parental engagement the more they get back. The ATL research tells us nothing except that there continues to be a strong seam of antipathy to children and parents in teachers’ organisations and that that the media will print anything as long as it reinforces the thesis which they are convinced sells their increasingly threadbare offering; namely, that society is falling apart because people like ‘them‘ (not us) are out of control.
RSA Animate
RSA Mobile
RSA Comment- RSA Projects Blogs
- Twitter @RSAMatthew
RSA Bookshop
The RSA Bookshop, in partnership with Blackwell's the UK's leading academic bookseller, offers Fellows and friends an opportunity to purchase books and to explore our speakers’ ideas in greater detail. Visit the RSA Bookshop.