Beyond Westminster
On Thursday 3 May, much of the UK goes to the polls. In England, there’s a big set of local elections pretty much everywhere except London. In Wales, voters elect their assembly. And – perhaps the biggest contest of all - in Scotland, there are elections for the parliament and councils too (I spent last weekend on the phone to my aged mum in Dunoon trying to explain the three different votes she has, and the intricacies of the Additional Member PR system).
With all this going on, things get a bit quieter around Parliament in London. Most MPs are away campaigning. With the tumbleweed blowing through the corridors of power, political correspondents – accustomed to spending much of their working lives inside the Westminster bubble – seize the chance to emerge blinking into the sunlight, and travel Britain gauging the mood of the nation.
So in recent days Nick Robinson has been to Blackpool calling bingo numbers and talking to men with tattoos (which you can watch here); James Hardy in the Midlands has found disillusioned Labour voters cuddling up to the BNP (which you can watch here); and nurses have demonstrated a robotic body to Guto Harri, as he checked out rumours of a resurgent Tory vote in Wales (which you can watch on Friday's Ten O'Clock news).
It’s not rocket science – if you want to find out what people are really thinking, go out and talk to them. We sometimes boldly give it a go even when there aren’t elections going on. But so often we get sucked into the Westminster vortex, where - as Tony Blair said recently - a raised eyebrow from him will get variously reported and analysed as support for/ scepticism about a David Miliband leadership campaign.
Not to say this stuff isn’t important.
But all three correspondents mentioned above have reported back to me feelings of surprise at some of the views they’ve encountered, and a degree of enlightenment through connection with members of the voting public.
So an election campaign – where there aren’t endless Westminster-based news conferences – can be an invigorating business, at least for correspondents who spend most of their lives in one small area of London.
When the results come in next Thursday and Friday, there’ll be loads of coverage – but it’s not been so intense during the campaign. How do you think we’ve judged that – too much? Too little? Have we covered the issues you think are important? Let me know – we’ve still got a few days left to liberate yet more of our correspondents from the shackles of Westminster and send them out round the country.
Comments
Coverage of local elections is always difficult - how do you reconcile local democracy with the national leadership, and indeed, it is far from clear that should this be attempted at all. The real significance of Local Elections is the power parties have over local issues: a Conservative Council is significantly different from a Labour Council, etc. The ±«Óãtv's coverage has been adequate - but to be better, (and to inform about the significance of these elections), coverage should focus individual councils, on local issues and not just see the result as a referendum on Tony Blair.
Further, only some councils are likely to change hands - but which ones are they? Where are the marginal councils and why is this psephological issue not covered?
Finally, at the last set of local elections, the Conservatives did extraordinarily well. So well, in fact, that it will be almost impossible to do better. Will this be brought out in coverage, or will it just be reported that "the Conservatives did worse than last time".
How terribly exciting it is that the great and the good of the sainted ±«Óãtv have ventured out into the blasted wastes beyond Westminster and graced the peasants forced to pay their salaries on pain of imprisonment with a few hours of their valuable time.
As your journalists seem to have found that the ±«Óãtv's politically correct line is not shared by absolutely everyone in the U.K. presumably you'll be campaigning for the British people to be replaced with people whose views are more in line with your own?
Are 'men with tattoos' and women who play 'bingo' even allowed the vote? Disgraceful! They'll be letting people vote Conservative next, and that will never do.
There's politics outside of London?
People have political opinions which they'd like addressed and reported, not just stage-managed photo sessions with a 'slumming' ±«Óãtv reporter?
Who'd a thunk it? Certainly not the beeb.
In ten days, France will vote on one of two candidates with very different visions for the future of France, a nation I'd think should be of considerable importance to Britain. But coverage has been sporadic and relatively limited by ±«Óãtv. Its most recent broadcast this morning was for several minutes at the bottom of the hour while a televised debate among 8 Democratic candidates for president in the US, an election which is a year and a half away got top coverage that occupied much time and attention. Even the body language, tone of voice, and every inflection of the leading candidates was scrutinized. Why? Is France so relatively unimportant or is ±«Óãtv so obsessed with everything about the USA that it cannot miss a single moment of what goes on here? Believe me ±«Óãtv, by the time the election comes around and voters have to pull the lever in the voting booths, everything said in last night's debate will have been long forgotten.
