It's still the economy, stupid

I have petitioned and campaigned for - and against - many, many things since the world of political campaigning crossed my path. But the absurdity of the thought of running a petition calling for next month's inflation figure to be cut by at least 0.3% or running a street stall demanding an extra 0.1% on the third quarter's GDP growth figure should not become a reason for ignoring economic issues in our campaigning.

For economic issues are crucial to winning support - and if our techniques do not easily apply to them, then it is those techniques that need adapting. Why do I say that economic issues are crucial? Well - I have written before about the significance of the economy to general election campaigns and its importance is best summed up in two ways. First, people consistently rate economic issues as amongst the most important in helping to make up their minds when it comes to voting - especially when you add together the numerous different issue labels into which the economy is often broken down in polls. As one example - in May 2005 YouGov found that it was the third most important issue, even breaking in on that near-holy trinity of health, crime and education we have all (rightly) been taught to use with such effect.

Second, take a step back from our own conduct of campaigns and look at how the rest of the world describes and acts during election campaigns. The economy is frequently at the centre - just as when Philip Gould wrote to Tony Blair in April 2005 that he should: "drive the election to the point where it came down to one central question: 'Who do you trust with the future of the economy?'"

The regional variation in the Conservative performance in 2005 reinforces this message: in the South East the Conservatives did consistently better than in other English regions and this was the region which had the worst economic experience, with unemployment uniquely rising in 2001-2005.

More recently, it is striking that in the successful US Democrat campaigns in Montana, Missouri and Virginia - those which in fact gave them control of the Senate last year - populist economic messages played a major role, as did the long-term health or otherwise of the French economy in their Presidential election earlier this year.

Neglecting economic issues therefore comes at a real cost to our electoral prospects. If we are not engaging in a key area for voters when making up their minds, we are hobbling ourselves in the electoral race.

And what image does it leave of us as a party if we skip lightly over the economic heart of government when laying out our messages? It is rather like meeting a police officer who talks their great plans to start using a low-emission police car, is getting solar panels on the roof of the police station, takes part in a charity stall at the local summer fair, is introducing organic food to the staff canteen and has an effective twinning arrangement with a police force in France - but avoids talking about the business of catching and arresting people. All lovely things - but in the end, isn't there something rather crucial missing at the heart of all that?

We have a good basis on which to build - particularly the party's hard-won tradition of not just having fully costed general election manifestos, but having costings that stand up to close examination. The careful balancing of the details of tax cuts and rises in the "Green Tax Switch" policy is another good building block. So what more can we do - especially as our traditional campaigning techniques may not seem easily adaptable to this issue?

First, meeting local businesses should be a part of the diary of MPs, candidates and councillors alongside the traditional hospital and school visits. This is not just a matter of show (though we should of course get and use photographs) but also a matter of necessity, for by meeting businesspeople we are much more likely to pick up the issues of concern to them for us to work on. I have been struck in my own constituency postbag and surgeries how certain issues naturally raise themselves with me; for example, most weeks I can barely move for examples of problems with the way our planning system work. But until I started ensuring that more business visits were in my constituency diary, the travails and issues of small businesses rarely intruded into my in-tray.

Indeed, thinking back to when I was more involved in my family's business, I remember how often the words of politicians about the economy seemed a stepped removed from the reality of running a business.

That is why meeting and listening is so important. It is just like with the general public - if you are never on the doorstep you lose touch with the public, and if you're never meeting businesses, you lose touch with them too.

Second, we can emphasise the benefits for business and the economy behind our other policies. The Green Tax Switch is right for the planet but also - by growing the opportunities for businesses marketing green goods and services - good for our economy in the long run. It's not just a green policy, it's a job creation policy.

Putting effectiveness, not vindictiveness, at the heart of our crime-fighting policies is good for the communities who suffer less crime as a result - but it is also helping reduce a heavy burden on many businesses.

Abolishing the DTI was not just a means to fund our other policies (a policy that now needs updating following Gordon Brown's departmental reorganisation) - it was also a good way of attacking unnecessary bureaucracy that afflicts small firms. Indeed, removing unnecessary restrictions on both people and organisations is after all a good part of what liberalism is about.

Simplifying the tax system is important not just for individuals struggling to cope with Gordon Brown's morass of tax credits and complicated paperwork - it is also important for small businesses struggling to grow and cope with bureaucratic burdens on them. And at the more local level of taxation, relating it to ability to pay means not just having a local income tax rather than Council Tax, but also introducing the sorts of business rates allowances we had in our 2005 business manifesto.

Fighting for a fair trade deal for developing countries does not just help alleviate poverty in those countries, it also helps global prosperity. The list goes on and on - and we shouldn't be afraid of pointing out the self-interested benefits (such as more jobs) from policies that are motivated by higher causes (such as saving the environment).

Third, we should remember that people's perceptions of how the economy is performing are neither set in stone nor outside of our influence. It is a staple of academic studies that people's perceptions of how the government has performed on the economy heavily influences how people vote. Now - we are well used to the idea of campaigning hard locally to change people's views of the track-record of those running the council; we do not need to shy away from bringing similar influence to bear on their views of politicians' economic records - particularly if the Prime Minister is a former Chancellor of the Exchequer and the leader of the opposition was a top adviser in the Treasury when Britain last plunged into deep recession!

These three steps - meeting with business, framing our policies in the context of their economic and business impact, and talking about the economic record - are beneficial in themselves. Even better, though, economic issues help us present one of our core themes in a concrete and practical manner. "Fairness" is a good concept for gathering up many of our policies and attitudes of mind, but to make it work as a vote-winning and society-changing concept we need to present and demonstrate the idea of fairness in ways that are persuasive, that illuminate the concept, that show its practical application, that show we are in touch with and understand the concerns of non-political people - and that move beyond simply sticking the word on the cover of some documents or under the logo on some press or conference backdrops.

This is just the opportunity which the economy - and in particular taxation - provides, because most of the policies I've touched on above can be couched in just these terms. They are about having policies that make life fairer for people and businesses. They take the ideological concept and turn it into practical policies which let us both demonstrate why it's the right concept but also that we are sincere in promoting it.

Fairness applies in the wider economic picture too, for tackling poverty and social exclusion is essential for helping people to realise their own potential and to truly prosper in a fair, tolerant and liberal society. And this is something that benefits the whole community. We all benefit from the better public services, the lower crime rates and the more harmonious society that flow from a more content and prosperous country. And that's our challenge to deliver.

(c) Lynne Featherstone, 2007. This article first appeared in Liberator.

Getting these columns in future

Or, you can subscribe to my columns feed: