High-ranking Labour Members have told me that they agree with my earlier post, which slams Labour's Party Election Broadcast.
Scroll down to read my post, and to watch the PEB, "A nightmare on your street".
I would not attack a party's election broadcast without strong justification, but in my view, "a nightmare on your street" is not worthy of a party whose principle promise is fairness.
This PEB is not fair.
Let me qualify this; I don't think it is wrong for Labour to attack the tories (though I regard negative campaigning on their part, AND ON THE PART OF THE TORIES to be unwise). I do not think it wrong for Labour to attack what they're calling "a credibility gap" in the Conservative Party's financial forecasts (though may he who is without sin cast the first stone). I do not think it wrong to ASK about funding and policies inside or outside of a PEB, but to tell cancer patients that if they do not vote Labour, they COULD DIE, is not only wrong - it's disgusting.
May I appeal to the MANY fair-minded Labour members, in the name of all that is right and decent, PLEASE SCRAP THIS MONSTROSITY before you drag your own name through the mud. PLEASE do not scare people who are sick, and who are dying.
....
Here's how Tory Shadow Health Spokesman Andrew Lansley has reacted:
“This election broadcast is extraordinarily cynical, particularly as it comes so soon after Labour upset so many cancer sufferers by targeting them with scaremongering breast cancer leaflets."
“Having already upset so many people with their original scaremongering any decent party would not have engaged in this sort of low politics again in the campaign – but not the Labour Party."
“They have run out of ideas and are now resorting to the tactics of smear and fear in order to bully people into voting for them. In contrast the Conservative Party is fighting a relentlessly positive campaign with a message of hope and change.”
.......
NOW I question entirely the notion that the tories are fighting a "relentlessly posative campaign", (having reviewed their own Party Election Broadcast) - but the worst consequence of their own PEB for "The hung parliament party" will be to agrovate floating voters in to voting for another party.
Labour's PEB does this - which is FINE, but it cannot be fine for them to scare the living daylights out of vulnerable people like this.
So this is a sincere appeal. PLEASE, reconsider your party election broadcast before it's too late.
Work Harder? Not The PM!
-
Less than a week after William Hague told us all to work harder, it seems
David Cameron may be doing exactly the opposite!
"If there was an Olympic gold ...
16 hours ago
I will repeat what I have just posted on Iain Dales Blog, at least Labour are up front about it and will stand and defend its accusations.
ReplyDeleteThey do not hide behind Fleet Street editors who they give their smear tactics to one by one at Tory HQ and then blatantly lie that it didn't happen.
Hi Red Rag,
ReplyDeleteThanks for posting.
I am sorry to say that I cannot see how your comment changes anything.
This isn't about the Tories - I've criticised their PEB. This is about scaring the most vulnerable people in society in to voting for one party over another, based on nothing more than partisan speculation.
It is very wrong and I am afraid, it is (in my view) wrong to defend it!
Labour are brave enough to defend it? Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe that is not what Gordon Brown did when he was confronted about the leaflets - he said that he had not authorised them.
ReplyDeleteSean,
ReplyDeletethis PPB will be up front and the Labour Party will defend its message and it believes it is true.
Would you rather them do that or hide behind editors of Fleet Street by asking them to come to their HQ, issue them with smears, then blatantly lied that it never happened, when we now know it did...which is what the Tories have done.
If the Tories believed in what it was saying about Clegg, why not come out and say it themselves instead of hiding behind their Fleet Street friends.
The faux horror rumbling across the Tory Blogospher(not yourself) over this PPB is so hypocritical it is breathtaking.
I have to be honest and say I don't quite see the offence here, unless it's really in the 'we shouldn't use cancer in electioneering' sense. Which I guess is an argument. Labour's pledge is to be able to see a cancer specialist in two weeks, which the Tories are removing. If it's distressing to show in a political advert (which is perhaps true), wouldn't it be even more distressing to experience it in person? And if so, why should it not be shown?
ReplyDeleteTargetting people with cancer is immoral, but I don't think highlighting the potential distress of scrapping the two week guarantee is in the same way.
Blue2002 - Very true, how do you put across in a nice way that the Tories are going to scrap the guaranteed 2 week waiting list.
ReplyDeleteThe truth sometimes is brutal and it hurts, but for people with this problem, surely it is best to get it out in the open. It is not like the Tories were actually going to tell anyone is it?
Guys,
ReplyDeleteReally glad to have you visiting and commenting.
As Iain Dale kindly pointed out, I don't approach these things from a partisan political viewpoint.
I am a journalist - and a journalist who was genuinely shocked by the use of the cancer tactic.