Is the ±«Óãtv watching the UKIP/Conservative battles in the Tory Heartland? Tunbridge Wells has 10 out of the 16 wards with a UKIP challenger in and the Tories are, for the first time in a long time, having to fight their home turf.
It should be very interesting.
"men with tatoos"? gosh how utterly frightful.
When I got my polling card the other week, I realised I didn't actually know what my local elections were really about, or what the candidates stood for. I didn't have access to any material other than what the parties had sent me themselves.
It would be nice, for next time, just to try to get at least one article per country outlining the state of the county's politics, who was running, who they were etc. I think it might increase the turnout.
The condescending tone of this piece reinforces why i will be voting SNP. Scotland isn't some petty region of northern England. I cant wait till independence and, like in Eire, I can wake up and hear the worlds news not through some stuffy London sieve.
I would like to see more coverage of the campaign itself on the news...
Good grief.
I think it's pretty obvious that Gary wrote that article slightly tounge-in-cheek- he's not saying that people with tattoos are somehow less important, he's saying that Nick Robinson is used to dealing with slick politicians with non-stick suits, and that it's a change of scene for him.
I don't understand why this article would reinforce any intention to vote SNP, either- it doesn't paint Scotland as a 'petty region' (whatever one of those is). ±«Óãtv News gives coverage on politics in London, because it affects all of the UK. My ±«Óãtv Wales news gives me all I need to know about Welsh politics, and I'd imagine that ±«Óãtv Scotland does the same up north.
What's the problem?
Given that this election is likely to see some dramatic changes to the Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly, I would like to be seeing more coverage of the latest opinion polls.
Obviously with the AMS 2 tier voting system it's difficult to predict a result. But I still feel that they have been lacking (from what I've seen) in the ±«Óãtv's coverage.
"Men with Tattoos', shame on you Nick, this is the sort of comment more suited to the 'Islington brigade'.
If as you say it is not rocket science which way people will be voting, why not start to represent the general public rather then the PC minority who share absolutly nothing with the 'rest of us'.
I hope that when the Conservatives and Liberals take even more of the local vote that the ±«Óãtv will start to understand that the views that seem to pervade the 'Editors' left of centre blogs are no longer welcome.
As for the coverage of the Scottish elections no wonder that so many Scots want to get as far away from Westminister as possible.
The ±«Óãtv is fast losing it's reputation for balance and unbaised reporting, and the calls for the license fee to be repealed will grow stronger and stronger if you don't start understanding that not everyone wants to hear your reporters attacking the USA, Isreal, Catholics, Families etc.
I haven't received a single piece of literature about the upcoming elections, despite having contacted both the Conservative and Labour parties (the only parties fielding candidates in our ward) the Conservatives have promised (but failed) to deliver information on their candidates platform, Labour have just ignored my request. And they wonder why we don't "engage" with the process!!!
The piece isn't condescending at all-if Scott wants to vote SNP which he's perfectly entitled to do, surely he can manage less specious reasoning.
In response to Mark at #4 I think the ±«Óãtv has had plenty of coverage of the French elections and the issues facing France.
There have been many, many, features on news programmes and special programmes (such as Radio 4's Analysis) on the candidates and how France and has, or hasn't, adapted to globalisation. Also ±«Óãtv News 24 had live coverage of the elections last Sunday with many ±«Óãtv correspondents in France. ±«Óãtv Parliament rebroadcast French TV's coverage of the elections, so viewers had a choice of coverage in English or French.
Though, I would take your point that generally, the ±«Óãtv always seems to look to the US for points of view (ie US based think tanks) rather than Europe or Asia when discussing international issues.
Ian #15, the coverage on World Service has been relatively light compared to what I expected. I would have thought ±«Óãtv would be covering anything of note in speeches of the major candidates each day, comparisons of policies of the candidates on all major issues, interviews with people in the street, panel discussions, interviews with media and other analysts, results of different polls, in short the kind of coverage an American election would get. I'd expect much more in depth analysis from the French media than anything in the US since they are closest to it and live with it every day. Here' something from the American media, a one hour interview with Sarkozy explaining much about him and his philosophy;
And about 35 minutes into the following discussion, you will get a very interesting analysis of the situation in France;
Where is ±«Óãtv's comparable coverage?