The Labour Party’s failure to engage…
April 20th, 2007 by Frank
Yesterday I passed a poster for the Labour Party which said ‘It’s time for a change. Are you with us?’.
The poster gave the web address makeachange.ie, and invited me to free text the word ‘change’ to 50100.
Leisurely walking along with nothing better to do, and being a curious soul, I texted.
Here’s what I got back:
It’s time for a change. Labour will bring a change for the better if elected to government. Pat has 5 Commitments for Change, check them out at makeachange.ie
What a banal taxt. The only possible advancement the Labour Party has made with me here is that I now have the web address on my phone, but the text was so unengaging I’d be unlikely to check it out if I wasn’t motivated by my interest in viral campaigns and the like.
If somebody is motivated enough to use the freetext then they are interested at some level - maintaining that interest is crucial. Off the top of my head I would send them something like this:
Pat Rabbitte: 5 commitments for change.
1. Beds in hospitals
2. Pre-school education
3. Gardai in the neghbourhood
4. Carer’s means tests
5. Buying a home
Reply with 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 for more!
In the text I received it refers to ‘Pat’. If this happens to be the only communication between us, and I’m not familiar with Pat Rabbitte already, I’m none the wiser now.
Text is an opportunity to engage with people, sending one bland text just doesn’t do it. As you can see from my above outline, I’d encourage people to request more info on the item (or items) that interest them. This could also provide some interesting data about which areas are foremost in people’s priorities.
You would now have, in one text message, got Pat Rabbitte’s name out there and got the five areas of Commitment out there. By following up and sending a further text, if requested, you are engaging on a level that interests the texter.
Here’s an example of what I would include in the second text, for commitment 1:
Not a vague promise. A clear goal of 2,300 more beds in clean hospitals.
Cost and delivery time set out on makeachange.ie.
For regular updates on Labour news reply with the word ‘updates’.
Obviously, the mechanism and cost for the whole text updates would have to be considered, but my point is that having engaged with someone, it’s important to build on that small relationship somehow. Perhaps not by text updates as I suggest above, but something.
Their blog doesn’t allow comments (which is a shame, but I can understand why) but I wonder do they note trackbacks?
Entries (RSS)
April 20th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
Guess Labour must be doing something right. They keep catching our attention. Shame they’re not winning our votes while they’re at it.
I agree one would like more info if you went to the bother of texting.
April 20th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
I’d love to think they were worth voting for, they certainly bring up issues of interest to me from time to time… but you know…
April 20th, 2007 at 9:37 pm
Do you have something against Labour Frank? It’s just you keep pointing out their campaign weakness, the ‘Are You Happy’ poster and now this, and you don’t seem to be having a go at any of the other political parties and their campaign methods. Just seems a bit one sided to me.
April 21st, 2007 at 4:17 am
This is my first Labour post Martin, and maybe I just want them to do better?
As I said above, I’d like to think they were worth voting for. Rabbitte has impressed me once or twice by speaking up for things I believe in.
But trying to assess parties by their election strategies is like trying to assess pop albums by the singles.
Anyway, this wasn’t a political post as such, it was just related to marketing more than anything else.
If I was anti Labour though, would I have texted the number?
April 21st, 2007 at 10:37 am
I had the first candidate at the door looking for my vote on Thursday. I was in the shower when they rang but I said I’d get dressed and come and talk to them-I really wanted to talk to him, see what he was about etc. By the time I’d come out, he’d already made his way next door, canvassing for votes there. He kind of half came back and I had a few brief words with him but he just wanted to keep moving. I told him I’ve no party allegiance and would be voting according to policies so he had plenty opportunity to win me over but no, he just couldn’t get next door fast enough. This was after I made the effort of quickly drying myself of and getting dressed to talk to him. Well, he won’t be getting my vote anyway.
As for the Labour text thing Frank, I checked it out and consider it just a gimmick-obviously some Dublin based media guru got the contract to come up with a modern, savvy method of spreading Labour’s appeal among the floating voters. As I said, just a gimmick, nothing to get too worked up about.
Politics and marketing-well I suppose that’s the way it is, different companies trying to sell different products to the same people. Whatever about campaigning and marketing, it is going to be an interesting election and I’m actually looking forward to speaking with the other candidates who call to the door and hopefully afford me more of their time the the perfunctory few seconds the last guy gave me.
April 21st, 2007 at 11:37 am
I’m voting for Labour, mainly because Pat Rabitte kicked a ball back over to me down in Tallaght Village when I was 15. That’s the way to get a vote. That or give me a bunt while robbing the orchards.
