I received figures this morning documenting all candidates expenses and returns for the recent local elections. These were made available to all elected members and as a candidate I also requested and received a copy.
Interesting to dissect the different trends. In deference to the different individuals, I do not intend to treat of any specifics but I may well look at which patterns emerge. A quick perusal does not appear to identify many correlations however. Some of the highest spending candidates bombed out of their races at early stages whilst some of the lowest spending candidates got elected. Which is encouraging in a sense for democracy. Although what does seem to have made a difference is incumbency. Generally speaking, those low spending sucessful candidates were outgoing members, or in some cases “inheriting” a seat.
Also in relation to donations, there is not an obvious pattern. Some left / independent candidates received at least as many donations as ‘mainstream’ party political candidates. There may almost be an element of overcompensation, people may be more inclined to support an independent financially thinking “they need it to compete with the big boys”. Whilst in some cases those “big boys” have in fact the same or less resources. There are also many differences across different candidates within the same parties which is interesting too.
The only finding that can really be drawn from this cursory initial inspection is to highlight the extent of the individual in local politics. Whips and party politics tend to apply less within the operation of local government and it would appear for campaigning purposes too.
Few questions:
1. Will candidates campaign accounts be made available to the public?
2. What period do the campaign expense returns relate to?
3. Is there a proceedure for further querying the returns provided by the candidates, and if so, who can make these queries.
4. Is there a statutory body that audits the candidates’ returns?
5. What constitutes a breach of campaign accounting and what are the penalties?
Hi James,
It is a good thing that in principle one can be elected to county council level at least without great expenditure. Your own experience might back me up in saying that at local level so many things outside your control render the local elections a handicap hurdle on a tight track where the going is key.
A few observations- We got approx half the funds to run the campaign by central (CDC ) allocation and the candidates coughed up the rest themselves. I think our party needs to do more for young and /or new candidates .
We spent a signif few thousand on newspaper ads even though we endeavoured to use shoe leather and canvas cards instead of press spend.
I would be interested in reading views on the effectiveness of thos ads?
I do know that any column inches we got by design or otherwise were very valuable.
in assessing spending dont forget that established campaigners spend money on their re-election outside of the spend declaration date, e.g. website, local newsletter drops, local sponsorships, – all those constituent PR costs count towards re-election without being part of the campaign declared spend.
The drumcondra machine which I am reading about in the ” mafia” book at the moment showed how it should be done- I note some of our hopeful opposition challengers in Kildare South for a Dail seat are election campaigning now with cost effective use of press and PR- which is election campaign spend that they wont need to declare.
But that ‘s not a criticism- it is as it should be as otherwise candidates are open to the cliched charge ” we only ever see you at election time”.
Posters are of course the most visible form of election spending. From the perspective of the constituent, they indicate the candidates (or at least the serious candidates). Also if the party is canny enough, or foolhardy enough, they can assist in vote management, by informing committed party supporters whom to vote for in a particular area.
But I suggest that the law of diminishing returns is particularly applicable to the deployment of election posters. One is surely not more likely to vote for a candidate just because his or her poster is on every other lamppost for several kilometres along some main road. And in general they don’t impress: I can well recall occasions travelling round Dublin by car at election time, when the other occupants of the car have been making caustic remarks on many of the election posters, which in their opinion do no favours to the candidates pictured on them. Maybe, on rare occasions, some image on a campaign poster does catch the public imagination, or at least attracts the attention of the odd constituent.
Maybe candidates should aim to sure that there are sufficient posters around the constituency to ensure that potential voters will be aware that they are in the race, without clambering up to put a poster on every single lamppost? But a well-chosen poster or advert, in a strategic location, may catch more favourable attention.
Then there is the question of attracting the uncommitted voter, and hopefully attracting transfers from those who support other parties.
I do not align myself with any particular political party, and have absolutely no electioneering experience. But I have been trying to think through how things might work with regard to attracting support from such quarters.
