Picture by Pete Prodoehl
The Electoral Commission has published the full breakdown of election spending for the Holyrood elections.
The first thing that reading the returns showed me was the terrible handwriting endemic throughout the people responsible, and I write as a dysgraphic well used to trying to decipher my own scrawl.
The second thing was how, despite clear instructions to the contrary, some parties (cough) filled in the pence rather than rounding up to the nearest pound. The 5 main parties are summarised in the table below:
| Party | Lib Dems | % | Tories | % | Greens | % | Labour | % | SNP | % |
| Broadcasts | 4558 | 2.59 | 5088 | 1.86 | 7630 | 5.76 | 46235 | 5.66 | 71961 | 6.30 |
| Advertising and publicity material | 8441 | 4.79 | 664 | 0.24 | 10698 | 8.08 | 115985 | 14.20 | 294601 | 25.80 |
| Unsolicited material | 104274 | 59.15 | 200150 | 73.19 | 73872 | 55.77 | 545745 | 66.81 | 405728 | 35.54 |
| Manifesto | 1972 | 1.12 | 4062 | 1.49 | 2665 | 2.01 | 9147 | 1.12 | 14067 | 1.23 |
| Market Research / Canvassing | 20680 | 11.73 | 1434 | 0.52 | 1860 | 1.40 | 32623 | 3.99 | 201613 | 17.66 |
| Media | 73 | 0.04 | 1922 | 0.70 | 14123 | 10.66 | 6153 | 0.75 | 32269 | 2.83 |
| Transport | 10530 | 5.97 | 10475 | 3.83 | 980 | 0.74 | 16798 | 2.06 | 34957 | 3.06 |
| Rallies and other events | 1936 | 1.10 | 1783 | 0.65 | 193 | 0.15 | 19695 | 2.41 | 20689 | 1.81 |
| Overheads and general administration | 23836 | 13.52 | 47884 | 17.51 | 20770 | 15.68 | 24503 | 3.00 | 65777 | 5.76 |
| Total | 176300 | 100.00 | 273462 | 100.00 | 132463 | 100.25 | 816888 | 100.00 | 1141662 | 100.00 |
What was really interesting was the different patterns in each party. The Tories and the Lib Dems didn’t really bother with print advertising or broadcasts, focussing on unsolicited material. The Greens spent a fair chunk on media, much more proportionally than any other party and more in absolute terms than anybody other than the SNP.
The biggest difference, to my eye, is the huge importance the SNP put on market research / canvassing. From the invoices the much vaunted (and equally envied) iPhone app cost them £8k, which in the scheme of things is buttons and must surely represent one of the best value investments in the history of campaigning?
They seem to have employed a number of people through recruitment agencies on low wages (you don’t get much as a temp from the agency when the client’s paying £10/hour) for thousands of hours for “telemarketing” and “customer service” throughout the campaign working at an SNP National Call Centre in their Edinburgh HQ. Combined with the invoices for for polling work and research running from February the impression given is that there was a huge phone operation running for months both getting their message out and measuring how it was working. There’s also 1000 hours from First Opinion and BSS invoice for 47 thousand contacts on polling day itself which point to a massive get out the vote drive run from Edinburgh.
Labour, on the other hand, ran 16 focus groups, 4 of which were in Edinburgh and Glasgow through Red Circle Communications. That’s it. There’s an invoice from Leftfield Communication for 6 focus groups held in Wales but I think we can assume that’s been misclassified and one from the Labour Party in England from January.
The party spent a huge amount on on bumpf and had no idea if it was working. None at all. Now, that was pretty clear from my vantage point of shoving it through folks letter boxes but I’d assumed there’d at least been some polling done before it went out. Nope. There was volunteer phone canvassing going on but that was for voting intention and there’s no way that that constitutes useful data about what is or isn’t working.
Labour seems to have been flying blind, intent on being heard as much as possible and with no idea about whether what it was saying was in any way effective, why it was effective or how a different message would play. The line that Labour was “micro-targeting key groups” doesn’t really stand up, but nice try.
IÂ still maintain that the difference in available cash played a part in the SNPs victory, but there’s no denying that the scale of Labours defeat in May was somewhat self inflicted. You just can’t shout into a void.
#1 by Barbarian on December 4, 2011 - 11:36 am
The most cost-effective method of market research is knocking on doors.
Why don’t the parties actually try that everywhere rather than focus on high profile seats? I’m personally sick of leaflet after bloody leaflet. I want to discuss matters, not see shiny pictures of shiny people!
#2 by Aidan on December 4, 2011 - 1:44 pm
Totally agree door knocking canvassing is better than leafletting, it does take longer though and it’s harder to get folk in – better at persuading people but not as efficient at voter id as phones.
I think properly conducted professional polling is probably better for judging messages simply because it’s objective and not liable to confirmation bias. Getting demographic weighting right is also hard.