April 21st, 2007 at 3:33 pm
Martin - Yup, I don’t know who’s worse… politicians for marketing at election time or me for not paying enough attention the rest of the time.
As I said, I’m interested in marketing so for me - if you assume that politicians *are* going to go down this route - the least they could do is get it right.
Also, don’t hold out too much hope for the canvassers, last election time I asked a couple of questions on immigration, got a lot of shuffling feet and then the doorbell stopped ringing.
Bob, that wouldn’t have got my vote, I pass people playing football with a false air of confidence which I hope will mask my terror that someone will kick the ball to me and I’ll have a panic attack and pass out.
April 22nd, 2007 at 6:35 pm
Feel your pain there Frank about the kicking the ball back. Check out my mate’s take on it, about halfway through the clip, Gold.
http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=1560237221
April 23rd, 2007 at 1:22 pm
Ha ha ha… right, I’m off to buy some sandals then…
April 23rd, 2007 at 11:56 pm
As a child I spotted a labour poster and was disgusted, why would anyone vote for something that sounded like hard work? I would vote for the Immigration control platform because Aine ni Chonaill is one of my heroes. Unfortunately I dont think they are in the running this year because people only like to moan about immigration in this country and not vote for a party who have sensible things to say on it. I met an Irish bar man with 15 years experience in the industry the other night, he was let go because he wouldn’t take a pay cut to minimum wage and he now cannot find a job, in his trade, in his country. Who said immigration was meant to supplement the Irish work force and not replace it?
April 24th, 2007 at 3:08 pm
They have one candidate running in Dublin Ed, maybe a second to be confirmed. You can listen to a recent discussion with Vincent Brown and Aine ni Chonaill on their web site:
http://www.immigrationcontrol.org/
April 24th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
Quotes from the website linked above:
“Immigration policy should be framed solely from the viewpoint of the needs of the receiving state. ”
“it would be the position of I.C.P. that labour market immigration should tend as far as possible to be such as would minimize rather than maximize ethnic and racial differences.”
“If there is to be preferential treatment for countries with traditional links with Ireland, this should specifically not include countries where that link is primarily missionary or aid activity. This is particularly important if such reference is to appear in the legislation.
Where there is already a preponderance of any ethnic grouping in the State (legally, illegally or semi-legally) as with e.g. Chinese and Nigerians further immigration from such areas should be disallowed. Such an ethnic community when well-established is a focus for further immigration, including illegal.”
They’re not getting my vote.
Ed, are you quite serious about voting for this group? Martin, you?
April 24th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
They’ve no candidates running outside Dublin Frank, so I can’t vote for them. The above quotes make sense to me-what’s wrong with looking out for the interests of the receiving state-protecting infrastructure, social services, employment, crime and security, rates of infectious diseases. Not to mind having some pride in your own nation and history and wishing to preserve your cultural integrity. There are 150 million people in Nigeria, would you have them all come here? The world is an unequal place Frank, but what we have here in Europe we’ve worked for, lived through the Renaissance, Enlightenment and Industrial Ages. Is this something you want to give away to people who can’t feed themselves in their own countries despite vast natural resources, e.g. Zimbabwe.
April 24th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
I won’t say I have the answers, but the policies outlined above are too right wing for my taste.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t have policies, but “Immigration policy should be framed solely from the viewpoint of the needs of the receiving state. ” is just bollocks.
Their website implies that an asylum seeker should only be granted access to the country if they can prove themselves a valuable asset to the state. And of course not be too ethnically or racially different.
I can have pride in my nation and history without wanting it to remain chained to it’s history. I can keep my own heritage without withholding access to what I have inherited to others.
If I might quote you Martin, talking about another matter entirely:
“there should be a recognition of the fact we are all human and all share this planet”
“There seems to be no dialogue between the nations, no celebration of human existence and natural beauty in all its forms. Instead we have the same selfish, materialistic and ultimately nihilistic ethos spreading around the world destroying cultures, beliefs and biospheres.”
How does this align with the policies of the Immigration Control Platform?
April 24th, 2007 at 6:39 pm
I see no contradiction there Frank, in fact that’s the exactly the point people consistently miss when discussing immigration. In an ideal world, one free of exploitation and greed all the nations of the Earth would share the resources of the planet in a sustainable, enlightened way. Until that equitable point is reached we will have the problem of massive North-South immigration, and believe me it will increase exponentially in the near future. And where do then draw the line? As I said 150 million Nigerians, and remember Nigeria is a country of immense potential wealth, could well apply for asylum here, who decides which to admit and which to bar? It’s not a realistic, sustainable solution.
