Small Flyer: Outside, Inside.
(warning: large images!)
As I mentioned before, we've had two flyers from Andrew Lansley, the Large one was addressed to myself, and the Small one to </a></b></a>atreic, </a></b></a>claroscuro, and </a></b></a>emperor. I'm not entirely sure if this is "directed campaigning" or something else; particularly since I can't figure out the direction if it is....
Anyway, on to the content. Andrew Lansley presents me a slight problem personally, since I find myself agreeing with quite a lot of things he says, even though I disagree with many things his party says. Suffice it to say that even though I will be voting against him on Thursday I won't be entirely unhappy when he gets elected. The large flyer has a number of parts. On the outside we find a selection of personal endorsements that remind one of the cover of a science fiction book – one almost expects to see someone comparing Lansley to
Gladstone at his best. On the rear (as it is folded up) appears a copy of an article that appeared in the Independent about the Gulf Wars, which is a good use of the space in my mind – it sets out his position on that issue better than a paragraph of text might do in the same space. And then, on the bottom one finds a Conservative posterlet to stick in ones window, which is a really good idea and one that I think the other parties should consider (rather than going through the faffy talking to the local party process that one would otherwise have).
On the inside we see some application of the Conservative policies to the local area. Some attention is paid to the fact that Lansley was the Shadow Secretary of State for Health (a good thing – I didn't even know he was until I was researching him in the run-up to this election!). The general theme is "more money to Cambridgeshire facilities", but no mention is made of where that money is coming from - not that I suspect that many voters would believe in money magically appearing from nowhere to pay for these things. The pensions section in the bottom corner seems a little like a band-aid solution to me, and the last line can be read as one of those "I've not done this thing that I think that you wouldn't like, so see I'm I nice person really" things, even though it might not really be so.
The small one on the other hand, goes for a much wider (and shallower) treatment of issues, mentioning on the outside that Lansley has been "a key figure in shaping legislation on issues as diverse…" (without saying what form this shaping has taken, or what effect he's actually had of course). The outside seems to be playing to the "squee! kids!" camp (and people who believe in
family values). The inside suffers from the "but where will the funding come from?" problem even worse than the big flyer did. I also wonder where the putative inhabitants of the 29,000 houses that he's proposing not building are expected to go? Admittedly the North has a housing excess, but that's because the North has an Employment Shortage – and that isn't a problem you can solve by protecting the
Cambridge Green Belt. Also, one feels that 29,000 is a drop in the lake of the current Cambridgeshire development schemes, but is large enough to make people think that he's promising decisive action.
Similarly, while he highlights the Conservatives' plans to scrap Tuition Fees, he doesn't mention their plans to reform the Student Loan. I'd like to see actual figures (from both sides!) on the Local Income Tax issue, since I suspect that that one hangs in a question of what you define as
the typical working family. On the other hand I don't think anyone seriously thinks that the LDs are going to form a government this year, so it's a little bit of a pointless shot.
All in all, both flyers are well produced and cogent, but I'd still like an explanation of the apparent directed campaigning.
I've got some other flyers to scan now, so hopefully I'll be able to present some more tomorrow.