There was general agreement at the Institute for Government’s Annual conference last week that it would be a good thing for Britain if this year’s election campaign is not “dirty”.
This highfalutin notion was shot down in seconds with equally universal assumption by the assembled politicians and policy wonks that “that is not going to happen”.
A clean campaign would concentrate on policies and competence.
A dirty campaign is built around slurs, distortions and untruths, with those competing for votes slinging mud at each other.
A lot of factors, headed by booming social media, are coming together to suggest that this year we may see one of the dirtiest election campaigns ever.
The IFG delegates had to wait less than a day for their forebodings to come true. There might have been a lot to talk about at Prime Minister’s Questions.
The Rwanda (Asylum and Immigration) bill struggling through parliament. The world order threatened by ongoing conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, Israel and the Red Sea.
Record NHS waiting lists are the public’s number one concern. The chancellor is contemplating two rounds of tax cuts.
But no, the leader of the opposition chose to exchange personal insults, much of it based on dubious content circulating on smartphones.
Advertisement
Image: Rishi Sunak responds to Sir Keir Starmer during PMQs
Starmer opened up referring to a couple of brief unofficial clips posted online. One showing the prime minister “collapsing in laughter when he was asked by a member of the public about the NHS waiting lists”.
The other “accidentally record[ing] a candid video for Nigel Farage“.
Sunak, who seldom passes up a chance to brand Starmer as a lefty London lawyer, shot back that he is “the man who takes the knee, who wanted to abolish the monarchy, and who still does not know what a woman is”.
Previously Starmer “chose to represent a now-proscribed terrorist group” Hizb ut-Tahrir, and “served” Jeremy Corbyn.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer during PMQs
Both men knew that the insults they were sticking on each other were essentially unjustified distortions of the other, but that was what they chose to put on the national agenda at the most scrutinized moment of the political week.
Starmer has explicitly changed his party and his previous positions.
Under scrutiny, he has clarified and explained each of the specific acts detailed. It is a core principle of British justice that advocates are not surrogates for their clients.
Sunak was not laughing at the people he was talking to and spoke to them properly after the end of the clip.
The alleged greeting to Farage was repurposing an online meme which allows any name, in this case “Nigel”, to be put into the prime minister’s mouth.
Neither Sunak nor Starmer are classic alpha males.
Sunak comes across as a whiny or petulant geek, Starmer seems hesitant, overcautious and inclined to blame others.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:10
Starmer pushes PM on childcare
Perhaps this is why they feel the need to overcompensate by acting rough and tough. Sir Ed Davey, the Liberal Democrat leader, also has his moments of fabricated machismo.
The leaders set the tone and their petulance has been picked up in the campaigning efforts of their underlings and supporters.
Prime minister Boris Johnson took up an online distortion that Starmer had failed, when he was director of public prosecutions, to take action against Jimmy Savile.
This prompted the senior Downing Street aide Munira Mirza to resign protesting that this was “not the normal cut and thrust of politics”.
It soon would be. Labour cited Johnson’s attack as justification for their later personalised digital poster attacks on Rishi Sunak including the smear that he “doesn’t think adults convicted of sexually abusing children should go to prison”.
Image: Labour published an attack advert on social media targeting Rishi Sunak last year. Pic: Labour/X
Since then Keir Starmer has gone out of his way not to back down or apologise; following the code of the playground he promises to punch back hard against any attacks.
At the start of election year he rejected an invitation from Beth Rigby to take up Michelle Obama’s famous recommendation: “When they go low, we go high”.
Instead, he told Sky News’ political editor: “If they want to go with fire, we will meet their fire with fire”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:24
‘We will meet their fire with fire’
Donald Trump crafts insults – Lyin’ Ted, Sleepy Joe, Ron DeSanctimonious – with cruel genius and gets away with fabulations.
There is only one Trump; honest political strivers should not try to copy him.
Opinion polls after personalised attacks usually show that support for both sides goes down, though more for the target than the attacker.
This should give all the party leaders something to think about, especially since public respect for politicians is at a record low and a low or differential turnout could be a major factor.
Starmer needs to mobilise enthusiasm for his leadership, not dent it. Sunak’s standing is already low and doesn’t want to drop further.
Image: Labour’s attack advert targeting Sunak was published on the Conservative Home website earlier this year. Pic: Conservative Home
This government raised spending limits for the election campaign to £35m. Much of it will go on direct messaging to voters – which is harder to police than election broadcasts and billboards.
During the 2019 campaign, the Conservatives spent over a million on Facebook, much of it on messages disparaging Jeremy Corbyn.
Both Labour and Conservatives are already spending over a million a month on Facebook advertising.
Then there is what partisan supporters choose to put up on social media independently.
Labour has already advised its supporters to use humour.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Even without explicitly taking sides humourists such as Coldwar Steve and Trumpton, liked and retweeted, can make some political weather, often by lowering the tone.
Political propagandising is much more equal opportunity than it used to be. Anyone can post.
On the other hand, the newspapers and other mainstream media no longer have a near monopoly.
In 1997 when The Sun ran its famous “Nightmare on Kinnock Street” and “Will the Last Person to Leave Britain Please Turn Off the Lights” attacks on Labour, the paper’s circulation was 3.9 million.
