Taxation and Representation: Media, Political Communication and the Poll Tax (Acamedia Research Monograph)

For Jo andJack, with love: DD ForJen:PG

Taxation and Representation: The Media , Political Comm口nication and the Poll Tax David Dcacon and Pctcr Golding Department of Social Sclences, Lo U9拙。rOU9h Universi句

Da'li唯d Deacon is Lec個rerin Commu剖開位on and Media S個dies Peter Golding is Profesωr ofSo ciology and Head ofDepartment, Depar恤ent ofSocial Scienα為Loughborough University

British Library Ca個log1iing in Publica位oilDa個 Deacon, David Taxation and Representation: The Media , Poli位cal Comtnunication and the Poll Tax Acamedia Research MoIiograph: 11 I.Ti位e II. Gölding, Peter Series 336.25

Contents

m.

的BN:

0 86196 390 3 ISSN: 0956-9057

Acknowledgements Preface Chapter1

Published by John Libbey & Company Ltd, 13 Smi也sy，位d， SUínmerley Street, LondonSW18 4I罰， England. Telephonè: +44 (0)81-9472777: Fax +44 (0)81-9472664 John Libbey Eurotext Ltd, 127 rue de la Républiql趟， 92120 Montro1ige，扭曲ce. John Libbey - C.I.C. s.r.I. , via Lazzaro Spallanzani 11 , 00161 Rome, 1個ly

Citi扭由包p， éommunication and Politiês 一 The Tarnished Ideal

vi Vll

1

Chapter2

A Brief History ofthe Poll Tax

21

Chapter3

Selling Accountability: Government Promotion ofthe Community Charge

45

Chapter4

Promoting Dissent: Anti Poll T，也 Campaigr血g

71

Chapter 5

Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Ch訂ge

111

Chapter6

Journalis俗 and the Poll Tax

149

Chapter7

The Politics ofPolitical Communication: The Determinants and Impact ofPoll Tax News

181

Chapter8

Rethin旭ng Political Communication

199

Appendix1

Methods

205

Appendix2

Referenêes

207

Appendix3

Index

213

。 1994 John Libbey and Company Ltd. All rights reserved. Unauthorised duplica位on contravenes applicable laws.

Printed in Great Bri偵旭 byWhits組ble LithoL瓜， Whitstable, Kent, UK iv

v

Acknowledgements

The empirical rese缸ch that forms the basis of tbis book was funded by two grants from the Economic and Social Research Council (reference numbers: R000231512 and R000233523). We are gratefulωthe Council for their support and interest 旭 therese位曲， and to the anonymous referees who cons個lctively cOlÌlIDented on the grant submissions 阻.d end ofprojectreports. We would also like to thank Jo Aldridge, Natalie Fenton, Alan Brym阻， Karl Ashworth, Andrew Shaw, Julie Johnson and other colIeagues at 也e Depar個ent of Social Scien白s ， Loughborough University for their advi間，倒也個nce and support. Our thanks 曲o to Jo Wakefield for her careful transc旬tion ofthe interview草， Pe記r Beaman for his technical suppo此， Bob Fran蛤in for his steady supply of polI恤 clipp旭函， and Wendy Monk for her me位culous proofreading. 。田 fur也er

thanks to all 也ejournali喲， news editors, poli位.cians， presSnre group trade unionists, business men and women and press and publicity officers, who agreed to be interviewed for the research. Without their co-operation and candour many important elements of 也is story would have remained hidden fromview. Finally, our th叩ks to 0田 families， whose forebearance and 悶pport during the completion of tbis manuscript made the crea位.vestraine個ier 切 be且 representa卸的，

Preface

'Lo okl Quickl Wasn'tt加tapo位cy Just now? Too late. It's gone. We threw the proposer out'. Aris切pheries， The Assembly ofWomèn

D ……刑 1990 也eteform of 叫 loc叫

(0

tl') (/'

govemmentfmànce wàs one Qfthe mostnewsworthy 的picson the intetnational news agenda) Newspapers as geographicàlly diverse as Zim.babwe's Harráre Hera1d, The SöVÏet Union's Pravda and Izvest駒， France's Le Monde , Italy's La Rep的licca， Thailand's Bangkok Post and the USA's Washington Post ran lead stories on 也e issue, and in Australia Th e Melboume Age edi切rialized 世 ataxco叫d be designed to sow social dissent and e缸n unpopul缸ity for a govemment，也is is it' (3/4/90: 13). Evenmediafarremovedfrom 也e intêmâtional news agency rounds felt compelled to report the political debate it provoked. For example , down in the Falkland Islands , The PenguinNews ruminated on the political rammcations of 'a good scheme' that had been 'poòr甘 im­ plemented' (7/5/90: 12)

When the British Conservative Govemment aiJ.nounced in 1986 itS intention to replace the existing method of local domestic taxation with a new 'Community Ch缸醉， it couldn't have anticipated the controversy it w自 unleashing. Yet within fo肘 ye訂s， 'The Poll Tax' 一 as it became more publicly and pejora位vely known - had split the ruling p訂你仕om top to bottom , precipitated serious breakdowns in public order, conipro血isedthe electoral viab血ty and intemational cred晶晶ty of the Government, incited a cacophony of derision from a normally quiescent media, and brought down a Prime Ministβr who merely mönths before had been considering 扭曲直到tely postpon姐gherre位rement. Úl political tern'is alone，也e 晶晶-， 亢的nofthe Comm叫你 Charge ranks as(one ofthe most abject (ailures 姐 i British domestic history. 、_) This book charts the development of 血1s political crisis , and in p缸tic叫叮 vi

就i

T缸ation and Representation: The Media, Political Cômmu剖開tionand 也.ePolI T，坦

(心仙 ho棚w 血卸e 切協岫 … suu

Chapter 1

/

extends beyond the conten位ous issues raised by the new tax, for its imρplementation and subsequent abandonment has provideq句 invaluable

j 啊。的凶妙的呻lore bro咖p加ciples inv伽他 thec()mm叫ca位on

Citizenship, Communication, and Politics - The Tarnished Ide aI

\. and formation of public policy'; As a major fiscal rèform with impor個nt cons位tutional and political implications , the Co血munity Charge was introduced against a background of considerable opposi位.on. The Government energetically promoted the change; anq"citizens were principally dependent on the media for information aboutl~t. How did such promotion occ恥 and with what effects? What form did public discussions take and with what effect on policy forma位on? And how far did the media çater for a full public discussion of such a 血a 吋jo 肘 r legislative 恤 innovat位io9'?攻，? In 加 itωs

i|!jJb 卸叫 r叮're general ∞ mo c ont缸肘 ri跆 bu泌咐 t位ion to 0 盯 understanding 叫 0 ft晶 hesi站 g趾E 趾 c祖c 閃 eoft也 he

l…伽心旭恤血…i站蜘伽叫位伽岫削叫 C阻a叫 叫仙lc恥… agendasa 缸 repol扭it位ica 吋II蛤 y

Democracy in troubled times: on being an informed citizen

generated.

For logistical , rather than ethnocen仕ic reasons , our discussion focu.ses on the reporting ofthe Co mmunity Ch缸gein Engl祖d and Wales , rather than in Scotland - which experienced both a diffetent implementative timetable 個d intensity of media and public debate. The first chapter contextualizes /' our research within the broader debates currently active wi也M 也e fields of media sociology , social policy and political science , and outlines several conceptual models 曲的 informo盯 analysis. The second chapter provides r' a contextual overview of the history of the poll tax, and the main poli位cal issues its introduc位on raised. The third looks at the strategies employed by 也e British Governme前，趾st to promote itsEagship policy, and then to J ameliorate the political crisis it created. The fourth chapter provides a , comparative analysis ofhow opponents ofthe tax mobilized publicly. The 扭曲， provides a detailed comp缸ative analysis of national and local media coverage of the t缸， and explores how 也e terms of reference of media debate shifted as the policy cycle proceeded. The sixth chapter examines the news gathering of jo凹nalists and editors in reporting the t缸， andthe political and strategic fac切扭曲的 shaped their percep位ons. The seventh, / draws together material from preceding discussions to explain the specific fac切rs that in f1 uenced the building ofmedia agendas on the poll tax. It also explores the inf1uence of media discourses over public perceptions of the tax. The conduding chapter considers what broader inferences can be drawn from this case study of political communication. J

討ii

T 峙的ook ………… which able to take of their people 盯e

p訂t 怯 the poli位callife

society. When we 組lk of citizenship we soon a控ive at notions such 的 p叮ticipation and involvement, but above all we w血

隘的岫圳umbleacro啦 phantomof伽叫or蚓 ~itizen'~

./

Clichés about the 'information society' and the deluge of infôrmation to whichwe 缸e all subject, have become so commonplace that we sometimes lose sight of so血e simple tru也s. Democracies, even large scale cómplex democracies such as ours , in which power is exercised by the few and the remote , assu血e they 缸'e inhabitβd by informed citizens. Without some knowledge ofwhat the polity is up 妞， people cannot even begin to exercise any reasoned impact on the 可stem which govems their lives. We therefore foster an ideal ，旭 which people receive a wide range of political informa位.on， which they sift, consume and deploy in rational decision making. The outcome may be a vote, a motion at a pressure group committee meet旭g， a street riot, or a yawn of disinterest and contempt. But the informed ci位zen exercises choice on the basis of information received. The tβmpting metaphor is that of the supermarket，祖 which the votβr saunters among the shelves of ideas and policy op位。由， making shrewd calcula位ons about cost benefit balances and the comparative virtues ofthe ideological packages on offer. Trolley filled , the citizen strolls to the electoralcheck-。前， votβin hand. The problem, ifwe extend the metaphor just

1

,

T阻a位onàndRep悶enta鈍。n: The Media PO隘的問1 臼mmunication and the Poll Tax

a little furth肘， is that not everyone can get to the same store. Some can afford bigger and better-filled trolleys. The shelves 缸e f;叮 from full , and many goods somehow never make it to the front ()fthe display stands. Some 個rn out to ~ be very different (rom the glittering i扭曲 prömised on the νpackaging{ The citizen“shoppe~ is exercising choice wi也祖 ve可 d挖出ct and effectivè limits. This book is an at能mpt to chart those limits , to find out why the goods are packaged the way they 缸e， and what gets them on to the shelves. For the ideal of 也e informed ci位zen is precisely that, an ideal. An alysts have always been aw盯e， ofcour鈍， ofthe potential ofthe modern mass media to interrupt and dis的rt the flow of information from the political 叮ena to voters. It is a long 位me since we lived 祖 anyth旭g approaching the Athenian polis. But in recent years we have been increasingly alive to the limits of our ideal. There 缸'e at least two reasons for this. ,/First, we have been witnessing dramatic changes i科組組但.anJ:Ù2盟住心

I ofthe media through which poli位calinforma位onpÌim訂ilyreachβs;i.s. In

recent decades the ownership ofmajor national newspapers has continuβd ωfall in切 the hands of a small number of large corpora位ons ， frequently controlled by tycoons with uncompromising and naked political objectives alongside 也eir commercial 的pira位ons (Golding and Murdock, 1991). Several 仕ends have evolvedfrom the increasingly conglomerate character of the media. The political profile of the national press has become steadily less balanced , with a preponderance ofConservative supporting, or at least Labour oppos恆g titles that even the last Royal Commission on the Press recognized as creating a 'gap in political terms which could be filled with advantage' (cited in ibid.). The increasingly commercial and competi位ve character of 也e press has alSO fostered what some commentators iden位穹 的 'de-politicization' ， of the popular 削es especially (Curran and Seat凹， 1981: 123). Politics recedes before a rising tide ofhuman interest, showbiz related stories which transform the press 恤to an appendage of the entertainment industry in both economic andc叫turalform. Broadc部位ng， too , reflects this 仕end; 'Television in Europe thus becomes increasingly an entertainment medium' 但e Bens , Kelly and Bakke, 1992: 95). Television, as the major and increasingly prominent altemative to the newspaper as a medium for political communica位on， has also entered an age in which the 扭曲 ideals of public service broadcas位時缸e being confronted and displaced by the pressing imperatives of market driven new technologies of dis出bution (Gold坦g， forthcoming). 2

,

, ànd Politics - The Tarnished Ideal

Chap記r 1: Citizenship Communication

可/

Secondly, our ideal informed citizep. is further disadvantaged by the \growth of the ‘public relations state' ,)a. phenomenon 切 which we return shortly. Information designed to persuade is never the same 由 information passively offered as a service, and while this may naively understate the inevitably ideologïcal ch叮ac切r of anything we can sensibly c叫l'旭forma“ 位on' , it does reflect，部 we note below, a sea change in the opera位onofthe modern state.

v

For many writers within political science the anxieties and critiques im“ plicit in 也ese observations 訂e unfounded. Information flows have 恤， creased, electorates have become more sophisticated, and democracy is the rich紅的 a res叫t. Notions of 'cognitive mob也za位，on' suggest that rising levels of education have createdbetter equi即ed p石五日ations﹒ Together with the gröwth in media provision 也Ìs nourishes thβdemocra位，cprocess (Inglehart, 1977). Th間， as Dal的n argues,‘At the same time 也at the co俱Ìtive skills of Westem mass publics have improved, so too have the public'sresources ...的day there is a ne盯lyunli凶能d supply and v前ietyof political news ..., we caÍl [now] be more sanguine about fhe nature ofbelief systems 恤 co臨時叮叮 publics.' (Dalt凹， 1988: 凹， 32).

As will becomβclear throughout this book our views are far less confident. /宜'he changing nature ofthβcommunication system is count位balancedby

\._ changes 祖 the 帥部ta伽ns of citizenship~ 0盯 case s旭旬， ofthe m咖 change in local taxation introduced in Britain in 也，e 1980s, was centrally conceived by its 盯chitects旦旦an 祖itia位，ve to change the bas泌 of citizenship. At local level 也is was designed to be for 也e be此er， an 缸gument we examine in the following chapters. The poll tax arrived in the wake of considerable efforts by the ideologues of the newright to seize the moral ---., high 且至!.. and citizenship proved an attractive ba函正高高屁立泣區 dβ ，i:tte about the 怯x wound on，也is theme became an insis切nt 血0位f within the poli位cal dialogue of thβlate 1980s. 她s. Thatch肘's speech to the GeneralAssembly ofthe Church ofScotlandinMay 1988 ，恤sis臼dthat 句 'most Chris位ans would reg配d it as their personal Christian duty to help their fellow men and womβn' ， from which premise shemovedrapidlyto the 今 conclusion fhat 'intervention by thβstate must never become so great that it effectively removes personal responsibility' (see Rab間， 1989). This w的 parallelβd by influential articles by thethen Home Secretary, Douglas Hurd , in which he argued that 'the idea of active ci位zenship is a necess缸y complement to that ofthe enterpris晦 culture. Public service may once have been the duty of an 組妞， but today it is 也e responsibility of all who have

/

3

T臨ation and Represen個.tion: The Media, Poli位cal Communica位on and the Poll T臨

位me

or money to sp缸4 個肘d， 1989). The ac位.ve ci討zen was someone nurtured by the fruits of free enterprise , and happy to reinvest 也eir well deserved acquisitions 姐to reSponsible patronage of 也e less fortunate. lt W自 not al的gether surp也ing that 也e debate about the poll tax came to / adopt this language. 的Miller notes ，區血e battle over the t路 'for p缸" liamentary and public opinion the 訂guments have had to be pù.tin terms of values which 訂e more broadly sh叮'ed. These have centred largely on explicit and implicit 血odels of citizenship'. (M血er， 1989: 96). \ The citizen found herseijl constituted 祖 three very differem and confused ( '~~~e~: 如此， mdmostMdiaonally，部 informed and responsive p缸旭erto 也e state 旭 theman茍ementofthe 而梅克耐高高站在孟晶石EIZJs than encoura到時， with signs of continuous loss offai也 in the body politic, 也e fragmentation of a civic culture , and pluralist stagnation (see Topf, 少_ 1989). Second, the ci位zen was being urged to become the new....扭扭扭扭J thropic active citizen conjured up by the enthusiastic visionaries ofvolunk 、 teer welfare capitalism. The citizen 豆豆豆豆豆豆豆路 received her most 仁 authorita位ve acclamation from the Commission on the subject established by the Speaker of the House of Commons in 1988. In these terms ci也阻" ship became a target for schools in encouraging appropriate curricula , and thesumm訂y description of community voluntary work (Commission on k ci恥的峙， 1990)t Finally, we had the citizen ~s consumer,_exerting civic 令~一一一一一----power through the mechanics of the market , bullish1y clamouring for satisfaction in the glass and steel shop fronts of the town hall cus切mer service centre, citizens' 也缸terinhand. Amidst such confusion 也e 血.edia have a strategic role, enshrining and 已/ç_ promo伽g one or another面証el， labelling and evaluati時 theme恥 and 7話詢服冊商ëñ:-c而êiãf屆高豆豆 a 叫eisthepa句layed by the state as a dominant so盯ce of information and imagery which becomes the raw material for media work. And in 也at role we cannot ignore the massive expansion of the public relations state.