#3 by Daniel J on December 4, 2011 - 2:27 pm
I agree as well but, I live in Aberdeen Central, supposedly a key marginal/battleground/yadda-yadda, not a single door knocker and only leaflets hand delivered by Lab, SNP and LD.
#4 by Bill Pickford on December 4, 2011 - 12:14 pm
“They seem to have employed a number of people through recruitment agencies on low wages (you don’t get much as a temp from the agency when the client’s paying £10/hour) for thousands of hours for “telemarketing†and “customer serviceâ€
Actually, the vast majority – if not all – of the phone canvassing is done by local activists. The SNP is blessed in this regard, unlike other parties.
It’s the same with door-knocking. The SNP have no need to import canvassers from other countries within the UK.
It is true that the SNP, again unlike other parties, has an ethos of ‘constant campaigning’ and the groundwork for the May election was well completed long before the run-in to the poll.
I suppose this is what happens when you have dedicated people working together towards a principled goal – people who see power as a tool to be used for the greater good.
#5 by Aidan on December 4, 2011 - 1:41 pm
Well, no, it’s quite obvious not all the phone work was done by volunteers as there’s invoices for tens of thousands of pounds for it.
Labour did also have a volunteer phonebank, don’t remember seeing anybody from outside local party doing that but that’s neither here nor there.
The main point I take away from this is the utter lack of opinion polling being done by Labour
#6 by Indy on December 4, 2011 - 3:16 pm
The SNP’s call centre is in Glasgow. And a lot of people employed in it are actually members. You will be aware that it is illegal to employ anyone on the basis of their membership of a political party but I know quite a few student members who have supplemented their income working in the call centre.
#7 by Aidan on December 4, 2011 - 5:31 pm
Interesting, the invoices for it on the electoral commission website are quite clearly addressed to “SNP National Call Centre, Gordon Lamb House”.
#8 by Indy on December 5, 2011 - 8:10 am
That is the address of HQ and HQ obviously pays the bills. But the call centre itself is in Glasgow.
#9 by Barbarian on December 4, 2011 - 2:40 pm
Bill, I have yet to see a single SNP canvasser in East Kilbride. Not a single one has appeared in my street in nine years, and where I live is prime territory for them. Yes, lots of leaflets with activists round constantly, but then so have the other parties.
If politicians actually went round trying to win votes, they would not beed to spend money on voter profiling.
I detest phone canvassing. I think it is so impersonal and detached. It’s also lazy.
There is a danger however with door canvassing. You are relying on your supporters to preach the same message and be able to deal with arguments in an objective manner.
#10 by Indy on December 4, 2011 - 5:15 pm
Well in my constituency we canvassed every single street, some of them twice. But you usually only get around 20 per cent of people in. It’s something that has changed over the years – when I first started door knocking you got a lot more people in. Now people are either out a lot more often or they are less willing to open the door. So rather than just walk away empty handed as it were you take a bunch of leaflets with you and when there is no answer you put a leaflet or a “sorry you were out” card through the door so that you have at least made some kind of contact.
As for telephone canvassing – yes it is more impersonal but it’s also a way for local members to get involved who perhaps can’t get out to physically knock doors, whether it is because they have kids to mind or perhaps it is older people who can’t manage climbing tenement stairs. It all helps.
#11 by GMcM on December 5, 2011 - 10:05 am
Surely if the message was already out there well before May the SNP would have been ahead in the polls at the start of the year?
Either the message wasn’t received by people until April or people weren’t that impressed by what the SNP were saying but when they heard the other parties they moved across to the SNP.
#12 by Doug Daniel on December 5, 2011 - 12:12 pm
There is a third option of course – the polling was flawed. Hardly outside the realms of possibility, since the pollsters seem to be just as behind the times in regards to Scottish politics as everyone else.
#13 by GMcM on December 5, 2011 - 12:27 pm
That is possible but I don’t remember any shift in polling methodology prior to May. YouGov have made changes recently to their weighting in Scotland and Wales but no changes were evident before the May election.
Sample error is possible but again the trends were fairly consistent and then the polls showed a swing towards the SNP over a 4-6 week period.
This says to me that the polls were accurate and that the Labour Party were the electorates preference in the early part of the year until the wheels came off the campaign and people felt more comfortable with the SNP. Thats in no way a slight at the SNP – they had their message out there and stuck to it; they showed consistency in their message. As the electorate focused their collective minds during the campaign they knew what they were getting with the SNP and were unsure what Labour were offering.
The Labour campaign just never worked and the information above shows some of the reasons why. The presentation of our campaign was poor and people felt we were all over the place on policy and strategy; if they can’t have faith in us to campaign for what we believe in how can they believe we can deliver on their behalf?