Maybe in some cases some incident, or some social or personal connection, or some other non-political factor may result in the potential voter taking an interest in the candidate. Maybe in some cases that interest might be generated by an attractive portrait of a good-looking candidate. Maybe the candidate came across well in some debate or hustings, perhaps making some point that struck home. Sometimes, I suggest, the candidate may have been on the receiving end of some at least superficially bad publicity, which may well rebound on the perpetrators if sufficiently many constituents take the attitude that the candidate has been the victim of a dirty tricks campaign, and take a more personal interest in the candidate as a result.
So then we are in the situation where the voter has taken an interest in the candidate, and may, consciously or subconsciously, ‘want’ to vote for the candidate, or at least might consider giving that candidate a higher preference on the ballot. However the voter may well feel at this stage that this instinct to favour the candidate might not be rationally based. But he or she might perhaps be motivated to try to research the candidate, in order to decide whether, in view of the candidate’s background, CV, expressed political views, reputation, etc., the candidate deserves a vote.
This is where an online presence could be a distinct advantage. But I suggest that candidates need to have an active and sincere interest in expressing themselves online, if they are to benefit from an online presence. Of course, political blogs, Facebook pages and the like spring up like mushrooms whenever an election is in the offing. Many seem to fill up with rather impersonal stuff: manifestos and other campaign promises. And then, for some mysterious reason, those blogs and webpages seem to die completely once the election is over. Or else they are merely used as a cheap medium for pushing out press releases on local issues, and similar shovelware. I suggest that this rather limited kind of online presence may not be all that effective.
An effective online presence surely needs to express the personality of the candidate so as to engage the sympathy and attention of those who don’t have the opportunity to meet with the candidate in his or her (offline) social circle. Those who do not share the candidate’s political allegiance may want to assess (at least subconsciously) where the candidate stands on various issues, and determine whether they can really trust the candidate to ‘do the right thing’ in matters that are important to them. Above all, they need a sense that the candidate is not merely a cog in a political machine, but is a human being with whom they can empathise, and who deserves their respect, although they not share all the candidate’s personal beliefs and political attitudes, and indeed they may actively disagree with the candidate on some issues. And they may well be influenced by observing how effective the candidate is at responding to other people. Are courtesy and politeness always the rule? Does the candidate try to find points of agreement, and attempt to engage constructively with others of different views? Or is the candidate locked in his or her political world, unable to reach out to find common ground with others who do not belong there?
Well, the above might have relevance at least with regard to some potential voters. You probably have a better idea than I do how many.
(Aside: that Bodenstown oration. Text written down? Suitable for posting? Also any reflections on the occasion itself, and how it feels to be present and involved?)
@ Conor
>1. Will candidates campaign accounts be made available to the public?
They are available in council buildings on request. Personally I would like to see them available online as many of us would have difficulty attending council offices during working hours.
>2. What period do the campaign expense returns relate to?
They relate to 90 days before the election. Sitting Councillors also have to complete a donations document for each year. I have not seen copies of those. These documents may have further information as to the source of the different donations.
>3. Is there a proceedure for further querying the returns >provided by the candidates, and if so, who can make these >queries.
I’m not sure but I certainly think there should be. There was also a wide variation in the quality of the returns. Some were very thorough and detailed, some were very sketchy. Some were not even internally consistent, e.g. subtotals and totals were not even summed correctly. I think there should be some kind of audit of these at least with issues highlighted.
>4. Is there a statutory body that audits the candidates’ returns?
Just the county council from what I can see.
>5. What constitutes a breach of campaign accounting and what >are the penalties?
A significant breach would be deliberate non disclosure. I believe the penalties can run to a jail sentence.
Re: answer to question 3, I think there should be a consistent format adopted.
Some councillors are only providing headline expense figures, while others are giving detailed breakdowns.
I think an nation-wide body should be responsible for reporting for ALL elected respresentatives and election candidates.
This body would function in a similar way to the Companies Registration Office. It would require the elected and non-elected to submit annual returns and accounts detailing all expenses and all sources of funds – whether direct donations, reimbursement from council or government, or private.
This would settle the transparency issue once and for all.
Pingback: Council election spending - Page 2 - Politics.ie