The rise of the public relations state All governments like to be well thought of. They pro血ote their own policies and denigrate those of oppos坦gp缸位.es as p缸t of the routine business of politicallife. Even Napoleon invested 位meandmoney 祖 m暐旭gsurethe Moniteur purveyed the right line. But in recent decades the scale and ferocity ofthis aspect ofpublic life have escalated substantially. Writing of 4

Chapter 1: CitizensWp, Communica位.on， and Poli位的明 TheT缸nished Ideal the United States , Oscar Gandy has drawn attention to the rise of the information professionals within government. ‘At every level of goverIime此， in every agency , thete 缸e information specialists whose responsib泌ty it is to ensure 也at 也enation's publicmediacarry 也e desiredmessage forward to the general public, other government 0血cials， and key corporate leaders who have a role to play in the formulation and implementation ofpublic policy' (G祖旬， 1982: 74). Gandy goes on to

缸gue

that this system works through what he terms

(‘凶orma伽叫咄es'~Th帥缸訟吋祉泌的 orm體型戶臨的帥， but

♂Tλ 正與 v'

闊的盯es 切 reducetheCost 切坦起草泣忘訴函區忌。f obtaining information they need to construct news. By making life easy for the news seekers , information managers can influence and even determine the flo W' and character of coverage about their ac位.vities in the news media. That is , obviously, the basis on which all public rela位ons and publicity work rests. In the post-w位 period in Britain it was for long assumed 曲的 politics was mo社ng

to a steady state of ideological convergence, in'which agreement about the nature ofthe goodsocietywas disturbed only by minor squabbles over its administration. This 'consens肘， or ‘ButskeUite' happy statβcame to a rude end, if it ever really existβd， wi也 the return of' conviction politics' and the launch ofthe Thatcherite project in the late 1970s. Once more government was 扭曲e business of winning he叮tsandm扭曲. The state is at the heart of the news machine. Studies of news have pereIinially plotted the dominance of items about the machinery of goverIiment and the routine drama of Wes個lnster life wi也旭 thebroad 缸rayofnews coverage. Though this has , as we noted above , declined 自 a proportion of the whole , and indeed its reduction has recently occasioned some distress among politicians (Straw, 1993) , the predominant flavour in the daily diet of the news media continues to be the whiff of political grapeshot and the odour ofWestminster's hot air. 'News prioritizes the state and its agents , treating even minor state activi位的 as inherently newsworthy, viewing agents of the sta切 as ‘reliable' sources and as interesting speakers , and portraying the visible aspects ofrelations among states' (Knight and Curt詣， 1987: 的). Of course this portrayal has its own elisions and evasions (Golding, 1981). But 也is combination of ideolo斟cal divergence and the prom垣ence of the state as an object of media attention has created the conditions for a substantial increase in public relations ac位vity by the state. 5

,

T臨ation and Represen個tion: The Media PO加叫“mmunication and the Poll T;盟

Chapter 1: Citizenship, Communication, andPolitiω 叫祖eT，缸nisb吋 Id叫

Many observers have noted the importation of the machinery and prac偏 低ces of the advertising industry into poli位cs. A new branch of this craft appears , in whatNim血o and Combs describe 扭扭‘indus仕y of experience brokers' , of'propartists' consisting of'professionalhypesters with a v前iety of specialities and s泌ls' (Nimmo and Combs , 1990: 67). That poli位cs is nowg盯landed by an app盯atus of spin doctors , 10bbyists, consultants, communication analysts , press officers, and their kin is only too familiar. The political 叮ena is a supreme1y image-conscious one. After all , as the architect of the Sun's dramatic rise rather innocent1y puts 仗， 'it is poli說， cians , rather than newspapermen, who tend to exaggerate the power ofthe press'ιamb ， 1989: 161).

a位ract subs個ntial reso叮ces. In J an.u盯y 1994 the Secretary of State for Education announced that he was 個 spend over f.2million sending a 1eaflet intoev，位yhomein 也e country giving the Governme肘， s views and advice onmorali紗， citizenship, discipline and family values. Between 1989/90 and1991/92Depar恤entofHeal血 spendi呵。n public re1ations rose from f.0.8抽血ion to f.1.49m血ion (Hansard , WA Col. 244 , 8 June 1993). A Corporate Afl'airs Intelligence Unit was estab1ishβd to seek out, and compile form恆isterial promotion , stories illustrating the success of the Government' s health service reforms. S旭過缸1y， in housin菇， f.4.5m到抽nw部 spent on public re1ations to promote the 'right to buy' policy betwëen 19"80 and 1993.

Government has become a major e月10yer of press and public re1ation.s 心j翩翩， andof 帥的隘的In 1992 HM Government spent 的 3 別扭on on advertising. Betwee叫 986 and 1991 theinc自由e 祖 its expenditure 姐 」叫做msw帥的out~er cent, and the total expenditure of 也is kind \!.I rough1y doub1ed during 也e decade. The Government's advertising budget dw缸fs that of such mega corporations as Ford, General Motors，個dPr∞" 如r and Gamb1e. Moreover the Government's figures no 10nger include privatized corporations such as British Te1ecom ( “ 6 million in 1992) or the utilities. Indeed, spending on the promotion ofprivatization initiatives formed a sig祉ficant p缸t of this publici可 efl'ort. The sell“ ofl' of the water indus佐y was supported by campaigns costing f.42 臨別io且， more 也an twice that spent on the earlier gas privatization. In May 1990 也e then Government Energy Secretary, John Wakeham , w部 appointed to c心ordi­ nate government publicity and information, and new proposa1s to give senior ministers PR 'minders' were revea1ed (Independent on Sunday , 17 June 1990). Growing politica1 protests about these deve10pments 1ed to the appointment of a public enquiry by the Nationa1 Audit Office, which showed 也e very major programmes of expenditure undertaken 旬， for examp1e the Dep盯tment of Trade and Industry on its 'Enterprise Initiative'. Perhaps the two key administrative measures , above all others, whichcame 如 symbolize the force of 也is shift 旭 government promo位on were the incorporation ofthe government statistica1 service into the super“ visory embrace of the Treasury, and the assump泣。n in 1989 by 愉S Thatcher浴缸enchant ChiefPress Secretary, Bernard Ingha血， ofthero1e of head of the Government Information Service simultaneous1y wi也 his otherduties (Ingham, 1991: 367一的; Roya1 Statis位ca1 Society, 1990).

It is in this context that we should understand the promotion of the Com-

f'í

r

The promotion of good news and radica1 policy initiatives has continued to 6

mu國ty

Charge de心cribed in t垃ss個dy. Whilethe 吧空空空空豆豆些d promo- /2.~ ~.:♂ tiona1 efl'ort inv哩哇旦出“空缸gewer色空穿白磁蛇頭f 也控股!:~ entire1y /-U ν ← consis館益tw迪金主~pd.inthe 血缸kçtingof也.e state which had been rising 區區已yb叫Go1，峙， 1990).(那poli叫 promo位on does not 吋 happen atna位onal1evel. The 10cal state has not been s10w to 1earn thβse new 肘cks. The appointment ofpublic 叫甜od蕊迋京前5師布面前話証 予函諾諾8.1 efl'orts of varying kinds has become a common feature of the 10ca1governmentscenβry﹒ The evo1ution of municipa1 newspapers, bringing the good news to every doorstep 扭曲e community, is a good indicator of this deve1opment, though，扭扭曲姐恤an.d Murphy note, they are of such recent orig姐 that they were 討rtually overlooked in the 1977 Royal Commission on the Press (fl叫 detail on this phenomenon see Franklin and Murphy, 1991: Ch. 6; Fr祖國恤， 1988). In all thes晦 ways，也en， the marke位ng of government ac位.vity has become a 臼ntralac位vity of modern statecraft. Inevitab1y the 1aunch of any major policy initiative will be devised with this app缸atus of promo位on and information management in mind. 祖旦旦旦mmu剖ty Charge became a 臼st JP? 些做些單恆星E同仁暫住把堅. We neea oriefly to assess how well equipped students of political co血munication were to understand 也is process.

o c:;

Political communication: the doub1e absence To understand the process of political communication we need to draw on the insights of both policy analysis and of media and communication rese訂'ch. Unfortunate1y both have been curious1y silent on 也e intercon7

Chapter 1: Citizenship, Communica說on， andPo加cs 且 TheT缸nished Ideal

T阻ation and Representation: The Medi訟， Po加開l Communi間越on and the Poll T缸

nection between the two. The detailed intellectual history and disciplinary evolution which explain 血is 的哩t essential to 0凹 concerns here , but we do need briefly to review them.

Perhaps the most powerful concept to be developed

Important in such a view is the understanding of policy as a process 函ta product, and that insight releases the potential ('~ such traditions of policy ana蟑螂 as 加plementation 也eory and incrementalis哩d Each of them，恤 prac位ce， however, retains the sense of this process evolving within an 'environment' , which contains t l!e economic and social s仕uctures of the wider society beyond the polity ~ Our focus in this book is 0的h已medi~ 個d 也可 forma cruci刮過art of this èÌìì忱。mp9.Indeedwe d再叫起倒 也叮叮'e inherently p缸t of the modern policy process , which is inconceivable without the rhetorical and publicity app缸atus ofpoli位cal communication. Thus to devolve so much of the essential character of the po垃位cal process to a residual category of actions in the 'environment' is 拍 miss much ofthe core ofwhat determines and shapes policy. It is s凶Is凹prising how minimal an appe前ance the media and communications make in many policy analyses , and even where they do it is organizational communication rather than media communication which dominates (Nixon, 1980).

same 拋tiI加 me 血 med 社品曲 ia st仇 1叫 the rol抬e of 知 j O盯nali諂sm and the careful and 叫 cri位伽 ca 叫1 analysis of the symbolic world of media out句pu 叫t. Where it has been inclined to address politics it has remained resolutely 'media-cen仗ic' ， rarely drawing on the research and theory available within political sociology or policy analysis.

J

The notion ofpri血ary definition was formulated by Hall and his colleagues in 也祉 analysis of news coverage of ‘mugging' (Ha11 et a1., 1978). Dominant forces in society do not dictate directly the tβ:rms and vocabulary of news coverage , either conspiratorially or by dictat. They 缸'e able , however, through the s仕uctures of news production , to ensure that news reflects the interests of也e powerful. This reproduction , in 也e last instance, does not ignore the real autonomy ofnews producers. But because ofthe importance of accredited sources with authority to defme news salience and form , and the unavoidable exigencies and speed of routine news production，也e news process produces 'a systematically structured overaccessing to the media of those in powerful and privileged posi位ons. The media thus tend , faithfully and impartially, to reproduce symbolica11Ythe e油加g struc個reofpower 祖 society's institutional order' (ibi d.: 58). The media thus become secondary defme間， dependent on the hegemonic defming power of accredited sources , the representatives ofm吋or social ins位徊，

studies frequentlý pay lip service ~o the impo此ance of the media and communications. In p甜詢問， howeVér , this emerges only in cursory reference to 血e role ofthe media , especia11y as witness to the recurrentand playful cI ash of pressure groups wi血也.e poli位cal system/Most policy analysis finds its roots , implicitly if not explic設旬， in 也e 誼nd of systemic model developed, cIassical跡， by writers like David Easton 徊的恤， 1965). In this model the policy process becomes ，的 use the familiar metaphor, a black box, which produces ou句uts in the form of decisions and actions. Into the black box go inputs in 也e form of demands ànd supports, either as votes , payment of taxes , and obedience, or al臼rnatively as dissent, pressure and articulatβd cI aims. While it is not diffic叫t to develop a critique of functionalist models of this 垣nd， even盲refmed and moderated f()rm they underpin a large number of policy analyses.

Tν/A 郎t 伽

attempt to

und酬and 叫你也粗的叫叫酬的呼叫加叮恤叮叮

Poli位cal

<"

in 血e

位ons.

向三?至苦 ....'1}-川

I.l;:'

ι-_ 品('i'.......

This model is an 姐sightful and efTective one. Not surprisingly, though, it 名言 has been regul甜甜甜dwi恤 mediaanaly呦， mthsthathmoughf77 wo 吋 成k r 旭 啦ing 兮'吋 overb 句 yS 缸 ch 沮1β 郎si姐 nge 侃 丸r'， whoa 盯rg 訊u泊 est油 ha 肘tt晶 heI阻 nodelfi 包 or 叩 'ce 臼sa 組 na 叫lyst臼st切 ;0

ignore 切 b ot晶 h th_t'l processes by 戶y\71扭 l泣ichs叩 ot盯IrC 凹es ∞ c ont臼 es仗t for accreditation , and the strate斟.es 也ey employ to command attention (Schles姐阱， 1990).As 。盯 discussion of news sources志高志而江那誼妞， we would share 恤 reservation about the notion of prim訂y defmition , while remaining anxious to retain its essential insight into 也e relationship which exists between the media and power struβtures in society.

戶、 rJ

7

y-

、2

叫it也 w h

8

o

Ö"0

9

r

t

i

Taxation and Represen組tion: The Media, Poli位cal Commu凶間組on an:d the Poll Tax is an attempt to explore the applicability of a more substantial model ofthis 垣nd.

The analysis of political communication 函， of course , a well developed and extensive 缸ea of research and discussion. Yet it remains a curiously unhelpful one in answering the questions posed by this study. There are three _ reasons for this inadequact. :P irst , po挂毯cal communica位on research has - í been .obsessed wi也 the proþess-Qf ~lectionee且時這 The natural experiment providedby 也e spectacle of elections has been just 的o bewitching 切 avoid for generations of commentators and researchers , and we readily pleaù 訊Iilty to sh訂祖g 也is fascination (Billig et aL, 1992). Yet it should be only 個o ob討ous that elections are anything but the normal state of 也ebody poli位c. The content and volume of public debate , the intensity of poli位cal rhetoric , the attentiveness of ci位甜的， and the energy and partisanship of political media 缸e all 切tally atypical in the periods fra血ed by elections. This does not mean we can learn nothing from 也e study of elec位。帥， butit does suggest we would do well to be w訂y of generali泣ng 扭曲e poli位cal communication process per se from the lessons of election research.

于[SecondlY，如tion

research defmes 伽 nature of politics and po加cal communication in é!_very closely fraJlled 血anner. By politics is me éUl t par望J _...:-"-_J<-_ olitics , and by political communication is meant th墅里o_!!!跑單位veappealof 予arties to electors. Political co血municationresearch has much to gai甜苦Ut )茁濟問蕊區首品dli組e， from attempts to draw attention to 也e essentially po加c叫 character of all communicatio肘， the ideological inves恤entinall forms of public communication , whether fiction or non也c位on， whether dealing with the familiar artefacts of policy or the less obviously but equally powerful politics of the do血的啦，也e personal , and the mundane. --一-一_---、」旬-闕_

?

--

ThirdlyJolitimIcommmimti凹的捌rchhasrem恥edlargdmh空空空空L inth泌 country with the mβtropolitanandn甜on些! me d!a. ThiSls a mistake

for two compleme前可話函函;即此也econth鼠忌gaofcen叫一local state relations has been at 出ehe盯t of many of the key changes in British poli位cs over the past two decades. We examine these changes later in this study. Suβhhasbeen 也e importance of these changes that m吋 ordebates about the role of the state have been generat吋 bythe血 within poli位cal~ theory. On the one hand it is suggested th前 we now hav(a dual sta詞， ) 。perat旭g separately at local and nationallevel (Saunders, 19'8 1 , 1982). ~ The extent to which this is a genuine separation or a contingβnt one is important 阻d conten泣。us. On the other hand theorists have suggested

10

Chapterl: 口的zenship， Commu剖開封on， andPoli位cs -

The Tamished Ideal

that primary social divisions are no longer derived from class positio間， but by sectoral divisions determined by people's position 的 consumers of services, notably those provided by the local state (Dunleavy, 1989). The other reason why concentration on 也e national media is a mistake is more obviously rooted in the media system. This coun設y continues to have ('1宇 吋翩翩ld 崢伽n愉叫缸伽gion向服心 992 伽rewereover 2 ,000 regional papers , including over 1 ,000 freesheets , whose number~ had more than doubled in a decade. But even the p副d 位tles have been flourishing. Despite the closure in November 1988 oftheNorth West Times , the frrst new regional daily for 100 ye帥， t凶 is 堅堅空姐一旦血[OUS ~一些空空白ec切r. Between 1980 and 1992 the number of paid for regional daily titles grew by 12 per cent, and of Sundays by 28 per cent. Nearly 90 ', per cent of adults read a regional paper.

L

Behind the bald statistics of survival, however, lies even more impressive evidence ofthe continued potency ofthe regional press. The readership and use made of local papers is demonstrated in a wide u訂iety of research which conftrms how prominently 也ey feafure in people's overall media diet, and most of all, of course，旭 their consump位on of news about local matters. Despite the high penetra位on of national newspapers to households in general, na位onal readership 函， of course , dis缸ibuted among a nu血berof titles. Where above 80 per cent ofhouseholds 旭 a given locality 缸'ereading a local paper they 缸e all reading the same paper 的 often as not, since local monopoly is the norm. The power ofthe local press for local agenda-s的峙 is manifest (Golding, 1989). Thus both policy analysis and media research have , by operating in splendid isolation , left the field clear 切 a tradition of political communication research which is itself severely @ldemouri~ed by virtue of a steady diet 。f electoral poli位cs. To move beyond this impotence we need to exam坦ea little further the nature of media-polity interaction.

7

Rewriting the sociology ofnews so叮ces: a typology of roles Although the mass media 盯e crucial intermediaries between ‘society as audience' and ‘society as so叮ce' (Ellio仗， 1972)， concerns aboutthesocial impact of media representations have always exceeded attention to the processes by which they are themselves socially constructed. Yet to under11

T磁a的onandRepr田entation: The Media, Politi問l Communi闊前.on and the Pòll T盟

chapterl:

ci位zenship， Communi阻tion， andPo恤ω 自 TheT回nished Ideal

v

瑚nd 伽 impact ofmedia discourses we mu恥伽nd 切伽iro 叫 蚓 rii Gandyi油 由 d .en 吋 t討i盒 fied 尬 i ta 臼s

theneed ‘可油 t切 og 伊 o bey 卯 Oll<吋 .d agenda setting to determine the media agenda , how and for what purposes is it s仗， and With what impact on the distribution of power and values in socie昕， (Gan旬， op. ciι: 7). By exploring the rela位.ve influence of in組組位ons 也d 恆divid­ uals in the formation ofmedia agendas , we are Jlllalysing strategic power 旭 our society, which as Silverstone (1990) perceptively points 0帥， isvery difl'e rent from the tactical power of audiences to select and re-appropriate whos鋁 et俗s

JmemMgbmM叫dualte恥

Unfortunately, prim前y research 旭to news s()盯ces remains scailt and intermi此ent (Gandy, op. cit.; Ericson et a1., 1989) , with most of our undetstanding derived from 'internaUst' analyses ofjournaUsts at wotk (Schles旭ger， op. cit.). Nevertheless , several important conceptual principles 盯e 到ready available which provide an invaluable foundation for t挫sbook.

Gans' second fac切r is the power of a source. His point，也atthere心rui恤ent ( l _ and access ofnews sources r恥tsor石誨r social and poUtic~!hierarchi帥， is 祉so prominen位y emphasized - albeit 抽difl'erent degrees 一姐 olli誼---­ analyses ofjournalists and their sources (Sigal, 1986; Ericson et a1., op. cit.; Gan旬 ， op. cit.; Herm姐姐d Chomsky, 1988; Seymour-訂閱， 1987 ， Hall et 祉 ， op. cit.). Schlesinger characterizes this as t!!e 'cultural capital' of a news source 一i.e. i的 perceived legitimacy, authoritative閻明 and 甜甜ectabili旬， which is derived 吐om the location a source has 姐 thein咐他tional field … Official sources m可 not always have to be beUeved , but they do have to be t述en seriously' (op. ci t.: 81). Those with a high cultural capital will receive coverage as of right , whereas 0也er sources have to compete fì叮阻βdia attention by developing media strat曙ies.

