(Go: >> BACK << -|- >> HOME <<)

10 things you didn't know about Labour, from Gordon Brown's pollster

Andrew Sparrow on revelations from a new book by Deborah Mattinson, who was involved in polling and focus group research for Labour for 25 years

Gordon Brown
Gordon Brown was a fan of slogans, Labour pollster Deborah Mattinson reveals in her new book. Photograph: Suzanne Plunkett/Reuters

The Times reportedly paid £350,000 to serialise Lord Mandelson's book. My budget for book serialisations is rather more modest – but I did manage to wangle a copy of Deborah Mattinson's book, Talking to a Brick Wall, and it's definitely worth a blog.

Mattinson was involved in polling and focus group research for Labour for 25 years, and describes herself on the dustjacket as "chief pollster to Gordon Brown", although the book reveals that they fell out before the 2010 election.

It's not the best book on New Labour, but it contains more insight and less bile than many memoirs and probably deserves more attention than it has received.

The Sunday Times has published an extract, about Brown's decision not to have an election in 2007 (paywall), and the Mail on Sunday has extracted a story about how Brown's aides tried to make him appear more human. But there are other titbits worth mentioning, and here are 10 of them:

1. Gordon Brown came close to announcing a graduate tax and community national service. Mattinson says that in 2004, when Brown expected to replace Tony Blair as prime minister, she was asked to research with a focus group the reaction to a statement that he might make when taking over.

It said that 'we made a mistake by introducing tuition fees, and that this would be ended, replaced by a graduate tax'. It observed that 'we need to give young people the discipline and responsibility gained after the second world war by taking part in national service' and that 'I will introduce a new community national service – a gap year where all young people, not just the well off, can become involved in community projects at home ... learning new skills and a new sense of purpose'.

Reaction was very favourable. Mattinson does not explain why Brown dropped these ideas when he did eventually become prime minister.

2. Brown ignored focus group evidence when he cut income tax by 2p in the 2007 budget. Mattinson researched this option before the budget and found voters thought it was "too good to be true".

She says the research showed that cutting inheritance tax would be more popular. Brown ignored her findings, reduced income tax and did not cut inheritance tax. "It was a rare example from that period of GB ignoring focus group feedback," she says. After the budget, voters responded badly and Brown achieved his first ever negative rating as chancellor.

3. Brown was obsessed with slogans. "GB loved slogans and believed them to be imbued with a mystical power capable of persuading the most intransigent voter," Mattinson writes. "No matter how many times he was told that words must be matched by actions if they were to persuade, still he searched tirelessly for the perfect summation of his position."

4. Labour's 2010 election slogan – "a future fair for all" – was confusing. "Voters misunderstood, thinking that this might refer to some sort of futuristic theme park – a 'future fair'," Mattinson writes.

5. Brown tested a passage referring to his old school moto ("I will try my utmost") before using it in the speech he gave when he became prime minister in 2007.

6. Brown commissioned focus group research in 1996 into putting up taxes on those earning more than £100,000 because he did not trust the research carried out for Blair saying this would be unpopular. Mattinson convened some focus groups, but they showed that the Blair research (carrried out by Philip Gould) was correct. "The findings were surprising and somewhat disappointing for GB and the team," Mattinson writes.

7. Alan Milburn was not told when Blair agreed that Brown would replace him as head of the 2005 election campaign. "The first that Alan Milburn knew was when GB's team appeared, unannounced, to take charge of the 8.30 strategy meeting that Monday," Mattinson says.

8. Labour considered offering free tickets to the Dome as a reward for people joining the party. Mattinson was asked to conduct research into how members would respond to having free Dome tickets, or vouchers for other attractions, included as part of the membership package. "Party members ... were frankly outraged by what they saw as attempts to 'bribe' them," she writes.

9. Mattinson thinks politicians now have to be likeable to be successful. She says that, in the 1980s, Margaret Thatcher was admired as a leader, even though voters did not want her as a friend. But attitudes to leadership changed, she says, and attributes such as empathy became more important. "Is it possible to be a successful politician nowadays without attracting some level of public warmth? My judgment would be that it is not," she writes.

10. Research in the 1980s concluded Labour party members were "a bit weird". Mattinson says that she commissioned a study to enable the party to learn more about its membership. The woman who conducted the research spoke to party members all around Britain and made a worrying discovery. This is what she told Mattinson:

Basically, they are all a bit weird. I mean, what they had in common wasn't their political opinions – they covered the whole spectrum, from centre-left to far left – they weren't united by any ideology or political belief.
No, it was that they were all slightly strange people ... strange personally, I mean. They were people who really did want to spend their evenings sitting in church halls or community centres agonising over quite arcane points of detail.
And they weren't just doing it that night, but every night – the committee for this, the committee for that, the council, whatever. They were sort of lonely and socially odd.