The diversity of all life needs to be respected and celebrated, black and white; this mad rush towards global homogenisation is, I believe, the wrong track to be going down and will lead to an impoverished, troubled world. In short mass immigration is a symptom of a sick global system and another approach needs to be taken towards fixing this problem, along the lines professor Sachs suggested.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
I understand your concerns, and a lot of what you say makes sense.
But when it comes to the group you pointed to earlier, I don’t think they are the ones to be trusting to create immigration policy.
“In an ideal world, one free of exploitation and greed…”
We need to *move toward* this ideal Martin, and saying that Immigration policy should ONLY trouble itself with the needs of the receiving state moves us in the opposite direction, in my view.
April 24th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Maybe they’re not the ones to formulate any policy Frank but by being the most vociferous on the issue they might give some balance to this debate which up until now has been very one-sided and I wouldn’t be surprised if they poll well in Dublin North where they’re running. As I said, I still don’t know who to vote for..twice.
April 24th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
Frank,
I actually voted for them once. I agree with the majority of the above quotes, I also agree with Martin in that at least they talk about it candidly. I am sick (to my twinkly little toes) of hearing slick mick polititians saying we must have a debate and then being too scared to initiate it. This country is young and naive. They will learn notheing of what has happened in Britain where even the commision for racial equality have said multiculturalism doesn’t work.
This ineptitude and moral cowardice will ultimately and infortunately breed extremism. See hoew worried they are in England about the BNP gaining votes. They are gaining votes because Labour and the Conservatives are too scared or too hamstrung to bring it up. The white working class feel dis-enfranchised and scared. Fear breeds extremism. And many of their fears are justifiable.
All of Europe has a problem. This will become more apparent in the not too distant future (or past, depends which way you are going…)
As for being proud of your heratige Frank, I suggest you take a peek at a little website by the name of http://www.pintireland.wordpress.com. It’s small and badly designed, but it is highlighting, to a certain extent how OUR culture is being replaced at a scary speed. No more small IRISH shops, no more small IRISH bars, just mahon point with it’s imported American-Irish bars (The irony is almost surreal)
Yes it’s what the people want. Or is it what they are told it’s what they want?
By the way the Hi-B is closing.
regarding the vote, I’m afraid I will have to abstain. I wouldn’t bother even reading their PAP. Green is all that matters. and that’s not the party.
I have more to say on the matter but I’m afraid my girlfriend is the only one entitled to that kind of information.
Sleep well chaps. Maybe we’ll wake up tommorow and find it was all a bad dream and we can go dancing at the cross roads.
April 24th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
I was just reading the through the thread again and came across something from Frank which really troubles me-
I’m not saying we shouldn’t have policies, but “Immigration policy should be framed solely from the viewpoint of the needs of the receiving state. � is just bollocks.
Any chance you could tell me why it’s ‘just bollocks’ to look out for your own interests Frank? I just don’t understand the suicidal, absurd, logic -defying philanthropy behind that statement. It’s tantamount to pathological self-hatred. Is that what it’s all about? Have we in the West become so flaccid and self-hating that somewhere deep down runs an atavistic desire for subjugation and destruction? I just can’t figure out this line of thinking in face of the facts of the situation. Can you help me please? Was it just a flippant remark? I hope so.
April 24th, 2007 at 11:53 pm
Martin,
I’m sure Frank is coming from the viewpoint that the wealthier nations should help the poorer ones, which is a fair enough position in theory. The facts are that this, rather philanthropic stance is highly abused by many groups. Not just the migrants themselves, whose motives are understandable (I would like to jump from a sinking ship too) but the agencies, the lawyers, the pressure groups who make money from this demographic transaction. Also the bar owners, the builders etc etc etc.
Regarding self hatred, I think it is probably true to say all of European cultures suffers from it. WW2 and African colonisation are responsible for that.
New Zealand and Australia have very stringent immigration policies based on what the host societies needs and it works well. They were quite happy to receive the Zim farmers as they knew they were absorbing highly skilled, hard working people.
The T.B. thing is worrying also. They wont say in any of the media where it is coming from. The are too scared to admit that Sub saharan Africans are bringing it in. Our insane policy of non screening for disease (on the grounds of racial discrimination) is just another detail that will breed the extemism afore mentioned.
April 25th, 2007 at 12:50 am
Faced with starvation and persecution I’d want to leave and claim asylum somewhere better as well Ed. You can’t blame people for wanting a better life somewhere else and the conditions some of these people are fleeing are truly appalling. But even with the most compassionate heart the question of numbers and practicality must sooner or later arise. What do we do? Opening the doors and letting the whole population of Sub-Saharan Africa come to Europe is just not viable yet that is the only possible conclusion arrived at if you follow the current asylum system to its ultimate logical conclusion. Conversely a token asylum approach is also disingenuous because it does nothing to relieve the causative problems of mass immigration-it serves only as a palliative to some consciences here and as a provocation to others.