心he firS~iS that j叫Usts 叫出eirsources 叫跑過空白哩B ship , where information is bartered for pubUcity (Tunstall，即7的.H仰自 ever , in this market place ofideas , certain vendors sell their messages with greater ease and 加 f訂 greater volume. Gans (1979) identifies fo肘 major factors that influence the performance of news sources in shaping media agendas , that enc呻sulate a range of current debates around news sources andtheir 垣fluence.

t

v'

a source has to seek pubUcity through thè concentrates on the endemic disposition of institutions and individuals towards the news media - contrasting the ‘eager' sourc~s who would suffocate without the oxygen of pub區city (such as pressure groups andpoUticians) , with ‘recalcitr祖t' sources , who are habitually more indifferent or fearful of media scru位ny. However, it is also important to appreciate that the degree of incentive a news source has is contextual. Even the keenest news so盯ces will have certain issues they would prefér 的 keep private , not just because they may have something 扭扭曲， but also because every human being and organization requires privatβspace behind their pubUc face - a 'private culture' within which decisions can be made and confidences respected (Ericson et a1., op. ci t.). Co nversely, even the most reluctant source can experience diffic叫位的 ü it fails to respond approp品 ately to media scru位ny，的t least in risking further dangerous intrusions into its private affairs. It may also , of course , use the media to further its own poUtical ends (閱11肘， 1993). media/G阻s

12

、

'、

The 趾呼 hctorbthincenφie

From 也is

work, it is possible to discern several general themes about the power of 姐stitu位ons and;旭Çlividuals to shape media discourses that 訂e saUent to our discussion. 'Eir鈍， as not all pubUcity is good pubUcity , the power of news sources is not just located in their abillty to a前ractmedia attention , but also to manage 也e nature of that coverage , and where necess缸y 切 suppress or divert media attention. As Tuchman (1978) pointso前， the power to keep an occurrence out ofthe news is an important aspect of agenda-building power. This is 也e significance of our earUer observation about the new management regime of official s個位組cs.

S缸ec∞ond趴訪拘ow 咐ers of ‘池尬油 e缸肘 nlcloωs肘e' 閻d ‘油品s叩d枷 Oωs盯e' (趾加ic臼so阻 n et ι. a1. ， op. cit.) 缸e difl'e rentially available , and 缸e closely Unked to broader configurations of political and economic power. This is most evident in the power of sources to censor media debate , such as in the ability ofthe state to impose a range ofunique sanc位ons on the media , and ofthe rich to employ the legal system

13

Chapter 1: Citizenship, Communication, and PO加ω- The Tamished Id開1

,

T祖ation 個d Representation: The Media Pollti曲l Communi開tion and the PoU Tax

的也reaten

or punish jo叫nalis位c transgressions. However, these sanêused interm.ittently. More significant is the ab也可 to enclose discussion by disclosing information - mis姐forming or diverting media debate by emplo抖ng defensive strategies of 'deception' , or offensive strategies of 'selection' , where media attention is drawn towards less 也reatening， or more expedient, ma悅ers 但ricson et al. , op. cit.). As Dôwning points out, 'Secrecy is not used 的 an impermeable shield blotting out all communication, but as a device to allow the pinnacle of the power struc仙e to communicate how and when it prefers' (Dow到時， 1986: 157). In this publicity game- and the field ofpublicrela位ons more generally - economic power counts for a lot, whether inrecruiting trained pù.blic relations personnel or covering the costs of producing and distributing information subsidies. However, political and cultural power also exerts a significant influence. Those news sources who can disseminàte informationpr甘ately as well 部 publicly to journalists (Ericson et al. , op. cit.) , have a very significant advantage over those so盯ces who have to lobby loud and hard in the public 訂ena. As Gandy points out: tions 缸e

‘ Often 也e value

of an information subsidy for any source is increased the source can disguise the promotional, p缸位S血， self-旭terested quality of the information. This is often accomplished when news stories convey the desired informa位on without identif抖ng its so盯'ce. Information that would be accepted only with càu位on ifits source were identified as a p缸位san in a debate is much more powerful ifit is a received objective fa仗， reportβd by an uninterested journ叫恤， (op. CÍt.: 14). to the

extent 也at

21

1_

(ofthemedi的s information brokers between 缸叫orma位onsee坦ngpublic

門交部日臨C('advo總es' 姐 society …凶伽伽ns or individuals who have V

something to say (or some也ing to selI). The notion of advocacy see血sto 的如 be a useful way of partially conceptualizing J:1ews so盯'ces. In Our analysis 'advocates' are the sources 血的 journalists r豆亟單ZëãS.llav垣g 竺些也d哇哇盟控坐旦旦坐坐坐坐坐坐笠 which frame and inform their contributions. As such，也ey provide the raw material ofmedia coverage: the conflict upon which news depends. In the exchange with advo-' cates , journalists 缸哇旦旦tjust 臼eking informati妞， but 叫so opinions and assertions.

。、.

I

However , the news media are expected to cominent quickly and authorita幽 tively about an uncertain world , plagued with complex issues and moral dilemma~. If journalists spend a large proportion of 位merepor位ngafroth of opinion, co凶lict and conjecture, they never lose the impulse to establish v-a bed-r也包住戶， onw包ch toground 也耐 report山deed， joutnalism V remains 0現坐車坐到tbas位onsofem控蛇~: searching for the unvarnished truth behind the best possible gloss , clinging to 也可~ belief that 'facts' can be rescuedfromhyperbole. In this se前chjourn到istso立enelectso叮ces who , because of their perceived e勾ertise， willingness and ab也tyto communicate with journalis怨，叮e used to evaluate assertions and interpreta位ons made by advoc胸s in a political debate. 的 one local government co叮espondent explained in an interview with the authors: r 'A journalist is always looking for someone who can 紀且也em that not being mislead or led by the nOJß. And [the poll tax] isn't merely just a soft selI, but is 旭 such a complex 盯ea.' -

血呵're 句

These covert mechanisms of disclosure 缸e going to be more routinely available to those sources with the greatest 'cultural capital' , who autc• maticalI y receive the attention of the media , and can trade off par位al journalistic access for confiden位ality and non-attribution.

F今

These points provide an i血portant context for 0肘 analysis of the interaction between news so目ces and journalists in the construction of media discourses over the Com血unity Charge:- However , before starting 0盯 f substantive analy呦; we need to introduçè a further conceptual distinction ) that is 恤 f 阻d岫阻削d 均y 加峙p叫m 叫tt切oou 叫 1 cat紀 es' and ‘ arbit紛 βrs 訢， In the 19 50s, Westley and MacLean (1957) suggested we should conceive

14

.<.\ We refer to these sources as 也e 'arbiters' of a particular field of discourse. 電立~間喝一-詞句“即可-、-

(_Arbit的 ap阿 f盯 less frequently 血an advo阻除一倒叫 th甜 com­ 臨時 m叮理tevmbe d臼d even when contact has been m帥一 bu恤金控J \且堅空空空些eis且起巨型竺但也堅擎的. Because of journali咐， relianceon th.eir expertise , the evaluations of arbi臼rs resonate beyond the specific moment of contact, and far exceed the regul缸ity of their appe缸， 如此哭也要主要(略成: 84) 那SMQMjom恥ts view all SOurCeS 自 'questioÍl able'. Our research suggests an important qualification to 血is generalization. Al也ough claims and assertions by advocates 訂e ritualIy approached with a degree of suspicion , this scepticism applies far less to 缸bit憑自. This is mainly because ofthe nature of the exchange relationship

15

,

T臨ation and Representation: The Media PO益6個l Communi開.tion and the Poll T揖

f1

between arbiters andjourn叫ists. Firstly旭!bitersI ,don't p凹sue journalists: they 訂'e elected by jo盯nalists. Therefore, the廿 selection is inextricably linked to a journalist's sense of her own political and professional jud那個 ment. By 佐ust姐g an arbiter, the journalist is , by extension，仕usting her own 迦itial judgement. Second，訂biters 訂e most highly valued where issues are new, complex or uncertain. This 旭evitably places journalists in a far more vulnerable and dependent posi位on. ~-

The arbiter role here is comparable to that ofthe intellectual, in p缸位c叫缸 如 what Bauman has identified 的 the 'legislator' func位on. Thisis ‘ma垣ng authoritative statements which arbitrate in controversies of opinions a:nd which select those op旭ions which, having been selected, become correct and b垣ding' (Baum間， 1987: 4). The_perceived ~~ession空白血， of 也 ~更坦r is crucial to their selec說凹， and mirrors howtIle re函油証of journalistic professionalism enables journalists to construct their own 'objec位vity'. The professional status of訂biters is seen to remove themfrom the vestedp缸位ality ofp盯ty political debate , and allow them 切 comment dispassionately , intelligently and 'objec加舟， about complex and controversial matters. Beyond 血泊， the selection of arbiters is 叫so governed by 也eir ‘media friendliness'; assessed , on the oIie hand, in their co-opera位間， ness , and, on the other , in an ability to render complex issues in扭扭gibleto journalists and their audiences. However , if the perceived

expe的ise

of these sources gives their views a it is necess肘y 切 question 也ena個re of their 'objectivity'l There 訂e two dimensions to this issue. The first is whether these sources 缸e as politically detached from the matters upon which they are commenting, as journalists assume …迦deed， whetherthey may themselves be covert advocates. For example, several commen祖tors have recently challeng;ed the widespread use offinancial analysts from the money markets by the media to adjudicate on broader matters offiscal and political policy 但也ig et a1., op. cit.; Gav誨， 1992). In也e case ofthe poll tax, as we discuss in Chapter 6, some ofthe most influen位al arbiters in coverage ;were the local government finance 0血cers responsible for administβring \;;/ the system. However, when we interviewed several ofthese professionals it became clear they were f:缸 more actively engaged in 也e political debate 也an many journalists assumed. For example , they harboured serious professional grievances against the tax - because it made their work more problematic and seriously compromised the financial viability of their authorities - and often communicated their antipathy to journalists (晶晶 p訂也世缸 power 但d_ authori旬，

16

Chapter 1:

ci說zens旭.p，Communi阻位on， andPoli位cs -

The Tamished Ideal

/

privately). Furthermore , in some cases , they were highly selective in the information they gave journalists. For example , one fmance 0誼.cer deliberately suppressed information about the level of non-payment in his 缸eato avoid gi討ng succo盯 to local an位 poll t臨 campai血的﹒(As he put it , '1 always turned their question round into what 1 wanted 臼 tell them' .) The second dimensionto 也is 臨的 epistem叫i喊道isn圳ec仰aryto accuse every 缸biter of pursuing a hidden agenda to ques位on their objectivity. Cle缸隙， many 缸'biters seek 切 be 部 acc盯a妞， dispassionate and imp缸tial as pδssible in the evaluations they provide. Nevertheless ，也eir contributions 盯en帥， and can never be , completely value free. Arbiters' c-_yerdicts 缸'e PI金色旦旦控堅al judgements derived 仕om institu位onal 而血面ge 函函 and personal 句函站前As such they are 咖ays potentially contestable. To the social researcher the impossib也ty of absolute value freedom and objec加i可 is not an alien concept and , indeed , is why the philosophical culture ofthe social sciences is so finely attune缸oquestions about the conditions and production ofknowledge. ,However , such notions 訂e 恤旭ical to some of 也e most cherished no御自 ofjourn祉is位c professionalism (Haslam and Brym妞， 1994) and , asaconsequence , canbeseen as hostile to the practice and inte缸ity ofjournalism as a craft , rather than as a description of the inextricable s甘uctural conditions of its practice (Golding and Ellio仗， 1979: 12-16). Throughout 也is

study we explore the nature of media-s ourç_e rela位onsh恥， bearing 旭 mind the distinction drawn here between&he roles of advocate and ar甜er. However to take our model forward a little rurther we needtoex叫ne tw, addi泣。叫vectors in our an吻is， thedyn削csofthe policy process and the nature of media coverage.

I

11

d

The natural history ofpolitical communications It remains for us to set out briefly two conceptual devices which will form important props in the analysis which follows. The first relates to the policy process itself. We have argued earlier that the models of 血的 process commonly on offer in policy studies take inadequate account ofthe 'environme肘， in which policy evolves. The 仕ianguIar relationship between politics, public opinion and the media is a particularly crucial aspect of血is environment , and is certainly the focus of Our discussion in this book. Our model here is distinct from that developed by symbolic interactionist researchers who seek a description of 'social problems as products of a 17

Taxation and Representa位.on: The Media, PO加開l Communi間.tion and the POII T臨

chapter1: 曰“zensl旬，“咽munication， and Politiω 呻The Tarnished 姐姐

心肌咖n a new piece of legisla伽h曲 comes 鷗伽此加

process of collective defi.區位on' 個19缸tner and Bosk, 1988: 53). The emphasis on social problemsðen位rely 'a putative condition or situation that is labelled a problem in the 盯闊的 ofpublic discourse oì:' action' (i bid.: 55) rather detracts from the necess缸y analysis of the m.aterial conditions which give rise to those problems , and which 缸e 也o the backdrop for the contest required to force 也em to public attention. Equally the emphasis on the media as one among many potential 'carriers' elides the potent centralityof也emedia 扭曲epo誼.cy process. Nonetheless the perspec位問， while inadequate to 血e analysis of 也e deliberate mobilization of symbols on which politics subsists , usefully reminds us of 也e cultural component to the manufacture of politics. 門今

stage may of course be staggered, as a new policy is phased in. The eighth stage is that of eva1uation. Although polices 盯海 continually evaluated throughout the policy cycle, it is duringthis phase that claims for 也βpolicy in principle 缸e assessed against its performance in practice, and the doommongers 盯e congratuI ated for their presctβnce or ridiculed for their pessimism. However 也is stage rem訟ns an ideological as well as empirical phase , often characterized by vehement disputes over the validity and relevan臼 of evidence presented. The outcomβofthis stage determines the fi.n al stage of the policy cycle , namely 自宙的lilation. In this phase the policy becomes invisible, p缸tof 血.e political rot芯， literally unproblema恥.If也is isnotac隘的ed then the policy is forced back 恆的 acontinuingevaluation phase , and an altemative outcome of abolition may result.

戶…tyC凶ge 泌組叫s叩 u …

detectable 恤b扯蚵t也 h 組d 阻 e 師 ve 阻 n more pronounced ending\ But, exceptional though t趾s may be , we wish to suggest that any 仰lícy initiative goes 也rough a sequence of phases. These 缸e primarily defi.ned in terms of the legislative process , but 盯e designed to invite an assessment of the links between the three po泊的 of 也e P9licy triangle mentioned above.

This model is no more than an abstract description of the necessary phases of the natural history of a policy process. 1t does draw attention to the presence at every phase of a dialectic relationship with a communicative and publicity environIÌlent. In也is sense it is not a single linear sequence surrounded by an environme泣， wi也 feedback restrained until the fi.n al phase.Ra也er feedback , ifthat is theright term, is continuously impacting on each phase of the sequen間， anddβtermines the 位m旭g andna個reof each successive phase. The r l;l al environmentfor this process is the dis仕ibu­ tion ofpower and reso肘ces which enables access 扭曲。記 feedback flows.

、J

The fi.rst phase we have 叫led inceptio恥!fhis is the v甸甸 m蝕determi“ nate period in which percep位ons of the need for change 前e fostered and crystallized. This can be a lengthy phase in which long seated problems 缸e ignored, masked or un缸位c叫ated， or a brief and dram.a位c heightening of aw盯eness precipi個位ng urgent action (as in ‘moral panics'). The second -L phase is presentation , andis the point atwhich the government ‘goes public' with plans or aspira說ons， eitherthroughkiteflyingormoreformally. This merges almost immediately into the t趾rd period , of consu1tation , when interested parties react to the proposals , and a dialogue, often unequal, and frequently marshalled within the media , addresses and sometimes contests ,defmitions ofthe newly announced initiative. The fourth period is that of \/ form u1ation , wherein the Government refi.nes or redesigns it proposals on the basis of the conclusions of the consultative process. However, as we show latβr， this formulative stage was of negligible import扭曲 to the introduction of the Com血U凶ty Charge, which was imposed in spite ofthe conclusions of the consult甜ve process. Therefore , our description of the media's cöverage of this particular policy combines this stage with the consultation period. The fi.fth phase is legislation , in which the full cycle of p缸liamentary scru位ny 扭扭s place with a v位ying amount ofpublic at但岳 、/位on. The sixth phase is preparation , during which administrative 缸range­ ments are organized for its implementation. The seventh phase is 18

The second conceptual 切01 wesh剖1 employ is the distinction betweeÌl the V

lP eva1uative and the interpretative dimensions of media coverage)(Golding, ~

1990). In conventi個lal t活rms the adequacy of a media reporfis judged by its fairness ，。旬ectivity and imp缸tiality as an account of some event or person. 1s the report pro or an位 somepoli旬， p缸旬， orinitia位ve? This is the eva1uative dimension , but it is only one vecωr. We need also to examine the question of whatωpects of the policy 缸'e rendered visible, named and promoted. This is thβ interpretative diníension and asks the simple question , whatis 也is issue about? In也is study we shall be assessing both dimensions in rela位on to the coverage of the poll t蹄， and indeed 缸伊恆g that the process of ‘pri血的 defi.區位on' can only be understood 恆 relation to 也is distinction if we 缸'e to make sense of the history of 也.e poll 個x. Weshall also be assessing the evaluative and interpretative capacity of news so盯'ces， and suggesting that the power of arbiters , for example, is far more limited in defming the 恆terpreta位ve dimension of policy 也an it is in relation to evaluation. 19

Taxation and Rep悶entation: The M ed.ia, PO恤阻1 臼mmiI到個.tion and the Poll T，缸 We begin the analysis by assess祖g the genes泌 and background of the Community Charge.

Chapter 2

A BriefHistory ofThe Poll Tax

T T h h e 恤岫……岫伽叫叫…曲伽 ωωcti 耐…位伽 o ex 封te 閒 nd 缸 edwellbey ，o 仰 nd 吋 dth 加 .es 句 pe 郎 ci逍 fic 臼sofloca 叫19 伊 overnment 宜 financ 閃 e.

Ind 配 .ee 吋 d，缸guments

about its technical and financial adequacy masked 'a deeper cons位tutional and political 缸gument about what form oflocal government is needed in the UK' (Q世此， 1986:4). In也is chapter we set out the key aspects of this broader deba鉤， as an esseIitial cont冶xt to our general appraisal ofthe media' s performance and influence in reporting the poll tax.