Your IP address will be logged

Comments in chronological order

Post a comment
  • This symbol indicates that that person is The Guardian's staffStaff
  • This symbol indicates that that person is a contributorContributor
  • Moxycoxy Moxycoxy

    20 Jul 2010, 5:31PM

    This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.
  • TheotherWay TheotherWay

    20 Jul 2010, 5:36PM

    Ms Deborah Mattinson explains the debacle that was Gordon Brown. It is clear from his obsession with slogans and rejection of focus group finding that does not fit into his idea as erroneous is a clear demonstration of how low his opinion of the intelligence of the majority of voters.

    Her opinion " Basically, they are all a bit weird. I mean, what they had in common wasn't their political opinions – they covered the whole spectrum, from centre-left to far left – they weren't united by any ideology or political belief.
    No, it was that they were all slightly strange people ... strange personally, I mean. They were people who really did want to spend their evenings sitting in church halls or community centres agonising over quite arcane points of detail.
    And they weren't just doing it that night, but every night – the committee for this, the committee for that, the council, whatever. They were sort of lonely and socially odd" explains what lies behind some of the comments of the incorrigibly Labour supporters and how the clique that is at the top of the party have got away with saying something and doing the exact opposite. .

  • Novelist Novelist

    20 Jul 2010, 5:40PM

    No, it was that they were all slightly strange people ... strange personally, I mean. . . . . They were sort of lonely and socially odd.

    Hardly surprising really, when you consider that the party that's supposed to represent them jumped ship onto the millionaire's cruise about 13 years ago.

  • petecrockett petecrockett

    20 Jul 2010, 5:59PM

    Moxycoxy wrote:

    Isn't it time The Guardian stopped obsessing about New Labour and had a more critical disposition towards the way Cameron and Clegg have set about fucking everything up?

    Sadly, I fear the Guardian feels duty bound to obsess about New Labour because they backed the Orange Book Liberal Democrats who have endorsed the scorched earth approach of the Tories with such enthusiasm. I was going to say it overcomes the editorial team's sense of guilt if they can say it was all New Labour's fault that they backed them. There again is guilt an emotion they have?

    The reality is the Guardian editorial team backed the wrong horse and there are too few with the balls to say sorry. However, Rusbridger, Rawnsley, Watt and co are nicely ensconced in their office whilst the poor and vulnerable are hammered; our health service gets undermined and school building projects are cancelled. Shame on the editorial team - where is the apology?

  • awfulpoet awfulpoet

    20 Jul 2010, 6:04PM

    Don't disrespect the "weird" people who spend their evenings in community centres and church halls -- they are the Big Society!

    (and in any case, is that any more socially disfunctional than spending hours on newspaper blogs?)

  • Moxycoxy Moxycoxy

    20 Jul 2010, 6:33PM

    @petecrockett

    Absolutely correct! One of the things Alastair Campbell complained most about in his diaries (I don't intend reading any more, by the way) was the way the British press trivialised issues and adopted their own petty agendas.

    In that respect I always felt proud to be what Richard Littlejohn refers to as a "Guardianista". Not any more. The failure to call the Tories on policies that seem hell-bent on turning us into a Third World nation, and silly obsessions with both Sarah Palin and Apple products echo the hurt I felt when New Labour proved to be a party that spoke for capital.

    The pain is always greater when it's someone you love isn't it?

  • rebjn rebjn

    20 Jul 2010, 7:32PM

    4. Labour's 2010 election slogan – "a future fair for all" – was confusing. "Voters misunderstood, thinking that this might refer to some sort of futuristic theme park – a 'future fair'," Mattinson writes.

    Why didn't they just go with "a fair future for all"? Also, I think those focus group participants were taking the piss a bit. People aren't that stupid.

  • MsPirate MsPirate

    20 Jul 2010, 8:24PM

    And this is the best you have got? Really?? Really really? This is what now constitutes news is it?

    How is this insight? It is completely shallow. The idea that voters believed the slogan to relate to a fun fair is just laughable. Unless 3 year olds have started voting, I really do struggle to believe this.

    By the way, its always nice to hear one's parents described as "slightly strange people ... strange personally". I must remember to tell my mum - she will snort with laughter!!

  • AshleyPomeroy AshleyPomeroy

    20 Jul 2010, 9:04PM

    "9. Mattinson thinks politicians now have to be likeable to be successful."

    This is an interesting one. I remember the 1980s; it was a decade where the great powers were led by generally unlikable people who nonetheless won elections because they gave the impression that they were competent. That was the Conservative Party's main thrust; they were bastards, but they knew how to run the economy, whereas Labour were bastards who did not, and the Liberals were nice but hopeless.

