It is inevitable that during an election campaign political parties seek to represent themselves in the best possible light - and their opponents in the worst. This is perfectly proper because the electorate has to make a choice and parties must clarify that choice by emphasising the differences between them. Anyone who believes in democracy must support the efforts of political parties to make their case effectively. There are two enemies of democracy which rear their heads at this time of the year.
Thr first is the person who poses as one who abhors partisan statements. I have recently been upbraided by such a person who accused me of 'blatant electioneering' for putting forward the Labour Party view in a press release. What are political parties supposed to do in an election campaign - not electioneer? Or not to be blatant about it? This type of person is deadly for democracy. Democracy thrives on debate about what is the right or wrong thing to do for our society. They would kill that debate and substitute for it the non-partisan, bland, 'common sense' approach - which just happens to encapsulate their own opinion. Those who dislike electioneering purvey nothing more than the totalitarianism of the small-minded. They have neither the imaginative competence nor the generosity of spirit which allows for others holding a genuinely-held opinion different from their own.
The second is the politician who oversteps the mark between effective representation and plain deceit. A case in point is that of Iain Lindley, the Tory candidate in Walkden South in Salford, who has issued leaflets throughout his area warning of 'the Labour council's plan for incinerators' there. This was deceit on a grand scale which could only be perpetrated by one who, by his own admission, devours books on how to employ political spin - taking words to the edge of their meaning.
Let us examine his deceit in detail. Firstly, it was the 'Labour council' that was doing something. True, he was referring to a policy of Salford City Council and the city council is Labour-controlled. But the implication of those words was that it was a distinctive Labour policy. What he fails to mention is that the policy commanded all-party support and an identical policy has been adopted by all councils in Greater Manchester irrespective of political control. Only he and one Tory colleague voted against it out of a membership of 60 councillors.
Secondly, Iain Lindley refers to a 'plan'. Now the word 'plan' can mean different things in different contexts. It could be taken to mean a proposal to do something. In this case, I am sure, many would assume there was a proposal to site incinerators on two industrial estates in Walkden. But this was totally untrue. The 'plan' was in fact the Greater Manchester Waste Development Plan Document which contains a set of policies whose purpose is to ensure that there are adequate planning controls in place. This is so that when proposals do come forward from waste disposal companies the local planning authority has the power to make sure they are sited in the appropropiate place. Since such facilities are usually sited on industrial estates (not in residential areas or on greenfield sites) the Waste Plan also sought to increase the protection by specifying what kind of uses would be acceptable in specific locations. It stated categorically that incineration ('conventional thermal treatment') would not be allowed but it would be appropriate for mechanical heat treatment. .
So how did Iain Lindley arrive at his 'incinerator' claim? Well, apart from the half-truth and ambiguity he relied on in the phrase 'the Labour council's plan', he used the technique of stretching a word to its limit by describing 'mechanical heat treatment' as incineration. And it was here he came unstuck through his own ignorance - feigned or otherwise. Mechanical heat treatment is a relatively new 'green' technology which, in layperson's language, involves the baking of waste to destroy bacteria. There is no burning. It reduces the amount of waste that goes to landfill. Incineration does involve burning. It is perplexing that Iain Lindley, as a member of the Fire Authority, does not understand the difference between baking and burning.
This type of deception is the enemy of democracy. Firstly, it breeds cynicism. It seeks to persuade people that politicians don't simply have an alternative view of what is right, but that those we differ from want to inflict deliberate harm on the people. Secondly, it breeds disillusion because if there is one certain thing about this example, had the council been Conservative or Lib Dem controlled, the same policy would have been adopted. And thirdly it destroys trust. How are people expected to believe what politicians say when such transparent deceit is employed?
To give Iain Lindley some credit he has now retreated from the claim that there will be incinerators in Walkden. He now says he just doesn't want waste lorries travelling through Walkden. It is a completely different argument and one that a reasonable person might, without having reflected on the issues, put forward. We are left to wonder how he would deal with waste processing if not on an industrial estate.
Lindley's deception was not exposed by the media nor as the result of some Damascene conversion. It arose from Labour's 'blatant electioneering'. Partisan debate can steer even deceitful Tories away from blatant untruths.
No comments:
Post a Comment