British local and central government relationsω甜-1970) As wi也 so many Bri討sh political arr阻gements，也e role and respoUØ::: b血位.es of local govemment hav~ .never been cons仿制位onally inscrib~d . Rather, its powers and obligation告-have been shaped poli位callyandhistori:' ca旬， and remain contested. At the centre of this dispute has been the appropriate relationship 曲的 shoulde組成 between central and local g帥" ernment, and 凶 particular the degree of autonomy the latter should be permitted.

Some analyses , whilst acknowledging the value of the devolved adm坦is“ 甘ation oflocal services , ultimately insist that local govem血.ent should act

as the agent of cen甘al government: the conduit rather than progenitor of policy (Ridley , 1988). In contrast, others portray the devolution ofpolitical power 臼 an essen位al precondition for healthy dl1mocracy (B lu.D.kett an:d Jackson, 1987; Hilly缸d and Percy-Smith, 19881-..1'扭扭.troduction of the Community Charge was seen by bo也 sides as representing a crucial moment 恆 this evolving constitutional debate, whether as heralding a new

20

...::.一­

、

21

,

T揖ation and Repr珊en個位.on: The Media PO加曲1 Communica說on and the Poll T也

era of local account晶晶tyor dri討ngthe 宜nal nails into the coffin of local democracy.

〔hp閃閃的叫叫叫ov…呵呵叫別e political interventionfrom national governmen叫 The two tiers were essentially discrete political universes , with national government concerned withm峭的 of national security and foreign:policy, and 也e manyand varied local authorities responsible for the dis仕ibution of a1ms and the maintenance of local amenities 坦問y manner they saw fit (Do盟， 1986a). Inevitably, this laissez-faire system oflocal governance produced 'a chaos ofins位tutions，缸eas and rates' (Rich訂ds， 1980: 15). The nineteenth century has been described as the 'golden age' of local government reform in Brit缸， with many of the changes wrought d肘ing 血is period establishlng the foundations for the modern system (Sme油.e， 1968; Goldsmith , 1979). The m到nimpe旭s for reform came from 出e first industrial revolution which transformed the demography ofthe nation. As densely populated urban 缸e也 mushroomed， problems of social depriva位on worsened which placed 缸ow站g pressures upon the limited civic r ame副es and welfa叫rovisioI晶血泊， itw叫e叫hat there was an \ urgent need for a strategic response to the problems ofpoor relief, housing, \ sanitation, policing and public health. A restructured 咖tem oflocal gov1 ernment provided the principal means by which these pressing issues were I tackled.

(Er叫he 叫y nineteenth 叫阿伽0峭的伽副耐ιω-1 凹9空吵吵針 φ} 伽ep闕 a前t 鉛tβ 且恤伽 叮 r宜沮 ns n 姐 血e

development of local 伊 g overn血en 肘t 旭 the U:凶tê 品 a Kingdom 缸e evident. 如此， levels of local government capital and revenue expenditure increased; slowly at first, but then with a growing impetus. Second, central government influence over local government activities correspondingly 姐creased; whether 旭 ensur坦g unifor咽， minimum standards of service provision, or 旭 removing certain services wholly or partially from the jurisdiction of local authorities. Thlrd, and largely as a result of this 恤 in\(

I

~，的 r昀 e叫咖v叫o 囚E叫空墮型憋的竺型峙唾哇塑哩聖堅ov型愕竺帥 叩 s ou 肘 rc 臼 eofr 間 evenuefl 臼 'orloca 叫19o 仰 ve 叮 :rnment.

In the 晶i峙均 year叫ro血 1945 ，伽叫ends ac耐削eddram蜘all~ In real terms there was a 300 per cent inc甜甜e in local government-révénue expenditure between 1950 and 1970, and a 250 per cent 坦crease 旭 capital expenditure (Keith-Lucas and Rich缸缸， 1978: 130). Control of 血any services such as poor relief and public health, along with public 22

cbap能叫: ABriefHis切ry ofThe Poll T磁

u位lities

such as water, shifted to the centre. And by 1974/75 , 66 per cent oflocal revenue was provided by central subventions. ν/

/~Thep血cipalre肥 on for this ch組酹 wastge establishmentofthe ·吋垃皇 之盈鹽1旦趾迪瓦d伽 the

2nd World W，叮. The Labour Government's manifesto ofl945 血arked 也e first explicitly national view oflocal government, in which local authori泣的 were deemed 部 instruments of central government, rather than semi-autonomous agents. This diminishlng of local 帥的nomy and change in 也.e texture of local/cen仕al relations w部 部臼pted or ignored as the standards of public services increased (划時間， der, 1990; Golding and Middle恤， 1982). The imroediate post-war years also saw a qualitative transformation in the party politicization oflocal government (Goldsmith , op. cit.: 18). Although p叮叮 po加cs had assumed a growing sign血cance in local government over the preceding century, it w自 during this period that we see a ‘na位on­ aliza位on' ofp前走ya血垃a位ons in local government with 'repeated attemp臼 to bring local and national politicians of each p缸ty to m缸ch 旭 step' 已 (GHord， 1"5:86).TMSMjec悅。n of party poli位cs into loc叫 goverment/ 旭Mduce4a si血泊cant potenti叫 so盯'ce of tensio~ between central and V local gove也me肘， the full extent of which was oÍÙy fully realized 祖 the 1980s, when a resurgent municipal socialism ran fi甜甜tin切 anational government passionately committed to the free-market and swingeing cuts 泊 public expenditure.

「h f 岫口川 捌叫 t凶岫且岫也伽…… e“e闊叫叫叫 吋叫…缸吋圳叫 w圳 ly 凹 19970伽s 伽伽叫… s甜e吋吋叫 山旭凶… c

叩 a nd 肛th 加 eex 旬 ponent位ia 叫li旭 ncreasei旭 nloc 侃 algoverrr 虹mentex 苟 pend 品it伽 urea 缸n 阻dcent佐ral

I

However, from then onwards , the II V period of expansion in Bri位sh local government，也at could be traced back I more 也an a hundred and forty ye缸s， w卸 thrown 旭to reverse. __..J governmen 肘t subvent位ions continp.~d.

Local goverrrment 恆 the 1970s: 'the p前旬'sover' The unexpected vic旬眠。 fa Conservative Government 恆 the 1970general J election opened t恤趾頭 major fault lines in the locallcentral relationship. J Although the political energies of the Heath -administration were p泣ncipally concentrated on their dealings with the trades union movement, it also implemented policies which held m吋or implica位ons for the future form and fIn ance ofBritish local government. The most significant was the 23

,

T臨ation and Represen鼠的on: The Media Politi間1 Communica位.on and the Poll T祖

ν1972

L'Ocal G'O vernment Finance Act, which introduced a n主巨型d但

已空空em 'Ofl'O cal g'O vemance. At 也e sa血e 位me，

the issue 'Of the equity and adequacy 'Of the e.洹sting system 'Of l'O cal d'Omestic taxati'On was als 'O pt'Opelled 'O n t'O也e p'Oli位cal agenda. The ra伽g system ('Or 'the Rates' ，的 it was widely kn'O wn) was a pr 'Operty-based d 'Omestic tax that had remained unchanged in principle since the intr'Oducti'O n 'Of the Elizabethan P 'O'Or Law in 1601. L'Ocal rates were set and levied acc 'Ording t 'O tw'O c'Omp 'Onent calculati'Ons. The first was the 'rateable value' 'Of a pr'Operty, which was determined by its es位血ated rentable value. The sec'Ond was the rate p 'O undage , which was set by the lev抖ng auth'Ority acc 'Ording t 'O the gap between its 切tal spending and its inc 'Ome fr'O m all s'O urces , in p訂位cul訂 cen仕al g'Overnment subventi'O郎， and l'O cal business taxes (which were set and calculated by the levying l 'O cal auth 'Orities in a simil缸 manner 扭曲mestic rates). The levying authöri位es were 'sec'O nd tier' auth 'Orities (i. e ci旬， district 'Or b 'Or 'Ough c'Ouncils) , whö raisedrevenue 'O n behalf 'Ofthemselves and 'Over盯chingc'Ounty-叫deauth­ 'Or隘的 and smaller parish c 'Ouncils. T趾s pr'O呻 pe 叮 rty“b卸e 吋 d syst紛 em 'Of l'O cal

taxati'On required

pe 叮 ri岫'Od 街ic '世 re 叮 va 剋lu 研

闕

at位i站伽 'Ons' 'Of 也epr'Op 脾 er 前ti切 est'O beunde 叮r扭ken 丸 1， 切 ma 剖i且t祖 ai旭 nt也 he bu 'Oyancy 'Oft血:he l'Oca 叫lta 缸 xbas甜 e，

and it was the last revaluati'On held in England and Wales 旭 1973 that shifted the issue 'Ofl'Ocal g'O vernment financeref'O位n t 'O the centre 'Of the p 'Olitical agenda. The resul位ng redistributi'On in the l'O cal tax burden it pr'O duced, which was exacerbated by the c'Ost 'O fl'O cal g 'O vernment re 'Organiza位'Onandhigh 扭扭d妞， caused c'Onsiderable public c'Ontr 'Oversy and media c 'O mment (Gyf'Ord et a1., 1989). Vari'Ous 'rates strikes' were 'Organized by residents in the hardest hit areas , and the fur 'Ore pr'Ompted a manifest'O c'Om血itment fr 'O m the C'O nservative Par旬， which Margaret Thatcher pers 'Onally champi'Oned, that there w 'O uld be a fundamental ref'Orm 'Of the rates in the event 'Of its re-e lecti'On. Its subsequent defeat, h 'O wever, prevented the Party fr'Om acting up 'On that pr'Omise.

Chap紀r 2:

A BriefHis切ry ofThe Poll T，祖

rep 'Ort's supp 'Ort f'Or a l'Ocal inc'Ome tax 'w郎 specifically ass 'Ociated wi也 the wider ques泣。n 'Of relati'Ons between cen仕al and l'Ocal g'Overnme瓜， (Rich缸曲， op. cit.: 109) , and 旭 p訂位c叫缸 that greater p 'Owers 'Of decisi'On sh'O uld be given t 'O l'O cal auth'Orities. The additi'Onal revenue needed f'Or suchamaj 'Or 仕ansf'Orma位'On w 'Ould be pr'Ovided by this additi'Onal inc'Ome tax. The Lab 'Our G'Overnment 叫ected the c'Onclusi'O ns 'Of 也e Layfìeld rep 'Ort , and s'O ught instead t 'O exert greater c'Ontr'Ol 'O ver l'O cal expenditure. As Rich盯ds 'Observes, Layfield' s 'l 'O calist' VÏSi'On was 'thr'O ttled by 也erequire­ ments 'Of macr o-ec 'On 'Omic planning' (幼iiL: 163). Thr'Ough'O ut the 1970s , extensive di錯culties with the c'Oun仕y's ec 'On 'Omy, exacerbated bytheinternati'Onal 'Oil cri呦， had f'Orced the Chancell'Or t'O seek extemal assistance fr'Om the Internati'Onal M'Onetary Fund , which had placed great pressures up'O n G 'Overn血ent spending. One 'Of the maj 'Or c 'O nditi'Ons 'Of IMF support was 血的 public expenditure w 'O uld be reined in. In 1976, the Secretary 'Of State f'Or the Envir'Onment warnedl 'Ocal g'O vernmentthat 'the p缸旬's 'Over' ， and 扭曲e Lab 'O ur adminîstrati 'On's fmal years significant reducti'Ons were achieved in aggregate l 'Ocal expenditure. By 1978179 , the percentage 'Of l'O cal g'O vernment expenditure c 'O vered by cen仕al g'Overnment grants fell m'Ore 也an 5 per cent t 'O 61 per cent. Alth'Ough these harsh financial realities hit l'Ocal au也'Orities heavily, the cutbacks were generally achieved in a spirit 'Of grudging c'O-operati'On. H 'O wever , the C'Onservatives' vicωry in the 1979 General 四ec位'Onmarked the beginning 'Of a period where the latent tensi'Ons between central and l'Ocal g 'Overnment expl 'Oded int'O a p 'Olitical c'Onllict that t 'Ore their l'Ong established rela說'Onship t 'O shreds , and called the wh 'Ole structure 'Of l'O cal g 'Overnance in Britain int'O ques位'On. Thatcherism 缸ld local

government (1979-90): ‘Where there is 「

The immediate resp 'Onse 'Of the new Lab 'Our administrati'On t 'O this p 'Olitical c'Ontr'O versy was 't'O spend m 'O ney and buy time' (B 'Oyne , 1986: 428). In 1974/75 an ad hoc subsidy 'Of :t:l 50血血i'On was pr'O vided t 'O h 'Old d 'Own d'Omes位c rates , and the Layfield C'Om血拙ee 'Of Enq凶ryw自 established t 'O rep 'O rt 'On the financing 'Of l'O cal g'O vernment. The C'Ommittee's deliberati'Ons (Layfie峙， 1976) c'O ncluded that a l'O cal inc 'Ome tax sh'Ould be levied by l'Ocal auth 'Orities t 'O supplement the exis伽g rates. Crucially , the Layfìeld 24

~gr'Owing ∞n吭哩哇阻1

'Only

with the accessi'O n 'Of Margaret Thatcher that central government

mo叫i.J;!~_~ystema恥句空空白川紅些聾啞世型幽怨re.Thenew

。

g 'Overnment's ideologiβal c'Ommitment t 'O wards 'r'Olling back the 仕ontiers 25

說1 H

.';1 吋

川

叫

泛l 句，

J玄E 訂了1

刊l

Taxation and Repr宙間tation: The Media, Politi臼l Communi個組onand 也ePolI T盟

/μì/ fjì

Chapter 2: A Brief History of The Poll T也

<…z/

of taxation (Blair, 1989)} The Ac_t also (r'emoved the right 枷叫叫你ori御的 appoint their 0咐 au品tor~ì ap. ~ra切 S 扭扭扭dependent so叫ce

of血的組te' ，只 oupled with th甜 antipa出y 臼W缸ds 扭曲個xationandru也lic 區可endifiire，

brought many of the fóunding precepts of the welfare sta扭 As the cause of ne缸lyaqu叮ter of public e勾endi旭e， and in the context of a public sector borrowing cris函， it was inevitable that local government would be a prime 個rget for Government cuts.

」祖師研酒喝n.

though the Commission' s remit has been to encourage good practice, assess the impact of new local government legislation and improve the valuβfor money of local servic郎，也eir principal raison d'être is to achieve si但ificant cost cut位ng 扭扭y盯d and Percy-Smith, op. ci t.).

Lo ughlin (1990) describes one of thβdefining features of the Thatcher

period as being the juri再fication oflocal and central government relations. Previously 也isrela紋。nshipw由 governed by conventions of con:sulta泣。n; with bo也位ers of government broadly interacting within a framework of consensus. However, throughout the 1980s, central government 切ok precipita位ve， unilateral ac位on to control the activities and expenditure of local authorities by legislating sweeping powers. Nowhere was this process ofjuri你cation more evident than in the realm oflocal finance.

The

\/".旭御自din 也e

198q Planning and Land A吵Alongs!生旦捏捏捏聳聽 upon capital expenditu妞， the Act added a néw 'Block Grant' component to ~區函話詩ateS晶晶 Grantsy御m. Councils' expenditure w叫inked to a central Grant Relat吋Expenditure Assessment (GREA) to discourage high spending. Any expenditure in excess of this GREA 1βd 的 a decrease in 也.e gr個t paid to an authority and 也e greater the overshoot, the more punitive the penalties became (Sills , Taylor and Golding , 1988).

r斗 The 198 去Local Government Finance A昀 provided greater

governmental authority finance by/removing the right of councilslo ~一一~一一一一一~一一一一一一­ 一些血旦控lR些空空且強吵roughout a financial year to cover 個y shortfall. This represented a si伊ificant step in 10caV central relations 也 itwas ! 1 (the frrst 位血e a limit had been placed on authorities' freedom of access to the leverage

0立local

, 的)~

After the Conservative P缸旬's victory in the 1983 Gener叫毆，ectio且， Government legislation aga祖st local authorities gained momen個m._!!scom凶tmβnt was bolstered by increasingly acrirrÍ祖aG而前示函ons with several Labour authorities , who not only sought to 企ustra師也e Government' s economic s仕ategies but also foster 'some sort of socialist alternati間， at a locallevel 徊。ddyandFudg潭， 1984: 14).

/?Jl?The 趾st 到那iflmtFea阻四 taken to 叫FoI Local e耶吋ture were

Thism吋 or change was immediately strengthened by an addi位onal set of expenditure t盯gets based on actu a1 levels of expenditure rather than 悶， sessed expenditure needs , as it was fe缸'ed that those authorities whose expenditure were below their GREAs might take the opportunity to 'spend up' to this assessment. To the Government' s view , these targets offered the basis fo叫做恆的le expenditure reductions , and between 1981 and 1986 也e grant penalties for spending 胎 excess of these estimates became pr心 gressively harsher. T趾s method was finally abandonedin 1986/87 , when the underlying Block Grant 缸Tangements were altered so 也at authorities automatically lost grant when 也ey increased spending (instead of only losing grant when expenditure exceeded the designated 個rgets).