    I still believe that an unsympathetic leader or party that has a credible air of competence can win elections. They can be popular without being well-liked. To take an extreme example, I imagine that neither Hezbollah nor the Taliban are universally well-loved by the people who vote for them - or at least support them, if note vote - but nonetheless they are the regional powers, they get things done, they are undeniably effective. Historically there have been plenty of tyrants that bullied their own people, but who were tolerated because they were "our bastard".

    The problem is that in both Britain and the US I don't believe there is a leader or party that has a credible air of competence. There is no democratic equivalent of the Taliban; a bunch of bastards who get things done. Perhaps it's a consequence of the slow, patient democratic system, which works with a mixture of compromise and gradual change. It's hard for a leader or party to seem dynamic unless it suspends democracy and starts making unilateral decisions, at which point disaster is just around the corner.

    On a smaller scale it's like being the boss in a company. You can't be too pally with your staff because they'll no longer take you seriously; you have to have a distance so that you can dole out punishments.

    Is it better in Sweden, where everybody is sensible and pragmatic?

  • eroica eroica

    20 Jul 2010, 9:08PM

    petecrockett
    20 Jul 2010, 5:59PM

    Moxycoxy wrote:

    Isn't it time The Guardian stopped obsessing about New Labour and had a more critical disposition towards the way Cameron and Clegg have set about fucking everything up?

    And thanks for telling us that, Pete, as the original post has now been deleted! Oh come on Guardian, have the confidence in yourselves to be able to take a bit of criticism.

  • fibmac70 fibmac70

    20 Jul 2010, 10:43PM

    Labour considered offering free tickets to the Dome as a reward for people joining the party.

    This must be true, Deborah, it has the ring
    Of politicos who have abandoned commonsense
    And will try just about anything
    To wake the apathetic from somnolence
    Like suddenly smiling a propos of nowt
    Or declaring an imminent Tory rout....

  • mannin mannin

    21 Jul 2010, 9:55AM

    Why did the Guardian hail Brown as the towering intellectual of post-war politics ?
    A Scottish student politician in a blue suit. An intellectual pygmy. I guess Milliband will be saying this out loud any moment.

  • Gordi Gordi

    21 Jul 2010, 10:52AM

    "Mattinson thinks politicians now have to be likeable to be successful." ..."attitudes to leadership changed, she says, and attributes such as empathy became more important. "

    She does not mention if people are capable of discerning when a leader is faking empathy. If Cameron had empathy he would not do half the things he is hellbent on doing, turning everything on its head, as he puts it. Does she really think that Cameron give a toss about mere mortals with no money to pay for BUPA after he decimate the NHS ?

    We will see until when he would be able to play the "nice, well mannered card" and people see him for what he is. A Tory with no regard for commoners.

  • Iraqiran Iraqiran

    21 Jul 2010, 2:10PM

    awfulpoet
    20 Jul 2010, 6:04PM
    Don't disrespect the "weird" people who spend their evenings in community centres and church halls -- they are the Big Society!

    (and in any case, is that any more socially disfunctional than spending hours on newspaper blogs?)

    The latter is far more disfunctional. However in this age of austerity it is cheaper than hiring a community centre or church hall. At least the small size of the Labour party membership means that the inherent weirdness is socially diluted.

    Is this to be a silly season series? 10 things you wish you didn't know about Dave and Nick's relationship etc?

  • ticaboy5 ticaboy5

    21 Jul 2010, 6:02PM

    Very sad that people feel that Labour Party members are weird because they spend time engaging their communities by spending their evenings "sitting in church halls or community centres" and participating in various committees.

    Yeah, weirdos...they should stay at home, watch satellite TV, contribute nothing to society, complain about paying taxes, and then write letters to the Daily Mail to denounce the terrible state of British society. No doubt as well as blaming it on strange Labour Party members, they will also blame foreigners or any other bogey man they can think of.

In order to post a comment you need to be registered and signed in.

|

Comments

Sorry, commenting is not available at this time. Please try again later.

Our selection of best buys

Lender Initial rate
First Direct 2.99% More
ING Direct 2.89% More
First Direct 2.29% More
Name BT Rate BT Period
NatWest Platinum 0% 16 mths More
Royal Bank of Scotland Platinum 0% 16 mths More
Barclaycard Platinum 0% 15 mths More
Provider Typical APR
Sainsbury's Personal Loan 7.8% More
Provider AER
ING DIRECT 2.75% More
SAGA 2.75% More
HALIFAX 2.60% More

Politics blog weekly archives

Jul 2010
M T W T F S S
26 27 28 29 30 31 1

Find your MP