But that is the bungled orthodoxy of the day, I’m afraid, improving immeasurably the lot of the lucky few who make it here while alienating a good proportion of the population of the host nation by the extra demands immigration places on services such as health, education and housing.
This is only the tip of the iceberg and refers to genuine asylum seekers. The issue gets further complicated and even more emotive when one considers bogus asylum seekers and organised crime. And don’t forget, I’m only talking about asylum cases here and not economic migration which brings with it, as well as all the aforementioned problems, the very real issue of labour displacement as well.
So, as I’m sure you’re aware this is a massive issue, not just for Ireland but for all of Europe and no-one seems to take a rational stand on the issue, one based on logic, tinted by compassion but one that ultimately protects the interests of, in our case, the Irish state. That is what Dail Eireann is elected for first and foremost-to represent and promote the interests of the Irish nation, and, contrary to what some would tell you we do live in a nation state.
The mindless cant on offer from the immigration industry is nauseating. They represent a self-serving lobby who would say anything for money-immigration is their livelihood and the more the merrier. The TB issue is a case in point and for TB read also HIV. It costs €25,000 per annum to treat someone with HIV. Most patients at CUH HIV clinic are Sub-Saharan Africans, and this is why, I think, the issue is so adroitly avoided, because to deny people treatment is judged inhuman. No-one wants to be in a situation where they have to grasp this thorn: nobody wants to be judged as inhuman. The question is though, where will it all end?
April 25th, 2007 at 9:15 am
I agree with your concerns Martin, but….
( I just cant bring myself to say anything that goes against the grain. I’m meant to be an arty\creative type and for me to have so called ‘right wing views’ is like commiting professional suicide. It is as if anyone with a creative bone in their body signs a hidden contract to never abandon the left.)
April 25th, 2007 at 11:28 am
That’s me I’m talking about Frank, in case you get the wrong idea. I’m refering to a number of incidents that have happened since I went to glorious Art college. (which was more akin to the Borg now that I think about it)
I just fell off a ladder onto rocks and cut through the electric cable (from the hedge cutter) which landed around my neck on the rocks. I’m o.k though and the hedge was nearly finished anyway. No need for alarm.
April 25th, 2007 at 1:17 pm
Jesus Ed… sounds like we nearly lost you there… that would not have been good, who would we have debated the major election issues with?
Martin, with regard to your question earlier, when I said:
“Immigration policy should be framed solely from the viewpoint of the needs of the receiving state. � is just bollocks.
It is the solely I take issue with. Surely from your desire for a better society you would have to agree?
April 25th, 2007 at 1:47 pm
Just a short note from a window of opportunity my WORK break has allowed me . . .
Why don’t you lot quit fannying about on the net and get jobs!
Oh yeah, I forgot. Those bloody Poles . . .
April 25th, 2007 at 1:50 pm
Can’t talk now Brian, sorry, too busy.
April 25th, 2007 at 6:51 pm
Less time on the internet Brian and more time on the production line. There’s dozens of Poles queueing up for your job on better terms-for me that is-so get the finger out and start contributing to GDP.
April 25th, 2007 at 9:14 pm
Ya Brian, I’d say Mrs crosby needs her shears oiled.
April 26th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
W’re just another forgotten post Martin. But I think we performed pretty damn good. Frank escaped only becouse Brian interjected with off the point humour (as usual)
April 26th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
Good discussion. To be honest, I was quite surprised at your views, but then you’re probably surprised at mine. Or maybe not, us bleeding heart liberals are probably the bane of your lives. ha ah ha.
April 27th, 2007 at 9:50 am
C’mon Frank, how long have you known me? I cant understand why people get surprised by rational thought. By the way, Vicent brown broadcast live from the imperial hotel last night, interviewing all the candidates and Ted Neville from the ICP is running after all. He came across as the most honest contributer. All the others were complete careerist phonies. he’s getting my vote again.
April 27th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Liberals in Ireland , I find in gerneral are not real liberals. Real liberalism includes having a truely open mind. Modern day liberals tend to be rather Fascistic. Usually they are half educated and irritating, but when in positions of power they are actually dangerous.
April 27th, 2007 at 10:36 am
Interesting sweeping generalisations there Ed.
Does anyone actually think of themselves as a ‘liberal’ here by the way? I was just being facetious. I think that’s the first time I’ve used that word, facetious.
I find it disconcerting that you would bandy the term Fascist about as a put down when you are voting for someone who stands for minimising ethnic and racial differences in immigration policy.