J

po垣伽g 油 th你做ad 0盟空些些空位也迅PA咄t Commissio心.Al個

、 introduced twofì肘也erm吋 or controls oflocal au惱， CP\~

1984 哇~ates Ac~

odtyhmcal.The 趾stwas as組組如叩開的m封底1õéãï混血oritiesto

-

consult with businesses 'and other non-dome討ic rate paÿers before setting their business levy, thereby increasing the accountability of local authorities to their non-domestic payers. The second was 也e introduβtion of 'rate limitation' , widely known as 'rate-capp油g'. This involved the Depart戶 血ent ofEnvironment setting optimum levels for domestic rates which local authorities were not permitted to exceed. The Act provided the Government with the option of capp坦g the rates of spec過ed authorities or all councils; but after widespread opposi位on from Conserva位，ve ranks , the σ0 .f/字'6 Government only ex前cised the selective option. In 1985/86 , eighteen I 卅也 j highest spending au也orities were rate -capped, sixt海enofw趾ch wereLabour controlled. In response several capped authorities set 血βgalbudge怨 which flouted 也，e new restrÍc位ons ， but this defìance was short lived. As these authorities teetered on the brink of bankruptcy , errant councillors capitulated when threatened with personalliability for all excessive expenditure. As the political tensions between central and local government increased, \ and the fmancial co甜ols on local authorities tightened, the issue of i reform旭gthewhole 也!ll of扭曲nan凹， which had laid dormant since \ the report百1lle'Layfìeld Com凶ssion， ~eturned 切 the旦旦哩哇豆豆吧~a. During his fìrst period of tenure as Secretary of State for 也e Environment,..-/ Michael Heseltine published a Green Paper on rate reform 姐 1981 which explored the reform op位，ons. This Paper (Do宜， 1981) outlined several

I

、、、/"

26

27

,

T揖ation and Repr臼entation: The Media Poli位問l Commu凶間tionand 也ePollT缸

reform options , including a local inconie t眩， a sales tax, a poll ta玄， asys師m ofcen仕ally assigned revenues, and areformed rating system. However the consul祖位on process produced no consensus on a preferable altemative, and in the subsequent W姐.te Paper, it was concluded that the rating system 'should rem剖n for the foreseeable future' (Do盟， 1983: 14). Moreover , the problems ~血也e poll tax option were e:xplicitlyßtated: 'The tax would be hard to enforc也!fJhe electoral register wer~ used as asataxon 也e right to vot~. A new register would therefore probably be iieeded. But this woulamake the tax expensive to run and complicated, p訂位c叫缸ly if it incorporated a rebate scheme. Wi血out a rebate scheme a poll tax would bear harshly on people with low incomes ... The Government agrees with the En前， ron血ent Committee 血的 this option should be rejected' (i bid., 1983: 12). theb的isfor 扭曲也tyitco叫.dbes臼

As a statement of political intent , the Paper could not have been more categorical. Yet within a matter ofmonths the Government chose to renege on both its general resolu位on to keep the existing system in place , and its adamant rejection ofthe poll tax op位on. -::1

The return of the poll tax

0/

t

/

The main reason for the Govemm叫倘ddmMhintwis itsincreasing frustration at 也e failure of its fiscal conÌìols to secure dramatic 正面而話f -白白一一-巴巴血可一一一月戶戶戶戶\一一一的一-峭的-一一-戶、、一一-一 一、一-一一-戶戶，一一一-一-一-----in local expenditure.-In its view, there had been liniited successes: the 品面在誼trate-öfgrδ耐h in local revenue expenditure had been restricted to under 1 per cent (compared with levels in excess of 3 per cent during the 1960s and 1970s); there had been major reductions in local govemment employment levels; and the proportional contribu位on of exchequer grant to local expenditure had fallen from 61 per cent to 47 per cent (D unleavy and Rhodes , 1988; DoE , 1986a). However, these limited victories paled alongside the 18 per cent increase in local authority current e:xpenditure for 也e same period (Ridley , 1988; Do日， 1986a). of the廿 incremental 凹的盯'es was !inked to 也.e defensive responses oflocal authorities. Before rate-capping, manyauthorities ∞m­ 訴區組織ìôrpe回協副站碼 in central grant by increasing their levies on

~里她矗立堅e

28

4

ch旬ter 2:

A Brief間S紛ry of The Poll T，誼

local ratepayers. Other local au也orities chose 的 consistently 'spend up' because they rightly recognized that compliance wi也 the Government's expenditu削a耶tswould 油nply~壁壘 tofu抽er decreases in sub叫1ient expenditure targets. Furthermore, many au血orities e:xploited the coinplexities of the fmance 可駒m to mjnjmjze the effects of grant penalties (組d， latterly, rate-capping) by emplo抖ng ~ incre自旭gly söphisticated range of creative acéountancy technique(In 1984 , an Audit Cöininissioil report suggested that the complexities of the Blo c;k Grant system were inflating rather than reducing 血e amounts raised locally through the rates.

_

It was t恤s 全ustra位on at 也e thwarting of macro -economic objec位ves，

coupled with a series of increasingly acrimonious confrontations with veral Labour councils, that encouraged 也e Government to reconsider 伽 reformop伽 At the Conservati叫吋叫eren臼仰的ber1卿，你山 the Secret呵。f State for the Environment announced that r啞巴盟缸聽戶 可行 was back on th型體da and a new review ofthe reform options would take place. The key decision-ma蚵ng conceming 也is review was made at 也e 姐ghest level of Govemme帥，祖d involved secretive consultations between senior government m垣isters and their policy advisors. The task of reviewing possible reform options was delegated to two junior environmentm扭扭ters 組d then onwards to a secretive 'task for，間， convened by Lord Ro也schild， former head of Edward Heath's Policy Review Staff.

How啊， evenatt伽ta俱伽闊的叫ght have come to no恤峙的 ~ot been for the political impact ofthe 1985 rating revaluationin Scotland.

In Scotland rating revaluations had to be carried out every five years , and

the effects of the 1985 revaluation proved par位cularly h缸血， wi也 a. substan伽1 percentage of the burden for local taxation shifting from nOÍldo臨的前c to domestic properties. The resulting public outcry created consternation among Scottish Conservatives, and stirred p訂anoic projec位ons about the likely politi叫 effects of a simil叮 revaluation 姐 England and Wales (which was well overdue). Against such a prospect, abolition 甜emed a far preferable op位on 切 revision. The rehabilitation ofthe poll tax as a r~form option w的 crucially aided by

a

\1'/

帥er 仰川州 bl岫 i

昀 r ev 吋iew

period. In it the author chaf站一 against the 'po旭tless pursuit of perfi叫io叭n previous reviews and concluded , 'It is cle缸血的但雙ι 29

,

cbapter 2: A BriefHistory ofThe PolI Tax

T磁ation and Represen個位on: The Media PO加個l Commu函個.tion and the PolI T也

Î ~\ To rectify this cri呦， four mai:g_ch研ges were propose也_!?irst， the domestic rates would be replaced '\'Íth ~f1ji仕ate tax on all a 過s over the agè ofl8 , / levied by each local authori苟高高司苗訂前tsexpendi純正Ie耐高I而言在于 income from other so肘ces. People witl)., low income could b_e eligib峙，

~Jp more nearly matches the requkemen的 than aily other po鉗制旬， 做ason，

1985: 23). Theforcefully 缸那ed case for the poll tax proved very inf1uential on the deliberations of the policy think tank (MacGregor, 1988). Despite

in臼rnal

(世伽 叩ug O 叫 拉 hame叩酬ste 郎s叫

disagreements between members of the secretive task

l忱 ∞ca O 叫lc ∞ on仕肋 olofnon叫.-do血e 剖st伽 i泌 cra 前te 臼swouldber ，扭 'emo可aι.

Althoúgh councils would still colI ect this revenue，也e amount levied would be set nationally and any further increases would be index-linked. The resulting revenue would be pooled centralI y and then re-dis tributed back to local authorities according to the size of their population. Third , there would be 缸控na位cC (revisions 個也e local government gr甜可如~ with a simplified 咖temof Sþ ending assessments (l ater dubbed Standardized Spending Assessments)

force，伽均叫做曲 s的副吋切~車回艷旦旦控扭扭扭gent ka針。ca伽g th~坐監旦胞，

was enthusiastically receiv吋， and the - supporting m姐isters proposed 切 seek its adoption as GovernmeIÌ.t policy. In cabinet discussio自由e proposals had to wea也er fu此her opposition, P缸恥叫前lyfromthe 吐easury and the ChancelIor ofthe Exchequer (Lawqr son, 1992). Howev肘， bymid“ 1985 the policywas 0盤cially accepted , and inJanu缸y1986 琴~ Green Paper entitled ‘P~yingforLocalGovernmeIlr，was released, which sta話ãffië苗vernme帥'8 intentlon to replacet區正前swith-/ apolltax 一 or as it had beenrenamβd:the 旦旦哩mun局部泣聶

F?

~一~一一----

一

.-一一

一一一一'_.一一一一~卅一…r

血帥咖 d 紀 tβ 缸枷 削:rI咖ir 恤峙 時 n 19t伽 恤 he 閒 e l al巨 I必 10 ∞ 勘 c胸noft 枷 hene 帥 帥 e wRe 帥nueS 旬 呻 u pp 酬 叮 o rt 此tG 伽 阻 ra 缸n a 叫 1

t甘 ra 阻 ns 討it伽 i泊 ona 剖1

_

mechanisms would 呻 0pe 缸 ra 滋 te to ameliorate 扭mpo 叮 r缸a 即 y the alIocations and individual tax burdens that

m吋O 叫 r redis甜 t仕ri跆 bu位on 恤 grant wou 幽 l姐 doωc ∞ 叫 c 盯 u run 江nde 缸叫 E

'The way forward': the c個efor 血e Community Charge Wh atever subsequent judgements may have been made about the clai血s made by the 1986 Green Paper, it st沮 remains the most comprehensive and categorical exposition ofthe Government's rationale for replacing the

乙且堅型tllap.olI血﹒一 At the heart

of 也e

document rested the

proposition 也at

there was a

mal~sejp. loc叫 demoçx:a旬 ， the roots ofwhich could be directly traced back

些學愕蟬臨凹的懊悔哩坐坐些世間會且扭扭扭扭扭b

revealed several dimensions. F扯到， in an of the historical ev挂 oftaxa位on without representation , it 黨~ 主乙_claj盟edJ;hat too many people could vote for 姐gher local r帥s without having to pay for them. As a co凹equence of 血泊， prof1i gate authorities could continue their excessive expenditure sec盯e 恆 the knowledge 曲的 出e local tax burden would be borne unevenly , and thatmany local electors v benefitted from services they didn't have to pay fo(. SecQ且也_IlQ!!::曲回路且ι crisis of

'accou且tabilify' ,__.and

/inv首頁on

些些空空空~eresubjec叫 topu堅堅且堅空空空hizIom1臨姐l.，whilst 1hav詣。poppo助別ty 01!_(l主!1l~~JlUhel!壘的空空. Third , th仔哩pl~:x甜的 v 巫血色別及世且使拉扭扭且 were

so gre的 that 也ey helped obscure the consequences of local expenditure decisions. Fourth , these factors werè \ . compromising the power of cenj哩l-goJlernmentto pursue important macro-e conomic objectives 旭 controlling public spending. (

I

川、

v

where the po lI ta缸 xwouJdrun 叫 a10 叩 ng 酹s討id ，品 .e the rating sy 戶st峙 q血 for a 紛 ten 必-y 抑 e缸 period , and only accretively take over from the old system. The second was for a system of ‘safety nets' , where those local authorities who ga恆ed 旭come through商品函ñges would temporarily have these benefits redis. 甘ibuted to authorities who lost out.

J

As part of the process of increasing the accountability oflocal goveI'IlDie剖， 月líepap前 asserted that people needed 的 redefine how 血ey thought about"\ <:>_ (fl ο()'-'­ lòcal domestic taxation. Rather 也an measuring 也.e fairness of a local 個X according to the 'redistributive' principle (i.e i臼 relation to thβab也ty to pay) , it should be tested against the 'benefit' principle (i. e the extent to which people who benefitted from services contributed to their cost). In也is respect，也esemantics of 血eGQ同盟堅ent's decision 如 referto 也eimpost -
../

』司_-------

30

31

T酪ation and Represen組.tion: The Media, Political 臼mmu凶間.tionand 曲ePollTax

Chapter 2:

的

increases in Charge levels. Local au血orities would,@ longer be able to use 也ecompl創設es ofthe Block Grant sys恤， orpuni位ve 也esMq些空堅堅二/ tiQ_睦扭s， to bide 也βir overspending. This would mβan that local electors --lNo叫.d， for the 趾st time , have a s仕aigh由rw盯d measure of the relative efficiency and expendi個reof 也βir local authority.

Criticisms of 血e Green Paper From the outset it was clear the Governm:ent had taken on a m吋 ortaskin promoting such an ambitious policy. Although the Green Paper 姐姐ally received a positive response from Conservative M恥， the proposals were widely and intensively criticized from other sources. I!l Chapter 4 we iden位fy the main sources of 也is opposition and describ~ how they politically mobilized to challenge the Govemment's reform prògramme. In this [, section we concentrate on the main aspects of their objec位ons. These l criticisms centred 缸ound the equity and redistribu位ve implications of the , new system; its e血ciency; its implications for personal privacy; its impact i on the franchise; and its cons位tutional impact on local and central governI ment relations.

3、

Equity: 'winners and losers' As with any major t也 reform， considerable attention focused on the implications of the new system. The cri位cisms made on this issue related both to specific components of the reform package, and 切 its overall operation.

redis仕ibu位ve

The main

cri位cisms

of the Community Charge concerneß its manifest Although the Green Paper projected that 'winners anâ losers' under 也.e new syst冶m would be roughly equivalent (DoE, 1986a: 41) , critics 缸gued that these fi郎.ll'es were calculated 垣 a way that best supported the Govemment's case' and masked the structural inequities of

r'egressiven~ss.

thenβwsystem.

.............__the f1 at rate levy would bit lower 姐come groupings severely, particularly the 'nearly poor' … tho個 individuals whose modest incomes prevented them from qualifying for rebates. As a consequence of tbis, it would dis-

32

crimin……叮~dvar叫ed soc心。恥 Many~th叫_) '1 1

nority communities would be hea討ly bit by the ta.x，倒也eytend 切 livein larger adult households (Brown, 1984); are more likely 個 beb由edininner city 訂eas where it was projected the poll t a.x would be bighest (ALA , 1988); and 缸e more likely 抽 e耳>erience economic deprivation (Opp.enhe恤， 1987). Sim挂arly， the policy was seen as(~exually discriminative~as women 缸e more at risk from poverty due 切 lOWer levels of pay; 缸'e nÍore reliant upon income support; are more likely to be unemployed; and were specifically disadvantaged by the ru1 es on p盯恤ers' 'joint and several liab血旬， for ~ach others charges (αPFA， 1987). The ta.x叫so penalized ~ young peopleìfor s旭沮缸 re品。肘， and because a disproportionate n:umber ôfthe new additions 扭曲e local t a.x base would be adults under 24 years of age (LowPayUnit, 1987).

v

、/

臼倒t伽 i包c臼凶s 曲咖o re郎C呻叫伽 p附 a叫吋仗句ypo叫l叫 伽 di誼m 帥ne 閻蝴 油酬叫 酬 m e缸 n i伽 oωse 的 臼s r

issue. The Govemment made no apologies for'the fact that 1t an恥ipated poll t a.x levels to be very high in areas run by 'bigh spending' Labour authorities. In a BBC interview, a junior environment minister anticipated the system would 'run a coach and horses through 血e control that [Labour authori出s] have got in many 缸eas where , at the moment, not enough people 缸e ma垣ng a contribution towards the cost, and don't understand, as a res帥， thebighpricethatLabourcouncilsimpose' (Chr函， topher Chope , On the Record, BBC1 , 17/9/89). Opponents. 缸 é 邵ledthat 也is am叫edtoacrude 間耐抖 poli位“ gerrym空白型 crea伽ga 糊~ a位on where individuals couldùotafford to vote for ad呵úaúβservice provision. One commentator described this as an abuse ofthe concept ofpolitical accountabili旬， wbich not only concerns fiscal decisio肘， 'but also the relationsbip between the substance of local policies and local preferences ... When the humbug about accountability is stripped away from the Green Paper, the proposedreforms emerge 臼 an attemptto restrainrate revenue' (Boyne, 1986: 431).

~

Thβseinequitiβs had several intersec位ng dimensions. At a most basic level,

•

A Brief History of祖ePolI T:缸

Th at 1s, by quan吋ingw泌ners and losers by household rather than on 扭扭dividual basis.

Apart from criticizing the Community Charge 旭扭曲仕ibutive terms , critics also attacked its fairness in relation 切 the ‘benefit principle'. For, unIike charges for other services , individuals could not opt-out of paying the Charge by declining the services it provided , and this compulsion to pay prevented it 仕om qualifying as a charge. Furthermore, the untested assumption in the Green Paper that 也osewhopaid 也e least for local services benefitted from them the most was challenged as illfounded, with evidence 33

T磁ation and Repr四en個.tio眩Tbe Medi血， Politi開I 臼mmuni間.tionand 也.ePoIIT臨

cbapter 2: A BriefH樹ory ofTbe Poll T盟

provided that those who paid the most under the rates 叫sotended 切 have greatβst benefit from local services and a血enities (B ramley et al. , 1989).

ond , that councils might hold secret files behind their public register, '... notes , anec!lótes and suspicions the authori可 has about 旭dividuals' (ibi d.: 2). Third , that re斟stra位ono血cers would have unregulated access 切 alllists oflocal residents held by council departments - such as families register吋叫th social s削C賦 locallibrary card ho隘的哩哇JV council house list(. Fo叫出，也at individuals wouldhave only limited acc臨 to the information held on them held by 也e local authority. Fifth, thatthe nationwide implementation of也e poll tax would mean the crea位恤， forthe first time , of a complete list ofthe names and addresses ofthe whole adult population. Al though the Government maintained that each locallist was sep缸a妞， there would be strong argu血en郎， to ma封閉ize efficien呵， for ma蝦ngtheda個姐也e registers compatible to allow transfers of 姐forma.崗 位on when people moved. In conclusion , the group requested further safe那訂ds to protect personal priyacy, but also identified an 'ïrreconcilable conflict between the need for 也e efficient collectionl。扭扭x ofthis kind and ~ recording 也e

4tad

FLU OLM

ρLW

It was also claimed 血at the particularly regressive aspects of 也e domestic 組xation changes , would be exacerbated by the new methods for grant allocation and non domestic taxation. This was because these accompany旭g reforms would s凶't revenue away from poorer, indus出alized inner city authorities ， ωwards more affiuent suburban and rural regions 札G泊， 1989; Es am and Oppenhei血， 1989). For businesses , the rating burden would shift from Nor血 to South, from the manufacturing to reta設 sector， andfrombig 的 small business.' E R n uu The efficiency of the new system was also questioned. By 扭頭ng people rather than property , and thereby nearly doubling the local tax base , the

可 iz

， e

J'

‘，

H、

c

}味

administrative logis位.cs and costs of local taxation were substantially 妞， creased , with 也e prospect of widespread evasion of the tax. The fact 也at ( these additional adminstrative cosjs , and any shor呀'all in revenue due to non payme前， would have 切 bé paid by the charge payers themselves, added a further piquancy 旬出ese objections.