If you ask the Tories, they'll tell you that they'll actually better Labour's promises. That said, it is NOT in the manifesto.
The point I am making, which I would be surprised if you don't accept is that there is a clear undertone of "vote Labour or Die".
If that undertone is not intended, if it is accidental, they should pull the PEB.
As i have just commented on Iain Dale's blog; the 2 weeks is only an input - the real issue and focus is on outcomes and the 2 week target in itself is wholly irrelevent in the overall case management timescale.
ReplyDeleteI don't see how Labour can the Tories over what is or is not in their manifesto. Afer all just because something is written in a Labour manifesto it does not mean they have any intention of even trying to follow it.
ReplyDeleteSorry to disagree Sean, however, if these facts do not come out than how do people form an opinion. There is no nice and easy way to say that the Tories will end the two week maximum wait to see a cancer specialist.
ReplyDeleteBut I stand by what I said, at least the Labour Party are making these statement out front so the policy can be discussed in public and they know where the statement has come from, rather than hiding behind their friends at Fleets Street. It is better to make the statement and stand by it and defend it, no matter how brutal it comes across, rather than make accusations, and then use the front pages of the media to hide behind, and the blatantly lie that they had. We must agree to differ.
With you being from the media I would be interested in knowing whether you think the parties should make the statements themselves or hide behind Fleet Streets editors then lie about using them to get that statement across.
Yes, what an excellent point, Red rag !
ReplyDeleteHow can the wicked Tories go round spreading their lies through all the Newspaper Editors like that ?
They simply shouldn’t be allowed to talk to the press, and after the next Glorious Labour victory,(which seems more certain every day), I think we should ban it.
Just imagine the shock on the faces of poor Mr. Campbell and Lord Mandelson when they first saw some of the terrible lies in these newspapers ! Those poor, decent, innocent and honourable men must have been so shocked at such underhand tactics that they probably cried, didn’t they ?
As you say, though, at least they had the courage and tenacity to fight back with the sword of truth, which is well known to be their only weapon.
Whoever was responsible for this dreadful and deceitful conduct on the part of those posh toffs at the Tory Party should be hunted down and punished. Personally I blame Mrs. Thatcher and Lord Ashcroft.
Hi Red Rag,
ReplyDeleteYou're welcome to disagree - support that right entirely.
ALL parties brief 'the media'. I promise you that Labour are no better or worse than any other party in this regard.
I don't think there's anything whatsoever wrong with attacking the tories on the two-week pledge (or lack thereof), but a simulated situation in which a cancer sufferer was being told they can sod off and die (effectively), well that's just wrong in my book.
As for hiding behind Fleet Street - happy to address this, but it is (with the greatest of respect) a diversion from the point I originally focused in on.
It would be fantastic if all political parties spoke directly to the public, and directly to the press, but alas they all play games. All of them.
Please pop back soon
Psuetonius - the humour,oh the humour.....my sides are aching.
ReplyDeleteSean - Will do.
I notice that the Tories havent used a PEB to say that Labour wont fund cancer drugs, which could be used to say that people will die under Labour but be saved under the Tories. This is because the Tories have scruples.
ReplyDeleteI notice that the Tories are not saying that there will be less nurses and doctors under Labour, because the Tories will ring fence the NHS budget where as Labour wont. Instead, Labour will cut the NHS budget and spend billions on an IT system that doesnt work and which could be spent on patient care.
Labour are "scaring the living daylights out of vulnerable people" who will only have to wait a bit longer to see a consultant, which wont have any effect on their life expectacy but will allow the doctors to prioritize care for those who need it most, i.e. those already diagnosed.
If you asked Joe Public if they would like to see a cancer specialist in two weeks and put other patients lives at risk, or wait for three weeks, which do you think they will tell you? Is Labours slogan 'a future fair for all' or 'a future fair for some people at the expense of the people who need it most?'
The truth is, Labour under Brown care more about their jobs than the people who vote for them, which explains the dire state of the economy and public services.
Roll on May 6'th and so we can go back to being the decent, caring country that is governed for the sake of the people not for the sake of the politicians.
Seeing who in 2 weeks? A consultant oncologist or a specialisty nurse? And the 2 week waiters are buggering things up for other cancer sufferers. Meaning that quite a few will wait a lot longer than 2 weeks. The idea was a good one, the practicalities and knock on effects were not considered. Why oh why don't these wretched politicians talk to practitioners first instead of creating policies and targets that don't work and interfere with patient care and increase waiting times for patients. I am speaking from my medical experience here too.
ReplyDelete