Fishburn Hedges

27.05.2010

Do you remember Tony Blair's "Big Tent"? It was a way of describing an all-inclusive, everyone-likes-me, pre-coalition way of governing; it lasted a long while, before becoming, under Gordon, "goats" (government of all the talents) which was a ruse for bringing outsiders into the bear trap of government in return for a bit of ermine and a brief headline. The talented ones baulked most and baled fast.

What I shall miss most about Labour's 13 years is the new language it gave us; not just new jargon, but new ways of thinking, new ways of communicating and, sadly too often, new ways of dressing mutton as lamb.

Some of it was good: "joined-up" government was a worthy aim, even if it meant in reality, the Treasury is now running everything. Joined-up communication is always good; most organisations have too many silos, so I hope this phrase will stay alive.

Then there was "consultation", an Orwellian phrase which translated as "don't say we didn't warn you". It morphed at its zenith into "citizens' forums" and "citizens' juries", an apparently more democratic and participative version of "focus groups", but all of these were really just more qualitative research. The citizenry, judging by more recent events, did not feel "empowered". Governments over time get less and less good at listening – about the time Labour launched its "Big Conversation" (or was it the "Big Listen"?).

Tony Blair tried briefly to appropriate "stakeholder" but we comms folk were there first and still rightly use it as a good phrase to cover our corporate audiences, especially when linked to and contrasting "shareholders". (And you'll notice the Tories have sought to steal "responsibility" from the CSR world.)

There were many more words which came to shape Labour's way of communicating and defining its approach: delivery, framework, pathfinder, beacon, best value, strategic partnerships, outcomes not outputs, vision, values, key focus and above all, the brilliant reworking of the simple "New" that started it all.

Don't say you've never slipped these phrases into a document, possibly titled "strategic stakeholder partnership framework approach". And you will again.

Jargon can be good; it can be useful to condense a concept into a word or phrase that everyone can share and understand. It's a form of branding. But it works best internally, and it becomes too easily a substitute for thinking, and for challenging the norm.

Jargon is ultimately a defence mechanism; it reinforces cultures that should be challenged, and embeds ideas that are past their sell-by date; it excludes rather than includes.

Political communication in particular needs the Ronseal approach, that it says on the tin exactly what it does. The coalition has made a good start. The Osborne-Laws press conference on May 24^th did tell it like it is, in plain, simple, clear language.

So, is this a new dawn? I think it was the Mail who alerted me to the fact that the 36-page coalition programme refers a whole host of tricky issues to different consultations, committees and reviews, including a "comprehensive" review (on family law); a "full" review (on sentencing); and a "fundamental" review (on legal aid).

Here we go again?

John Williams

John is a founder of Fishburn Hedges and remains a senior adviser.