叫做位onfPri叫仰:d.~)正

/

t

v

Francmse implications

Privacy implications A further concern raised by the increased administrative demands of the system, was 曲的 it might encourage greater in個lSiveness by councils in people's private affairs in their e fl'orts to enforce the 個x. In 1988 , the National Council for Civil Liberties co血血ented: 'The Government's plans to replace the domestic rates based on property with a f1at rate tax is not 姐 itseIf a civilliberty issue. But the way in which the new tax will be administered and enforced will pose serious threats to the privacy ofthe entire ad叫tpop叫甜凹， andcreate thepoten位al for greater control by central and local government over the individual' (NCαJ， 1988: 1). The concerns of the influential press肘e group were fivefold. Fir泣，也at there was no safeguard in either 也e legislation or the Data Protection Act to prevent local authorities from gathering unnecessary information. Sec-

* In addition. it was feared that cen仕allzing business rate con仕01 would undermlne the par個ership between local authorities and their business sectors. 34

出于

Constitutional implications It w卸的。 cl訟m仙hat

the reform package wou旭 sqhuSKQ扭扭控ι___/

theind吧空空間 ceoflocalg的空但雙吱ycen甘alizing control ofbusiness 區te

revenue , the proportion of local authority revenue met from local would be reduced from around haIf to a qu前慨， w.恤ch significantly increased 也.e importance of grant assessments in the setting of charge levels (Blair , op. cit.). Whereas the Government saw th泊 as a virtue … enhancing the fmancial account抽出ty of local authoritiβs by exposing

t磁es

35

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli位開l Commu剖開tion aiJ.d 也èPolI T，阻 charge payers to every pound 也eir council ‘over spent' 一 critics clai血ed 也at because all expenditure above Government assessments would have 個 be raised from only a qu盯ter of the authorities revenue base (i. e domes位c revenue) , excess expenditure would have a powerful distorting effect on Charge levels , leading 如 dispropor位onate increases for mar斟naI overspending (the so-called ‘ge自祖g' effect). T趾sw自 seen 切 seriously comprom.ise the accountability 訂訊lID.ent， and expose the exercise as a cynicaI attempt to use electoral resistance to higher taxes 切 force savage cuts in loc aI expené加lI'e. Fur也ermore，

the greater importance of central government assessments 恤 determining loc aI taxation levels 隘的itably raised concerns about the accuracy of 也ese grant assessments. In p盯位c叫缸， that 'simplifying' the needs assessment equation, would make 也em less sensitive 旬出epar位C恥 lar needs and conditions of different 缸e臼.

A chronology of chaos: the ri田 and demise of 血e Community Cha培e

'Theh胸ryofthepoll t扭曲伽tesh叫oliciesc叫aVI鈔鷗nded 九/

內心 74

-dJiJi

Jdr

玲、叫

JUMhjν

:1nyfu

consequences that give them a dynamic beyond the ima斟na位onofthe originaI proponents. The Government became caught in a 10蟬c of events of which it lost c甜甜;站前ould no longer direct towards its desired ends' (St詣r， 19訂了三 03-204).

These then were the main criticisms and claims made for the Community Charge , and are important to be訂旭 mind when apprais恆g the terms of public and media debate on the tax. However, before addressing these ma位ers one important contextual task remains. This is briefly to map the ?21' main events in the inglorious c缸eer of the Community Ch缸ge， fromits ,/ f趾st presentation 區別 6 to its abolition 姐 1993. }

Chap紛r 2:

A BriefHistory ofThe Poll Ta玄

1987Gener叫Election，

which the Conservatives won in June with a barely reduced majority ofnearly 100 MPs. In the post-elec位on Cabinetreshu血e， KennethBaker , who had been one ofthe principal architects ofthe reforms , was replaced by Nicholas Ridley 由 Secretary ofState for the Environment for England. Álthough initially Ridley had been scepticaI about the fea叫“ b也.ty ofthe poll tax option (L awson, 1992), by the time of旭sappo旭個.ent r­ he was fully in favour ofthe proposals, and 如ok 切 promoting the tax with “l 也e enthusiasm of a convert (Ridley, op. cit.). The triumphal post-election Conservative P叮ty conference of that ye缸 血缸ked a crucial turning point in the implementation ofthe policy. Party ac位vists urged the Government to abandon the plan to run the poll 個x alongside the existing system, and introduce 也e Community Charge 區 one go. Byadoptingthe ‘big bang' approachit was argued that those people exploited by 也e rates would benefit immediately from the redis仕ibutive effects of the new system. The P缸ty leadership willingly acceded ω 也is app缸entunanimity ofp缸ty opinion and agreedωintroduce the tax in one goin1990 , ap訂t from ln those London authorities that 'would be h缸dest hit by the new 叮rangements. • However, when the 1987 Local Government Finance Bill entered P缸油" ment s戶。凹的 omedupM恤伽臼nserva泣的吋:??emd/ 川、.c - (; Readin拭 was marked bv an acrimonious debate on the fairness and effec昀 of the poll t臨 proposal. While the proposing m垣ister clai血面1he new t 可stem w。“官豆ood for locaI democracy' (Hansard , 16/12/87: 叫 1119) ，也e 血ain opposition p缸ty described 泌的 'a threat 怕也mocracy itself (Hansard , 16/12/87: coll131). Senior fi♂lI'es on the left of the Conservative P訂ty also voiced s位ious concerns - most noteably the exEnvironment Secretary, Michael Heseltine and ex-P訂ty lead肘， Edward Hea由.

Following 也e

publication of the Green Paper 隘 1986 ， the Government moved quickly 切 introduce the legislation for Scotland. At the end of that ye訂 legislation for 也e accelerated introduction of the system in Scotland (The Abolition ofDomestic Rates Etc. [Scotland] Bill) entered Parliament, and received its Royal Assent the following March. Unlike the le斟slation for England and Wales , this B也 passed with comp叮ative ease , with no Co nservative P缸ty back bench rebellion. Le gislation for England and Wales was held in abeyance until after the

36

/ • The decision to introduce the tax over four ye訂s in London wω aIso subsequently rescinded. 37

,

Chapter 2: A BriefHistory ofThe Poll Tax

T盟ation and Represen個tion: The Media Politi，個1 Communica位on and the Poll T;也

I! by a system of 'banded' poll tax肘， that would link the sys切m more direcdy …且 rLL主o..abilitj:_!旦pa~ A vote on the amendment was held on the 19 April19 8 8 , /作 ;μqprior 切 the ;-,

Bill's Third Reading, and fears of its success prompted the Government to announce 個 additional í13o million for rebates to 1函面前ow 恆晶磊五函ies fr~the 站站 ofthe new 石方he con... cession bought ofl' a su血cient number of Co nservative rebels 切 defeatthe amendment with a reduced Government majority of 25. -!

As the B世 passed to the Lords ，也ere was anticipation that 也e upper chamber might impede its progress to the statute books , or at least force the Government into major revisions. However, a rebellion headed by Conservative peer Lord Chelmsford was swamped by Government whips who dragooned various 'backwoodsmen' (Peers who rarely or never attended \theHousedLords)intotheHouseofLordstDSUpporttheGovernment-The Finance Bill passed through the Lords with a huge Governmentmajority of 134, following the highest turnout ofConservative peers since 197 1. ?、

Although political controversy over the poll tax intensified in Scotland dur恆g 1 9 8 , there fol lowed a h ia tu s in the p 仰 oli位缸ca 叫ld 由 eb 加 at扭 einE啤lar吋 an Wales. However, the issue re吟merged once again in early 1989 , wi也 the introduction of the Community Ch訂ge in Scotland and the st缸t ofthe registration process 垣England and Wales. Here ag訟n， m吋 or 也血c叫做s emerged for the Government. First, as we discuss in the next chapter, a m吋 or Government publicity ofl'ensive timed to coincide with these events went dram諸位cally awry , causing considerable embarrassment to m姐is­ ters. Second, concerns about the intrusiveness of the new tax system seemed to be borne out by the conduct ofthe re斟stra位on process. Despite ass盯阻ces from the Environment Secretary that 'strict limits' would be placed on 也e 姐forma位on which registration 0誼cers could obtain about 恆dividuals (DoE News Release , 17/3/89 , No. 145), many local authorities requested excessive or irrelevant information on their registration forms. Out of the 403 forms examined by the Data Protection Registrar, only 37 were passed and 304 author闊的 were asked to clarify the purpose behind some oftheir questions (Liberty , 1989 a). In response to the controversy the Secretary of State directed local authorities to avoid being too intrusive on their registration forms , but admitted he had 'no power to prescribe the content ofany form' (DoE News Release , No. 344, 19/6/89: 2).

9

The 也ird

problem concerned 血e proposals for a self-financing system of 'safety nets' which were intended temporarily to cushion the profound

38

可

redistributive efl'ects ofthe new tax system. The scheme - where 'winners' had their gains redistributed back to authori位es who lost out- had already been criticized as a smoke screen that would cynically obscure the full extent of the redis甘ibution of income from poorer local authority 缸easto more affluent authorities (Esam and Oppenhei臨， op. cit.; Lee, 1989;IβIU， op. cit.). However, the thrust ofthe con仕oversy on this occasion originated '. from the Government's own 阻pporters， who criticized the system for apparently requiring pars旭0到ous Conserva位ve authorities to subsidize 可 '.profligate' Labour counci弘In也e face of this criticism, even Margaret ! Thatcher publicly conced@_that 'the transition period is flatly contradic- \ tory to the basic philosophy, so we have got to find a way through' (Daily J Express , 7/9/89: 9) , and at the Conservative P缸ty conferen臼 it w的 announced 血的 the safety nets would be dropped after the first ye缸， and that 也e Treasury would fund the costs 切 losing authorities over the ensuing three years , at a cost of í600 m到ion. Furthermore, a new syste血 。f 仕ansitional relief was 隘troduced for households who were h缸desthit bythenewt缸， atanaddi位onal cost of í3 75 million (Giþs妞， 1990). A Cabinet reshuflle in July 1989 replaced the rightwing Nicholas Ridley 的 Secretary of State for the Environment with the more modera臼 figure of ChrisPa此e且， whose less combative political profile it was hoped wouldhelp ea田 the pathway to implementation. However , he had not been in oflìce long before he w個 confronted by an escalating political crisis over the Community Charge which made all the preceding difficulties pale into 旭sign的cance.

The troubles seriously began in January 1990 , following the announcement of the outcome of the revaluation of business prope的ies and the first realization by many businesses of how much more taxation 出ey wouldhave 切 pay. Matters took an even more serious t1.玟n in late Febm缸y， when local authorities were notified of 也eir grant allocations and started setting the first Community Charges. These initial charge levels greatly e:lfc~eded the Government' s prior projec位ons of probable taxation levels. ìú November 1989 ，也e Government announced 血的 the average Communi可 Charge in England and Wales wouldbe ￡278i:providedlocal au也orities met central government spending assessments. Although this figure itself represented a considerable 姐crease on previous oflìcial es位mates ， the actual average charge level exceeded this projec位on by more than í80. Furthermore many Conserva-

戶戶 ff

f

_;

39

,

Chapter 2: A Brief History ofThe Poll Tax

levied charges in excess of f4 00 per

behind the 1990 Conservative Party leadership contest. For, although Margaret Thatcher's stance on European policy was the catalyst for a serious challenge to her leadership , the main reason for her defeat lay 融 the parliamentary party's concern about her dogged defence of a tax that was seriously compromis旭gtheP缸旬's electoral credib血ty (Gibson , op. cit.; MacGreg肘， 1991).

T阻ation and Representation: The Media Poli封閉l Communi個組on aIid 也ePollTax

tive as well as person.

Labo盯 authori位es

(,'\

ν./ The impact of 也e~~J!9-bxpectedly ];lÏgh charge~ were twofold. Firstly, the bitter wrangling onthe policy within the Cónservative P叮叮 over the policy turned into open warf盯吉它站前宣部的百ëkbe吋ers， from the right as well as the left ofthe Party, openly turned on the Govern血.entand exhorted them to repeal such an unpopular policy. At local Government level, anger was even more vocifero肘， and there followed a spate ofhigh profile resignations and defections among Conservative councillors and ,_'

仁岫岫gJ伽峭的 victory 祖削吋r的∞臨今 the pros伊ct of/ the repeal of the poll tax became a very real poss晶晶ty. Michael Heseltine was appointed as Environment Secretary and embarked on a fundamental review ofthe struc個re and finance oflocal government. Over the ensuing months rumours circulated about the reform options under consideration and whether the poll t阻 would be abandoned completely. However , the P訂旬's disastrous showing at the Ribble Valley by-e lection finally severed the Government' s com血i位nent to the policy.

ac位.vists.

\'/'

q

óì ':)-

l ')

(巴

were held across England and Wφ〉 against 也e 個x and its harsh impact. In Conservative 個 well as Labour areas, people demonstrated their dis afIection with 也e policy and the Govern血ent.Ons臼 eve 叮r 阻 叫 aloc ∞ca 卸si切 ons 泌st也 herewer肘e 叮r切1凶 1泌sb 伽re 侃 ache 臼sofpubli切 Cωo 肘 ;rde 賦 巳, r , the most violent of which occurred on 31 March 1990, when a public r demonstra位on in the centre of London disi帥grated in如在且也包些 which led to many 缸Tests and injuries and millions of pounds worth of damage. So intense was the controversy over the policy, the Government was forced to make several immediate concessions, and instituted an internal review ofthe policy an前后鼠忌站~ Secondl public

demonstr枷ns

The combination of public outrage aga姐st the poll t紹， internecine strife wit坦n the Conservative p前旬， and a rejuvenated politicãl oppositíon)lad adrama位c impact upon the P缸旬，詢服服司1'õït聞自7缸站前clrt到íOthe 印nserva位.ves句時hold of Mi d Stafli。他hirefell 旭 a by-election to Labour with a swing o( 2J型rce時!.-l\fationa峙， Labour's opinion polllead rose to unpr凹函區ïïféd"Iieights ， and the Pri血eM姐ister's 叮edib血ty sank: to an all time low. In也e May local government elections the Labour P盯tymade sweep坦gg訟ns at the Conservatives' expense , although they failed to secure two ofthe Tory' s 'flagship' boroughs, which had levied particularly low Community Charges. In October 1990 , another Conservative stronghold fell 迦 a 坤'-election. In Eastbourne a Conservative majority of nearly 17 ,000 w的 converted 旭to a 妥， 500 majority for the Liberal Democrats. Thisw部 followed the next month by an appalling showing for the Cons缸" vatives in the Bradford North by-election, where they came in a poor third. In March 1991 , the Conservatives also lost the Ribble Valley by-election, withavo位ng swing of 2 5 per cent to 也e Liberal Democrats.

/賞。llowing 也e

/

v

ν

、、--巴-唱----

(Cl C{" ，)、 、 J

The Government' s persistent diflìculties wi也 the policy was a key factor 40

setting of the

second 典型's

poll t缸軾的urp恥的lanket I

l reduction in C個nnunityCh叫es o(t14Q)vas announced in the Chancel- I

v

"lor' s budget speech , which was to be funded by an increase in 也e standard ,..1 rate of Value Added Tax from 15 per cent to 17.5 per cent. This w部 followed a few weeks later by a Commons statementfrom the Environment ( Sec闊的血的 the poll t阻 W唔;些控旦hhk豆豆握主盟主扭d replaced with ~/ new local tax. It took several further weeks for the Govèrnment to present the particular details ofthe replacement to Parliament. On 23 April19 91 , after days of informed media specula位on， Michael Heseltine let the House ofCommons in on the worst kept secret in politics: that th世Qlac空空空吧? vfGZY _theCom血U凶ty Charge would be a new property based 'Co uncil Tax九?

'a

、‘、

_--也『風向旬，

一、---間_-也也包個問-圍區旬---叫-"_間-﹒--囡-

Under these new arrangements , every domestic property would be 帥" sessed as to its capital value , and placed within several bands. The Council Tax would be levied according to the band in which a property fell (the more valuable the property , the higher the band, and the higher the Council Tax levied) , and the number of adults living in the property (single adult households could claim a 2 5 per cent reduction in their Council Tax). The new business taxation and central grant 缸rangements remained essen位ally unchanged. The consulta位on period for 也e Council Tax w部 very brief and the legislation was forced through parliament where the proposals met with no back bench oppositionj:五 March 1992 the Counclll Tax became law, and on 1 April1993 repl成ed the poll 個x in England,J Scotland and Wales.

J

r'lf) 咱

3

2γyι~-' 、

41

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli位叫Communi阻tion and the Poll Ti揖

Chapter 2: A Brief History ofThe Poll Tax

h 也e final two ye盯'S between the announcement and actualrepeal ofthe

controlled. However, a Warwick U凶versity study 扭扭 the effects of nonregistra位on for the poll t也 on the election produced less sangt曲econclu­ sions. According to the study's 'central estimate' , had poll tax disen全anc凶emepg涉 been a factor during the election, the Conservati冊， majority would have been reduced to only five seats (eight less than its actual majority). This would have seriously increased the political 叭血er晶晶tyof 也.enewad血恤istration (Smith and Maclean , op. cit.).

Co mmunity Charge , the fmancial pressure on local aq，thor峙的 intens血.ed ♂s 1缸ge

numbers of people continued not to pay. 耳y April 1993 , :t:1 .5 billion was still owed in poll tax arre缸s (Br∞血， 1994). Furthermore, disturb坦g evidence emerged about the detrimental impact non“ 'payment may have had on the electoral process. 0血cial figures published by the Office of Population Census and Surveys (OPCS) 祖 1991 estimated a shortfall of 1 million people between those registered to vote and those eligible. Al though a drop 恆 electoral rolls had been app訂ent since 1 9. 8~色， it accelerated appreciably between 1988 and 1991 , coincident with the arrival of the poll tax (Pop u1a tion Trends, 1991: 2). Over this three-ye缸 period, the proportion of adul個 eligible to vote and who had registered in Britain fell from 97.9 per 臼nt to 95.6 per cent, with 也e decline most evident amongst young people who had just attained the right 切 vote (ibi d.). According to one academic study, more than a third ofthis discrepancy was due to people not registering to avoid the poll t阻 (Smith and Macle阻， 1992). Poll 個x dodging also seriously affected the t間-yearly national census survey, conductedin 1991 , wi也 the 姐姐al canvas underestimating the actual population by an estimated 1.8 million people (Independent on Sunday , 13/9/92).