April 30th, 2007 at 6:21 pm
Thats not Facism frank. I tend to use the word, perhaps wrongly by definition, as someone who will not permit other views to emerge. Those who believe there is one way only. It is hugely common in our country.
April 30th, 2007 at 6:44 pm
I’m not saying Wikipedia is the be all and end, all but it defines Fascism as “Fascism is an authoritarian political ideology (generally tied to a mass movement) that considers individual and other societal interests inferior to the needs of the state, and seeks to forge a type of national unity, usually based on ethnic, religious, cultural, or racial attributes.”
Sounds like the Immigration Control Platform to me, certainly based on the choice quotes above…
May 1st, 2007 at 4:03 pm
If you’re happy to live your life by wikipedia definitions…. I’m, happy with my definition of liberal facsits. there are also health fascists and plenty of others but much less benign. I would refer you to today’s (tue’s 1st may) editors comment in the irish times. Finton O’toole (page 18) ‘Migration must be a poll issue) he goes on to warm of potential disastors. There is little doubt that he is right, but still nothing will be done. Because, I believe, we live in a country where very little of our political or media classses have any real will, ideals, moral courage etc etc etc.
Yours sincerely
Ed
May 1st, 2007 at 4:24 pm
I agree that immigration policy is a poll issue, that’s pretty much why I’m discussing it.
I agree there are dangers.
And I agree in general that we are a complacent country.
But have you looked up other parties immigration policy promises Ed?
ICP sound like dangerous people.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:11 pm
Are you really serious? Dangerous people! That’s nuts….
They have never, and will never say or do anything violent to any people, yet they have had violence visited upon them. Aine ni Chonaill, a woman in her 60’s has been physically attacked twice. They openly say that they do not want Xenophobes anywhere near them. i think you are finding danger in the wrong place, try sin fein for that.
One last point. Perhaps contentious but hey…. I think that if you look at most places throughout history that mono-ethnic societies are the happiest. They tend to be more united, less divided, there is less fear and suspicion. there are of course exceptions to this. Check out this lot if you have time, they were demonised at first but now main stream politicians are admitting that they make a lot of sense. http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/
Anyway, we’re not going to make any head way here so I suggest we simply agree to differ. This has probably been one of the most open discussions on the issue in the country and we’re probably the only ones reading it. nits.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:12 pm
I mean nuts.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:13 pm
Hey Frank, will you corrct my spelling of Fascists above… it’s a source of deep embarrasment to me.
May 1st, 2007 at 7:14 pm
P.S are you into doing any sketches for http://www.rafttobermuda.com
May 1st, 2007 at 7:27 pm
Yes I’m serious, if what I read on their site is indicative then I think they would be dangerous policy makers. I didn’t mean physically threatening to me personally.
A sketch for rafttobermuda is on a to do list which is in front of me right now… crazy busy at the moment though, it’s insane.
And yes, I actually make to do lists…
May 1st, 2007 at 7:43 pm
Dave who comments here from time to time sent me a link to an Enda Kenny speech and some supporting material on Immigration. It reads as a much more informed and balanced, not to mention rational, stance than ICP…
May 2nd, 2007 at 4:42 pm
Thanks for the ol’ spelling corrections old buddy old pal.
May 2nd, 2007 at 4:46 pm
I had a quick breeze through Enda Kenny’s statement and all I could think was that this is the kind of empty schmooz we have all heard before. Nothing will come of it. Nothing will come from any of them until we are in real danger of finding ourselves in a very disjointed nation.
Fair dues for being so optimistic though.
May 2nd, 2007 at 4:50 pm
At the last election all the major parties agreed not to discuss immigration. This time there is a little murmour but it is only platitudes. I would vote for anyone willing to say anything courageous at all on the subject, I’m afraid I.C.P are still the only ones. I don’t want to see them in power, I want our shitey pants politicians to pull their fingers out. LOOK WHAT HAS HAPPENED ACROSS EUROPE.
May 2nd, 2007 at 6:08 pm
Sorry Ed, i actually thought you were joking about the spelling correction - corrected now.
On Enda Kenny, I’m not a big fan, but he made a speech and he called for debate and his speech contained a fair and balanced assessment of immigration policy.
“LOOK WHAT HAS HAPPENED ACROSS EUROPE.”
Eh… what exactly?
May 2nd, 2007 at 7:26 pm
The rise of the far right ya ninny. Calling for a debate is not exactly brave, lets see if he gets one… a proper one.
May 2nd, 2007 at 7:38 pm
Now, Ed, no need to resort to name calling. Especially the N word.