Image: The Conservative Party’s poster campaign attacking Gordon Brown during the 2010 election. Pic: PA
The last official figures released were 1.2 million in 2020.
Poster launches used to be major events in political campaigning, but who would bother with them today?
There are some worthwhile lessons to be learned from the classics.
The Saatchi brothers are celebrated for their attacking of billboards: Labour isn’t working, Labour’s tax bombshell and Labour’s Policy on Arms (showing a combat soldier surrendering hands up).
Each of these were masterpieces of wit and effort compared to the Conservatives’ adoption of the BBC newsreader caught giving the finger for “Labour when you ask for their plans to tackle immigration”.
The Saatchis’ best work riffed with precision on policy rather than personal insults.
When the Conservatives tried that with their “New Labour, New Danger” demon eyes poster it misfired; it was difficult to convincingly portray Blair as a devil when other Conservative sources were attacking him as an inexperienced Bambi.
Image: The Conservative Central Office’s 1996 poster depicting Tony Blair with demonic eyes. Pic: Conservative Central Office
Labour boobed depicting Cameron as a cute bicycling chameleon.
The most effective attacks at PMQs cut directly to the political issues facing the voters, rather than scuffling around in their past record for something compromising.
Mrs Thatcher struck directly and seemingly spontaneously at Michael Foot: “Afraid of an election is he? Afraid? Frightened? Frit?”.
“Weak, weak, weak,” Tony Blair gutted John Major. “You were the future once.”
Sunak, Starmer and their teams of advisors have yet to produce anything as authentic.
Something which would crystallise the political moment.
Instead, they and we can look forward to a year in the dirt as they scrabble around trying to find it.
The government has taken the first step in appealing a court’s decision that asylum seekers cannot be housed in an Essex hotel.
The Home Office is seeking permission to intervene in the case, which, if granted, will allow it to appeal the interim judgment handed down last week.
Epping Forest District Council sought an interim High Court injunction to stop migrants from being accommodated at The Bell Hotel in Epping, which is owned by Somani Hotels Limited.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:38
Councils vs migrant hotels: What next?
The interim injunction demanded the hotel be cleared of its occupants within 14 days.
In a ruling on Tuesday, Mr Justice Eyre granted the temporary block, but extended the time limit by which it must stop housing asylum seekers to 12 September.
Somani Hotels will now appeal against the court order blocking the use of the hotel as accommodation for asylum seekers, the company’s solicitors have said.
Meanwhile, security minister Dan Jarvis said on Friday that closing hotels housing asylum seekers must be done “in a managed and ordered way” as he unveiled government plans to challenge the High Court’s decision.
More on Asylum
Related Topics:
He told broadcasters: “This government will close all asylum hotels and we will clear up the mess that we inherited from the previous government.
“We’ve made a commitment that we will close all of the asylum hotels by the end of this parliament, but we need to do that in a managed and ordered way.
“And that’s why we’ll appeal this decision.”
An analysis by Sky News has found 18 other councils are also actively pursuing or considering similar legal challenges to block asylum hotels – including Labour-run Tamworth and Wirral.
Disquiet with the use of asylum hotels is at a high after the latest statistics showed there were more than 32,000 asylum seekers currently staying in hotels, marking a rise of 8% during Labour’s first year in office.
The number of small boat crossings in the Channel is also up 38% on the previous 12 months.
Following the Epping case, a wave of protests is expected outside of asylum hotels across the country in the coming days.
Stand Up To Racism is preparing to hold counter-protests outside the asylum hotels on Friday, including in Bournemouth, Cardiff and Leeds, with further demonstrations expected on Saturday.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:03
‘We can’t take them’: Wirral residents on migration
In its case, Epping Forest District Council argued that the owners of the Bell Hotel did not have planning permission to use the premises to accommodate asylum seekers.
It argued that the injunction was needed amid “unprecedented levels of protest and disruption” in connection with the accommodation.
Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick said the people of Epping who protested and its council have “led the way”, writing in The Telegraph that “our country’s patience has snapped”.
His Conservative colleague Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said on Thursday that people have “every right” to protest over asylum hotels in their areas.
Kemi Badenoch, the Tory leader, has urged councils to explore legal challenges – with Conservative-run Broxbourne Council announcing that it would do so.
Paula Basnett, the Labour leader of Wirral council, said: “We are actively considering all options available to us to ensure that any use of hotels or other premises in Wirral is lawful and does not ride roughshod over planning regulations or the wishes of our communities.”
Carol Dean, the Labour leader of Tamworth Borough Council, said she understood the “strong feelings” of residents about the use of a local hotel to house asylum seekers, and added: “We are closely monitoring developments and reviewing our legal position”.
Labour-controlled Stevenage council added: “The council takes breaches of planning control seriously and we’re actively investigating alleged breaches relating to the operation of hotels in Stevenage.”
Coinbase is reinforcing security after North Korean hackers exploited its remote work policy, with CEO Brian Armstrong outlining stricter hiring measures.
Beijing’s consideration of a yuan-backed stablecoin could mark a new front in the global financial system, but experts say dollar dominance, liquidity and trust are high hurdles.