Widespread concerns about the state of the electoral register in 1991 prompted many local authorities to conduct voter re斟s仕a位on drives, which partially arrested the decline in electoral rolls before the 1992 General Election aen恆的， 1992). For example , research by the Electoral Reform Society found that 229 ,064 voters in a sample of 300 local authority 缸eas 旭England and Wales had surrendered th耐 right 的 vote， against a pr吋ected decline (b ased on 1991 figures) of 280 ,000. Even so, 也e Society' s spokesperson commented , 'It is still a sad day for democracy when people have decided to forego the right to vote because it would cost them 切 o much money' (Independent , 25/3/92: 2). The 凹-election of a majority Conservative Government in the April1992 General Election, which confounded both political expecta位ons and opinion poll projections, raised questions about the hidden influence poll tax di闊的anchisement may have had on the election outcome by discourag垣g potential Labour supporters. According to Butler and Kavanagh (1992: 232) it isn't possible to argue that Labour lost the election 也rough the deliberate non-registration ofits supporters , because those areas where poll t位 motivated deregistration was most app缸ent were already Labour 42

Beyond the possible influence that poll tax dodging may have had for the outcome ofthe General Election, the main opposition parties also expressed concerns about the impact the low registrations might have for the delibera位ons of the Bound訟ry Commission, which by law had to base the p缸" liamentary boundaries from 1996 onw缸缸， on the figures from the 1991 electoral rolls en旭肘 ， op. cit.; Smith and Macle妞， op. cit.).

a

Concerns about local authority 旭trusions 凶to personal privacy also 間， mained, despite the earlier intervention of the Data Protection regis仗ar. In 1988 , it was announced that British Telecom had estaölished a f4 million computer system to enable local authorities to exchange infor血ation about charge payers , and track individu的 across local authority 盯e部 (Thornto且， 1989). By late 1991 ，也e Community Charge Information Exchange (CC閱 was used by 107 councils throughout England and Wales , and had handled in excess of 120,000 charge payer records in the previous ye缸扭ritish Telecom Print and Dispatβh Bureau promotional literature [1992] Customer Systems). In 1990，油 a flagrant disregard of conventions on pe位tioners' rights , Charnwood Borough Co uncil cross referenced the names and addresses on an anti poll tax petition it received with its own Community Charge register to 仕ack down non-payees; and in 199 1, the civil rights group Liberty challenged severallocal authorities who were threatening to withdraw services to persons not registered on their Co mmunity Charge register 伊拉油， 1991).

Summary and conclusions In this chapter we have outlined the his切rical origins of the Community

Charge and described its ignominious progression from inception through to abolition. We have also demonstrated how the political debate about the policy's practicality and propriety operated on a range of different levels , 43

,

Ta:xa位on and Representation: The Media Political 臼mmunlcation and the Poll Ta:x

li晶晶旬，

們知

raising issues of local democracy, personal macro -economics, and individual rights.

equity, efficiency,

h anr eVL q3 4.b

,.,_/

v

It is i血portant to be叮也e complexity and breadth of this debate in 血旭d when examining how this debate was publicly cons甘ucted by the policy' s main protaganists and the local and na位onal media, in particular when considering which aspects of the debate featured most pro血inently 個d whichwerem缸斟nali品妒。r it is by attending to these details that we can gain a sense of how journalists and political actors ac位vely constructed and inhibited the structure of public debate.

Selling Accountability: Government Promotion ofthe Community Charge

The more people know about the Community Charge, the more they will support it. The opposition are so frightened of the Comm叫旬 Charge that they are not even prepared to ca11 it by its proper nQJ帥， John Gummer , MinistβrforLocal Govem血ent，

10/5/89 , Hansard, Column 864.

A… sw

叫…叫蝴 a酹仰叫叫… 的晶… off訂t血 他伽叫 蚓 he 伽制 叫i e

旭蚵 ea 吋$叮 yt切 o 跆r 站 ge 吧 t口」垃捶鎧型恆血抄sm 血w 叫it 也 hw趾ch 伽 the

Government promoted the Communi句 Chargeto 也e British public. In in仕oducing a major fiscal innova位on against a background of considerable public suspicion, t4e Govemmegt recognized the crucial 煙z

v""

些堅堅坐坐坐且也世祖亞混血叫想空空控世啞斗

~-pce ofthe poucy.Accordingly it concentrated a 6石油aerable amount of 位me and expenditure on trying 切 promote 也e policy' s merits to an unconvinced electorate. In this chapter we examine the main features of this strategy and how itdeveloped in anticipation of, andin reaction to , broader political factors.

r

\

\

\ This discussion focuses exclusively upon central govemmen,t: both in its 品le as the site of national executive power and as 也e dominant political p缸ty. This is because of the particular manner 姐 which the policy w的 formulated and promoteιMarsh and Rhodes (1989) have observed that one ofthe deftning features ofthe late Thatcher a也n恆istrations w倒也eir autocratic , 'top down' approach to policy formulation and implementation. The poll 祖x was a classic example of this. Conceived in a conspiracy of clandestine meetin郎， from its first public presentation to its introduction in England and Wales , the Communi句 Ch盯ge represented a po加calfait accompli (a few major concessions notwithst扭曲的. And just as the G仰， 44

45

,

T酪a鈍。n and Representation: The Media Poli位cal Communi個.tion and the Poll T臨

ch旬ter 3: Selling A血。untab血句: Govemment.Promotion ofthe 臼mmunity Charge

emment circumvented the for祖al conventions of consultation , so its pilblic relations work was organized and financed in a 'top down' manner (whether through Government departments or Conservative Central 0ι fice). Although local authorities were expected to assist in increasing public understanding of the change (largely in support of their own self 姐terest) ， they never featured centrally in the Govemme帥's mission to explain:

In ana位empt 切 distance the

Preparing 由e presentation

From the first secretive discuss泌的 of the policy review tea血，也eGovernmentrecog叫zec!Jhat by replacing the 甜sting rating sy的祖Wfih a tlat~;l:， ~-1品;否話石nalle可， itwas emb缸垃ng on an ambitious and risky ven抽血﹒ i VJ Once the review team's proposals had been approved by 布ecabinet， discussions began at the Depar位nent ofthβ Environment as to how the policy could be most efl'ectively promoted to the British electorate. Atten- ~ v一位on particularly focused on ~~ brand image ofthe proposed tax_!. Although flatrate，區div組uallevies ha兩兩屆而直宙品店血而哥哥tpoUt位es'， there was an understandable concem about the nβgative historical conn心 ta位ons of such a name. In fourteenth century England every adult over fifteen years of age had beenrequired to pay a 田ries ofpoll taxes to fund the coun仕y's foreign w缸s. As the amounts levied gradually increased, and evasion became more prevalent, commissioners were sent out 切 forcibly collect the a虹'ears from around the coun紅y. The ensuing peasants' revolt, led byWatt 吋1肘， resulted 旭 a march on the capi凶， the storming of the Towerof London， andthβexecution of several ministers held responsible for the levy. This melodramatic and heroic ancestry was to be fully ex-: ploited by later opponents of 血e poll tax, linking the battle ag組nst the Co mmunity Ch缸gewi也 images of a down-trodden peasan旬， resiliently resisting oppression.

policy from such an unpromis旭ghis切rical precedent, a nam姐g sessiön was convened at the Department of Environment， wher而函sters面前eniorci討1 servants struggled to find a new title 血atwouldsi但ify a more modem and positive image. Several options were considered, including Council Ch盯ge (也smissed 師、∞ bureaucratic'); R:esidents Chatge ('too confusing'); and Residence Charge ('too bo曰“ geöis') , before itwas decided to opt for 血e Community Charge (Dispatches , Channel 妥， 1113 月 3).Once 也is had been decided, the Government p凹， pared to go public With its big new idea , wh~h it was hoped would bring local govemment to heel and sec叫e its political hegemony for ye盯s to come.

。

r

The only exceptions were the so-called 'llagship' Thatcherite authorities of Waudswor曲， Wes恤1nster aud Bradford 也at levied low polI taxes , aud Conservative Cen仕alOffi臼 sought to use as illustra位.ve examples ofthe direct linkage between cost efficle恥于 aud low local t酷的. However, al也.ough ωuncll leaders 卸血也.ese authorities colIuded cl的ely with Conserva設ve Ce ntral Office 1n promoting the poli位calmerits ofthereforms, their ∞unclls' official publicity material pursued amore moderate line. In recognition of the deep public autipathy to 也.e t器，也.eir publiclty material avoided endorsing its princip曲， aud focus吋 on the value for money the co叫mcils provided aud how that rellected 旭 the low charges levied 仰eacon 個d Golding, 1993). As theHead ofthePRdepar恤ent from one of 血的 eau也orities put it 坦泊terview. 'Co uncillors have g的 tog成 themselves elect憑此 46

'You and the Co mmunity Charge': the Government goes public An article published in the Guαrdian in early 1990 , questioned whether the Govemment ever seriously considered aggressively promoting the poll tax 曲rough high profùe publicity campaigns. Commenting on the anodyne quality of 也e last concerted Govemment publicity ca血paign on the poll t位 in England and Wales , the article concluded: 'Ame也ure likely to prove as ).IDpopular 部 the Community Charge … as it will be called in all Gover函ñëntcampaigns - can only be presented 切也e public 旭 its most sani位zed form , not piled high and sold cheap onourTVscreens' (G阻rdian， 9/1/90: 25).

However , closer examination ofthe timing , content and expenditure ofthe Govemment's promotional work reveals a more complex picture. In p缸， tic叫缸， it shows that any reticence evident in later campai扭扭gwas 盟L apparent in preceding campaigns, but reflected a 位midity bome of consistent failure to elicit public, media and intra-party support for 也epolicy.

A 三

47

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli位問1 Com.munication and 也ePoIl T，也 也ese two strategies changed as the policy cycle proceeded, as did the nature ofthe messages conveyed. These changes were 1叮gely dictated by contextual poli位cal developments. Prior to the tax's introduction in England and Wales , the pro血otion of 也e Community Charge cen仕'ed on formal , PR ini位ativ帥，血的趾st stridently extolled 也e merits ofthe policy, but latterly became more reserved and descriptiVJY.'A t the same time, news----'''--._且體質哩~nt work became 知 more significant, as ministers first strove to 詛mit the crisis of confidence in the new tax, and then to find a publicly acceptable alternative. In the sections below we describe 也ese developments in greater de個il and consider critical ques鈍。ns about the propriety ofmany oftheir features.

Poll tax public relations: leaflets and book:lets The first poll tax publicity material was distributed at a very early stage. In 1986 , alongside the publication ofthe Green Paper, a 'popul訂 version' was prepared for wider public consumption, en位tled Paying for 月~n LocalGovernment:Proposubjbrch呵呵。， OOpof 也ese miniature version紗， were distributed within a year, after 'sù磁區 tial demand' (Committee of PublicAccounts, 1990: 14).

Janu缸y 戶、ιJ

)'1\1'廿一

/.V~

h1i

!圳/

而 \'P

8

?; ';'‘

No further publicity material was distributed until after the Conservatives' in the 1987 General Election. However, on return to 0血ce， the Thatcher adminis仕ation started to mobilize the considerable resources of Whitehall's public relations machinery to explain and promote their 'flagship' policy. vic的ry

In October 1987, the Department ofEnvironment issued a twelve page booklet 的 supplantthe earlier summary ofthe GreenPaper. En位tledPaying

/]. 1

1.

'"

nν

、

，

D

MT 司

(l

、

qu 1t f

t、月

for Local Government: The Needfor Change , it contrasted 也e perceived merits of a 'Community Charge' with the inequities and inadequacies ofthe rating system, local income tax, and greater central government control. 1t concluded with the confident prediction that the reforms woulc!_pr.gvide a/ 'greaters呵， and 'a fairer share' for all in local government~'3， OOQ，èopiè~ of this leaflet were distrïbuted before it，姐個rn， was supplaììted1)y revised publicity material (i bid.: 14).

la6~./ In December1988 組 attractive，

48

twenty page boo磁eten位tled You and the Commu叫句 Charge: Your Step by Step Guide w的 released which ag到ngave details ofthe reforms and their underlying rationale. ('No 血ethod ofr帥，

Chap伽 3: se血ngAαountab血跡 Government Promotion of也e Com.munity ch前那

ing money is very popular but there has been a great deal of cri位cism of domestic rates for a long time... Atthe moment, halfthe electors in England pay nothing directly towards the cost of their local services. With the Community Charge，也is will no longer be the case. This will share the burden of paying for council services more widely and among almost all those who use them'.) The booklet w部 illustrated throughout wi也 C缸'_ toons of people of difl'e rent ages , occupa位ons and ethnic groups , all smiling enigmatically. These euphoric ci位zens became something of a 'brand image' for a while , and were the object of considerable satirical comment.

r-

( 8everal additional back-up leaflet為 were 叫so produced to provide mored aetailed information on individúal 部pects of the reforms; such as the business rate , exemptions from the tax, students and the Community Charge , the rebate scheme , the collective Com血U到ty Charge , and the appeal system. (‘ You cannot appeal against the amount of Community Charge you are asked to pay. That is fixed by your local counc泣， just 倒也ey used to fIx the rates' , You and the Community Charge: 到ze Appea1s System).

Çh叭。幽ts were followed up fo肘 mon也s 1咖耐心 even more r一一一一一一一一九

弋左空部主~啞i\1凹的lic relations ofl'ensive. In May 19 8 ~a3 million leafle旬，

._

^!J

/9 /l'}

仆的

en凶ed Th e Communi旬 Cha咖 (TheS叫a1led'Poll 凹的丑。叫t'Will Wõrk ~么， for You) were 晶晶uted 切的ery household in England and Wales at a 乙之二­ totalcost of f.1. 78million (Guarman , 11/5/89). In this briefleafletthe '8tep by 8tep' Guide was distilled into twentythree questions and answers. These were variously designed to explain the reforms ('Broadly, the following groups w由 not have to pay, i.e. will be exempt'); 如 promote its merits (‘ Only about half of all adults pay rates. 80 the Community Charge will share out the cost oflocal services amongst nearly everyone'); to dissuade p~ople from attempting to avoid it ('1t will not be easy 切 get out of paying the Co mmunity Ch缸ge'); to allay fears ('What if1 have di盟c世ty 扭扭ling in the form? The Registra位on Officer will be happy to help you'); and to refute criticisms ('The Community Charge has nothing to do with the right to vote'). Once ag曲， readers were encouraged to apply for supplement倒了 leaflets for more detailed infor四ation about the tax ('If the Community Charge is low enough , you may even be 旭 pocket. But ifyour council sets a high Co mmunity Ch盯阱， then your extra income may not cover all ofthe 20 per cent you will have to pay' , You and the Community Charge: Rebates). (9 訂可

In J帥的肌伽的叫叫 age叫學泣叫 Ma伽bwereCOInmb sioned to design a nationwide 'How to Pay Less'

adverti~ing campaign on (

一././11 弓( \ ,! "-l-

;~"'/

49

f7JU

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Political 臼mmnnica位on and the Poll T:揖

Chapter 3: Selling Acconntability: Govemment Promotion of也e Commnnity Char伊

印mm叫ty Ch前ge Benefits ，出的切olMKFSion， localmd national press and mag也隘的 at a final cost~o趕在EEEM(DOENewsbl師已 No. 6 , 4/1190; Campaign , 6 April1990). This final amount considerably exceeded 也e f1million initially projected for the account when tenders were invited in November 1989. The agency's chairperson , Mike Walsh , stressed the campaign would have 'no slogans , no gimmicks and no logos' (Campai仰， 24/11/8 肘， and there was a cle叮 difference 恤 its tone and content. Gone were the critiques of the rating system and the discourses about the political urgency ofmaking every adult con仕ibute something to local taxation , and 恆也eir place were straightforw訂d exhorta位ons to 也ose on low incomes to apply for rebates to the t恆. As Walsh later explained:

political di血culties the Government was confronting.. As the political debate ga旭ed its own momentum its publicity work became far more infOI祖訟， covert and media orientated, as m旭i到ers strove to limit the damage the policy w也 having on their credib過你

'Ours仕ategy from the start has been informational. The 恆ndofpeople we'retal坦ngto 缸e

pensioners and people on low incomes , who don't buy newspapers , so the advertising has to be on television. If they do read newspapers then 也叮叮efr帥-sheets， so we have 的 bein 也ose. There is no po姐t 姐 dressing the campaign up in j缸gon or flashy sell because these people find that kind ofthing a complete turn國0[. They need to see that there is something 怯 it for them' (Guarruan , 9/1/90: 25). Also 姐 Janu缸y 1990 ，也e Depar旭ent of the Environment used Inland Revenuerecords to send literature to every business in England, explaining 也e operation and merits of the new Uniform Business Rate (DoE News Release, No. 30, 22/1190). In a covering letter included wi也 every booklet, the Environment Secretary explained:

'At present each local authority sets its own rate poundage. Some businesses face a poundage more than three times higher than others. This wide variation distorts business competition. And rates can rise steeply, and with little w缸剖ng， from one ye叮 to the next, which makes it difficult for firms to plan ahead. Exis ting rateable values 盯e also outdated …The use of out of date values is another factor dis切rt­ ing competition between businesses.' These latter two campaigns were the final major publicity in峙的ives conducted on behalf of the 1988 Local Finance Act reforms. This was partly because the moment of introduction had arrived, but also revealed the 50

;rn stark comparison, the introduction ofthe Council Tax w部 markedby (onlyo~ 坦mited public information campaign , comprising

a series of 宜ve

'briefb06klets , whose measured tone and understated grap隘的 con仗的ted dramatically with those that heralded the implementation of the poll tax. In this literature the previous insistence 血的 local taxation levels exclu-

sively reflected local expenditure was also , quietly, 1剖d 的 rest: 'The Council Tax is set by yo肘 local council. The amount set w也 depend on how much it and cert越n other public bodies in yo盯訂閱 spend and how much money they get from elsewhere' (Councü Tax …A Guide 的 the New Tax for Local Government, Department of 也e Environ­ me瓜， 1992 , our emph部is).