#14 by Observer on December 4, 2011 - 7:16 pm
I think it’s quite clear that the SNP ran a professional operation, I believe they have had contact with various other political campaigns such as Obama’s in the US. It certainly got them results – but are the people who voted SNP actually SNP voters, if you get what I mean? The professional operation may have delivered the result on the night, but can they count on these voters for the referendum? My gut instinct, based on a completely unscientific poll of people I know, is that they can’t. Many people have taken the decision to vote SNP because they seem to be the best at governing, & also people like to be on the winning side. The SNP are seen as winners & Labour are seen as losers. But that doesn’t mean that they will vote for independence.
#15 by Observer on December 4, 2011 - 7:21 pm
Theoretically I agree with Barbarian, that I would prefer personal contact. Realistically when I get home from work the door is closed & I don’t open it unless it is someone I am expecting.
What I would like to see is more public meetings, where you could get the opportunity to question the candidates. That would be my preferred option.
#16 by Daniel J on December 4, 2011 - 8:28 pm
‘My’ candidates from the election tried to go to all the hustings, at least up here in the NE. The consensus seemed to be that quite a few had very few undecided voters, with the many of them almost entirely made up of candidates agents/activists/family members.
While I agree they’re a good way of seeing the politicians most people on’t seem to take advantage of the opportunity.
#17 by Iain Menzies on December 4, 2011 - 11:49 pm
I went to two hustings in Dundee (only one of which was in my own constit…) and at the first (not my constit) the largest group (by political affiliation) was the bunch of tories i was with….in Dundee East. It was a totally pointless affair. Other than the SNP candidate telling me that Joe Fitzpatrick saw the bunch of us (tory students) on the Perth Road and thought we were labour students…..
At the one in my own constit no one that i knew that wasnt involved in a party (and several who were) didnt know that there were any hustings in dundee west.
#18 by Indy on December 5, 2011 - 8:18 am
It’s a seasonal thing as well. In the summer months you can go out canvassing in early evenings and people will open the door and talk to you up until about 8 o’clock. But when the dark evenings come in, forget it. I think a lot of people just come home, shut the door, and that’s them for the night. All they are going to do is have their tea, get into their pjs and watch a bit of telly. There’s no way they are going to open the door to you. So then you have to try getting people in on Saturday and Sunday during the day but that’s when lots of folk are out.
#19 by douglas clark on December 4, 2011 - 11:31 pm
It seems to me that there is a general disengagement with politics. My mum and dad would have invited any candidate into their house, but that was back in the 1950’s, early ’60’s. And they would have listened, me sat in a corner, to what they had to say.
I think it is true that throughout my adult life, I have never been canvassed by any political party.
Seriously.
And I am due my pension in a couple of years.
It is very, very difficult to disengage from the media these days. Mainly the TV. Much as I wish it were otherwise….
#20 by douglas clark on December 4, 2011 - 11:41 pm
Sorry, just to add, I have high hopes for new media. I think it is a completely different way of communicating and may have more of a ratchet effect than is is usually allowed.
Think samizdat. Or altenatively a number of people that are, at the least very well informed, one way or another…..
For instance, I had no idea what the Barnett Formula was a couple of years ago. I certainly didn’t get informed through main stream media. It was sites such as this that educated me.
#21 by Barbarian on December 5, 2011 - 12:32 am
I got more information from sites such as these as well. The SNP have learned better than the other parties how to utilise the Internet properly.
The danger to political parties from the Internet is the lack of control. We’ve seen instances on a couple of occasions where someone with links to a political party has been engaging keyboard before brain.And the problem is that such issues can go viral very, very quickly and are almost impossible to eradicate.
Twitter is the same, as we witnessed with Ryan Giggs.
But it makes life a bit more interesting I suppose…….
#22 by Erchie on December 5, 2011 - 12:05 pm
It’s odd this concentration only on the May 2011 election
People said at the time tat the SNP had saved their money, not spent too much on the 2010 Westminster election, and that is borne out.
If you combine the spend from both elections, Labour outspent the SNP by about £300k
So Labour sees Westminster as a much higher priority than Holyrood.
#23 by Daniel J on December 5, 2011 - 12:48 pm
Pretty sure Labour spent about the same at both Holyrood and Westminster, equal priority! The SNP spent much less on Westminster elections.
#24 by Aidan on December 5, 2011 - 1:15 pm
I think it’s more that the SNP don’t care about Westminster elections and are solely focused on Holyrood – which is fair enough given the disadvantage they’re at due to FPTP and the eyes-on-the-prize nature of Holyrood for them.
#25 by Doug Daniel on December 5, 2011 - 12:19 pm
“They seem to have employed a number of people through recruitment agencies on low wages (you don’t get much as a temp from the agency when the client’s paying £10/hour)”
Fair bit of assumption going on here, like. I worked through an agency for a few months when I returned to Aberdeen. I was getting paid £9 per hour, and I believe my employers were paying the agency £10 per hour.
Not sure what your point is anyway – political parties should pay people high wages to phone around a bit?
#26 by Aidan on December 5, 2011 - 1:13 pm
No, the points really about the massive amount of resources that the SNP were putting into that side of things compared to the nothing that Labour was putting in there.