Poll 個xP.R. 缸ld

the media: the two step flow

'You will almost certainly have read about the new Community Charge in the papers , or heard about it on television. You will probably have seen it called the poll 個丸 but the Community Charge is its real name' (You and the Community Charge , DoE Publicity booklet, January 1989). '、Alongside the plethora o(booklets , leaflets and press adverts produced ( 'between 1986 and 1990 , \he Government also directed a considerable \缸nount of promotional máterial at the media. From the beginn祖gminis­ ters saw the media as being very important to their promotional strategi帥， both 祖 inform坦g 也e public and shaping public perceptions ofit. Accordingly , the winning of editorial approbation was a promine酷的pectofthe

V

* A few modest Governmentpublic relations campaigns followed after February 1990. The Royal National Institute for the Blind wasωmmissioned to reproduce the four m滋n Community Ch訂ge leaflets on ca間加 tapes and in braille and m∞nwri位ng (DoB News Release, No. 162, 9/3/90). Simil缸ly， theBritishDeafAssocla位onasslsted in producing a slgn language vldeo for the deaf (DoB News Release, No. 166 , 12/3/90; DoB News Release, No. 410 , 11/7190). In July 1990 a leaflet was publishedad討sing business rate payers how they mlght appeal ag到nst thelr new rating ass的sments (DoB News Release, No. 402 , 5/7190).

51

T阻ation and Represen詞組on:祖eMedia， Po加開1 臼mmu凶個tion and the Poll T，紹

Chap伽 3: Selling~ccoun個b磁句:“vernment Promo的onof也e Community Ch缸oge

宜'RUE

... The information is largely con益ned to names, addresses and occasional dates. No-one's privacy need be threatened ... 1 am convinced that as people understand the Community Charge they w也 realize we have de油ed the fairest and simplest possible alternative to 也e rates' (DoB News Release, 5/5/89).

Government's publicity work. One par位cularly significant element to t趾s on on local media. The reaS01 continuing political significaJ

In September 1987 local government ministers Michael Howard and Christopher Chope embarked on a ‘whistle stop 切缸， to impress on loèal worthies around the coun仕y the value and 旭evitability of 也e poll tax. Only one national press release was issued during the tour (DoB News Release, No. 369 , 22/9/87) , but great efforts were targeted at local newspaper editors , using a specially made video , fact packs and stylish presenta位ons. Eight special fact packs were also produced 切 ensure， as Michael How盯d' s press release prior to the to肘 put it, 'that people should get a clear idea of how it will work' (DoB News Release, No 343. 8/9/87). The 切ur aimed at areas where political considerations demanded a careful and forceful marketing ofthe poll tax.

A later, and less ambitious news media initiative ∞curred in May 198'9 , and was timed to coincide with the blanket distribu位onof 也e 'so-called “ poll tax'" leaf1ets. A 'ready made' article written by the Environ血ent Minister, John Gum血.er， the Minister for Housing and Planning, was mailed and faxed by civ誼 servants to 10叫 news desks across England. In 也is standard 缸自治， the minister extolled the merits of the Comniunity Charge and sought to allay criticisms ofits implementation, 'You will probably ... have heard or read many sc缸e stories and half truths abo 'IJ.t the Community Charge peddled by those who oppo甜 it. Today the Government begins to deliver TI也 FACTS ... These are some ofthe blatantun仕uths circulating about the Community Ch叮ge. 'It is a flatrate t缸'. NOT TRUE. A generous sys臼m of rebates ensilles 血的 the charges paid by people with very low incomes reflects 也eirab也可 to pay ... 'It is a tax imposed by Central Government'. NOT TRUE. It is a charge paid by most adults to pay for local services … Thelevelof血的 charge is set by Lo cal Councils. 'It is unfair on the poor and 也eelderly'. NOT TRUE 一 it is designed 切 be fairer. The poor will be assisted by rebates and income support. Most elderly people 缸e likely to pay less than they now pay in rates ... 'There will be an army of snoopers' . NOT 52

On several occasions 也e format of the Ministβr's 缸的cle was tailored to include direct responses to criticis血s made locally by opponents of the policy. In a feature article in the Nottingham Bvening Post , the Minister condemned w缸到ngs from Graham Allen , a local Not位ngham MP，的 ~heartless scare mongering which conveniently ignore a crucial element of the new system' (‘Tr uth on the Commu到ty Ch缸ge' ， 9/5/89). In the Birmingham Bvening ]).伽il， he attacked 也e 'groundless claims' made by Birm旭gham Councillor Roy Be吋 am恤 about the regressiveness of 也et缸， asserting he 'would do better poin位ng out to the people he represents that a generous rebates scheme will operate to help the poor' (‘ Community Charge …The Full Facts' , 9/5/89). And in his 缸位.cle 姐也e Leicester Mer叫巾， he sarcastically suggested that 'someone should explain to the City's chairman offinance how the new system will work' (‘ City Rapped Over Poll TaxFe盯s' ， 9/5/89).

Apart from specific news management ini位atives of this type , the Government also distributed a，s仕坦g ofnews releases to keep the media abreast of 一.一一一一--^-"一~一一…一一 the progress towards implement的ion， and accentuate po必說.ve 函P郎ts of the policyHowever, subtle changes were also evident 坦 the tone and subjectma仕er ofthese releases as the policy proceeded. These mirrored the progressive blandness of the Government's formal publicity camp剖gns ， and suggested a grow凶g realization that a crude 'good news' campaign would only exacerbate 也e Government's di姐c叫.ties with the policy: 的

the 1987 Local Government Finance B血 negotiated its p盯liament肘y passage , 血 the 帥 甜 s e rel 枷 l 伊ro p 咄 bi均句血d 詛kelypo 句 p世缸叫'Í~句 yoft也 he policy. A-précis of a written answer by the Local Government Minister MichaelHoward confidently predicted that •

In M紅'Ch 1990 disaffec t10n with 也e policy in Whitehall had grown so intense that lt was alleged that 也ere had been 'no te訂s shed' by Bemard Ingha血's team of information oflìωrs when the job of Head of Information at the DoE was given to a ci叫 servant， 'Por 也eprincipal 組sk of the DoE Press oflìce in the coming mo且也sw也 be to justify the poll tax. Not m阻y Whitehall PR men see that as a rewar也ngtask' (Guardian , 2/3/90: 6).

53

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli位開l Commnni個組on and the Poll T缸 j'most householdsÎwill be be伽 offwiÇh the Community Ch叮醉心 they 、/ 缸e now with the 'r-ates' (DoE News Release , No. 16 , 1311188). In March 1988 , a Sl單單缸y of a speech by the EnvirOIiment Secretary confidently conclude司 the new system would ‘enable the electorate , through the councillors they elect, to put local government under great冶r pressure to deliver value for money' (DoE News Release, No. 192 , 28/3/88). The next month saw another environment minister congratulating the prudence of local authorities 迦 making early preparations for the introduction ofthe Charge in England and Wales in 1990 (DoE News Rele的'e， No. 211 , 11/4/88). Additional releases signalled the generosity of Government provisions for 也e transitional period ('Government Capital Allocations Will Help Cou必 cilsPrep盯ePor Communi句 Ch前ge' ， DoE News Rele的e， No. 213 , 13/4/88; 'More Help Por People on Lo w Incomes to Pay Community Charge' , DoE News Release, No. 214 , 14/4/88). After the B也 had passed through the Lo rds , another release soughtωallay concerns about the technical adequacy of the new system by highlighting a report from an independent consultancy fi.rm 也at suggested the adminis仕a位ve costs ofi血plementing 也et也 wo世想且çxceed those for the existing rating system (DoE News Release, No. 356 , 23/6/88): A simultaneous release provided pr吋ected E訊rres for 血的扭扭England and Wales based on 87/88 宜邵立即血的 ~ revealed 'many of the highest Community Charges would have beeIl._sub-, J迫，\st叫ally封些社this yea叫d the Govern凹的 proposals for 帥岱 'form beenfullyinplace' (DoE iNewsRelease, No. 357, 22/6/88: 1). One of the two news releases that marked 也e receipt ofthe Royal Assent for the 1988 Local Government Act variously highlighted the munificence of the rebates and exemptions 切 the poll t臨; the benefi.ts of a national system for rating businesses; and the 'greatly simp坦fi.ed' new grant system 品的 would ‘take account of speciallocal arrangement芯， (poE News Release , No.462 , 2917/88 , 1…3). The other release emphasized旬orv the new Act was 'an achievement for whichmillions will be grate~祉'(DoENI甜fS-Re晶宮-e;--' --，~._-一~ No. 463 , 2917188). As the date for implementation in Scotland approached, and the Governitself for its m吋or public relations offensive in England and

血entge缸'ed

*

TheM恆ister's 旭terpretation diverged tangentia11y 仕om 也at of the Labour P訂ty. Aωording 切 the Shadow local government spokesperson on the same day: 'The Government has just paid Price Waterhouse :t: 60.000 in order to confirm 也at the POIL TAX will be the worst 'value for money' tax in 也e UK' (Labour P位ty News

Release [JeffRooker's Office]. 23/6/88). 54

Chapter 3: Selling Accoun個b迎你: Government Promotion ofthe Commnnity Charge

Wales, the advocacy of these news releases became even 血ore e:xplicit. In two releases later 也at ye缸， local govern血ent minister, John Gummer, highlighted the key role local authorities would have in implementing the Community Ch缸ge (DoB News Release, No 543 , 3110/88) , andclaimed the ( Ìlew.哩哇emw也‘ mo哩哇~superior 切 the present syste血 of domestic rates' '\ 1 Î.DoENewsR品示;函。. 55 7:7江07弱: 1):磁石訕誦吾吾 release， the M旭怨ter i / openly disp肘aged non p缸ty political opponents to the poll tax. In his words: ‘the question 1 might ask in passing is why none of the moralizing clergy and lay people who have fulminated against the Community Ch缸ge h臼 ever raised a whimper ag訟nst the immorality ofthe ra出gsystem?No Bishops delivered petitions to No. 10 about the poor 坦t by the rates. Contrast that wi血也e fairness of the Community Ch缸ge' (i bid.: 2-3). However , as the Government' s political difficulties intensified, the 的neof these releases becomes far more meas盯'ed 恤 style and defensive 祖 aspect. In March 1989 , a reassurance was issued 血at the privacy of individuals would be completely protected under the Commu到tyCh缸ge (DoB News Release, No. 145 , 17/3/89). However , as criticisms inèreased about the conduct of certain local authorities during the registration process , an appended release was issued by Nicholas Ridley that urged local authori位的 to comply with data protection regulations (DoB News Release , No. 344 ，的 16/89). In announcing an additional PR campaign on poll t臨 rebates , another minister acknowledged the growth ofpublic concern , but predicted that 'this simple guide answers key questions about how rebates 訂ewo塊ed out' (DoE News 加leas州0.336， 15/6/89: 1). ，f三

Jhe 則間可叩何 the t空空pfFPPWEreIR扭s increased血型控ELJ )組S扭twith姐也e

Conservative P吋旭tens由ed. In a news release detail恆gthe ch個gesin 伽仕ansi位onal arra:ñ草草鼠的 for the implementation of the policy , Local Government Minister, Lord Hesketh , acknowledged

that ‘the Government understands the concern which some have expressed about the 缸Tangements for the safety net' ('Transitional Relieffor Community Charge Payers' , DoE News Release, No. 530 , 11/10/89: 2). By the time the tax e:xploded on to the national political agenda in early 1990, and the Government's position became increasingly beleaguered , opt旭is­ tic 的sessments of the policy' s implementation became fi前 r叮叮. Theonly exceptions were a 11叮叮 of releases from one junior minis能r(‘DavidHunt Hails Major Success for Commu凶ty Ch盯ge Implementa位on' ， DoE News Release, No. 683 , 13/12/89; ‘Councils Porecasts of Community Charges Start to Come Down' , DoE News Release, No. 36 , 23/1/90; ‘Community 55

----

4ι-

56

空空空堅entandthe帥cuss扭蚓的 theworh些他空空加世~a扭 }一一-

system ('Business Rates Appe a1s Leaflet Published' , DoB News Releαse， No. 402 , 517/90; ‘Sma11 Shops Rates Bills F叫1'， DoB News Release , No. 433 , 19/7/90; ‘New Regulations onBusiness Rates Laid' , DoE News Release , No. 477 , 6/9/90). However , bythetimethetensionsin 也βsenior levels ofthe Conservativ~ P的S戶alled 枷官向再豆苗lc!_.and the deposi伽 d the Prime Minister , (班lcial releases 而 local fmance became e寫clusively concerned with expenditure t前gets of the Government and other macroeconomic objec位ves(‘Local Government Finan臼- England: Statement by Chris P甜en， Secretary of State for the Environment' , DoB News Releas語， No. 604 , 31/10/90; ‘Chris Patten Announces Depar位nent's Future Spend垣g Plans' , DoE News Release , No. 617; 8/11/90; 'Local Authorities Must JoinBattI e Against Inflation Says Chris Patten' , DoE News Release, No. 628 , 12/11/90) , whilst occasionally stressing that the system was not as chaotic as was widely supposed.('Community Charge Collection Progress Encouraging, DoE News.Release , No. 566 , 16110/90; ‘CQllection Figures ShowThatN泊eOutofTen 缸ePay迦g the Community Ch缸ge'， DoE News Release, No. 639 , 1妥/11/90).

L

Following the accession ofJohn Major to the post ofPrime Minister and the appo恆tment of Michael Heseltine 的Environment Secretary with the brißf to look at reform op位ons for the poll t眩， the principal pu可ose ofthese releases became that of signalling the Governme帥， s commitment to 也is review 泊 response to public antipathy 的wards the system ('More Help for Standard Community Charge Payers' , DoE News Release, No. 698 , 13/12/90; 'Simplifìed Community Charge B血 for 1991192' , DoE News Release, No. 712 , 14/12/90; 'Local Government Finance Settlement for 1991/92 , Community Charge Reduction Scheme Announced' , DoE News Release, No. 26 , 17/1/91). As the date for the Government's poll t盟 review approache,d, the tone 9Î 晶 t 加岫昀帥 h serel 伽 l

TheC 他 hanc 臼 ell 勘 lor 自，冶s

shock 阻 announc 閃eme 即 1姆 er肘 1此tω0.[ 圳垃立盟控恆受E墊空蛙主血 Z鈕主盟隻錯姐 血l旦鈕且E d 鎧旦9 興 叫凶 n 恤 irn ~

_allpollt堅扭扭旦血型企豆豆91 sparked a briefflur可 ofreleaseswhichgave

i

de叫s of these reduction~仰heme for Reduc恆g Community Ch叫esfor \ 1991192' , DoE News R、éase， No. 184, 19/3/91; ‘Scheme for Reducing

Charges for 1991/92', DoE News Release, No. 190, 20/3/91; Community Charge for 1991192 is Published, DoE News Release, No. 194, 21/3/91; ‘Community Ch訂ge Reduction Scheme to Be Commu凶ty

官也切 Reduce

57

呵?

From April 1990 , Government poll t位 news 叫eases focused on ohe controversial aspect of the legisla位on: the decision to restrict (or 'Charge cap') poll tax levels in 22 Labour authority 盯eas. However ,\ .-/Î:hese releases concentrated on the prac位ce rather 也an the principles of ' these res仕ictions ('Chris Patten Caps Lambeth' , DoB News Release , 250 , 10/妥/90; ‘ Camden Accepts Charge Cap' , DoE News Release , No. 269 , 26/生/90; ‘ Chris Patten Sets Hillingdon Charge Cap' , DoE News Release, No. 350 , 6/6/90; ‘Chris Patten Sets Ch缸ge Caps For Basildon , Bristol and Doncastβr' ， DoE News Release, No. 371 , 18/6/90; ‘Chris PattenSets Charge Caps for 16 Co uncils' , DoE News Releαse， No. 394 , 2/7/90). Only one νrelease indirectly addressed broader ques位ons about the probity of these 翩翩~. Issued on behalf of the then Mini蜘 forLo叫 Government and Inn er Cities , the document warned local authorities that 'spending can't go on' and that the Government would nQ!..hesitate 切 use its powers more widely the followi時 ye缸 should any authority , in the grip of ‘ leisurecentre-itis' , seek to exploit public confusion and 9istrust of the poll t臨 by lev抖ng higher amounts than were en位rely necessary. The Minister ignored ra也er than confronted the criticism 血的 ch盯ge capping undermined 也e central princ句le of accountabiIÍty , by concluding with the confident and dire warning to high spending author湖的 that 'in due course the electoratβwillfìnd themout' (DoE News Release, No. 392 , 29/6/90: 1). p盯位cul缸ly

Through the summer of1 990 the dis缸ibu位onof也e releases became more

『 Y

Charge Will Improve Local Government Says David Hunt' , DoB New.s Release, No. 61 , 3111/90). More typically , the releases accenuated the few positive aspects ('Larger Rate Reductions For Many Businesses From April' , DoE News Release No. 692 , 11/12/89 , 'Sports Clubs ωGainFrom New Rates' , DoE News Release No. 180 , 19/3/90); reapportioned blame ('DavidHunt Bxpresses Concern Over St祖d叮dCommu凶tyCh缸ge Levels' DoE News Release No. 183 , 21/3/90); or reiterated the m unifi.cence and magna到mity of Government' support (‘ Charge Payers 切 Getf350m血ion 旭Transi位onal Relier , DoE News Release No. 153 , 7/3/90; ‘f21million grant to fund councils' cost of Community Ch缸ge Transitional Relier , DoB News Release , No. 178 , 19/3/90; ‘抽nister Gives Camden More Ti血.eTo CollectRent' , DoE News ReleaseNo. 231 , 4/4/90). Itwasonlyfrom within the confines of 也is contained rhetoricallogic that the Secretary of State could predict that local government 區 Britain 'now had the s仕ucture to operate competa位vely [sic] 旭 a more complex and demanding world' ('Lo cal Government Well Placed for the 21 Century' , DoE News Release, No. 207 , 28/3/90).

mJZ JrJ、 FJ 一A本 行

Chapter 3: Selling Accoun個b混跡 Government Promotion ofthe Community Charge

州1 出( 已。 Stv1州: 2

,

T盟副on and Represen個.tion: The Media Politi叫“mmunication and 也ePollT磁

T臨ation and Representation: The Media, PO恤問l Commnni闊的on and the PoU T阻

Extended' , DoE News Release , No. 207 , 26/3/91; ‘B血 Reducing Community Charge Gets Royal As sent' , DoE News Release, No. 216 , 28/3/91) , and strongly defended their le單位macy ('Criticism of Community Charge Reduction “Wrong Headed" Says Minister' , DoE News Release, No. 191 , 20/3/91; ‘Government Announces That Over 14 Million People W血 Get Full :f. 140 Community Charge Reduction Scheme' , DoE News Release, No. 246 , 17/4/91; 'Average Community Charge in 草ngland :f.172 This Year' , DoENewsRelease, No. 251 , 23/4/91). Aseries ofcoincidentalrèleasesalso

assured the public that the tax would not penallze service personnel in the Gulf ('Gulf Crisis: Government Announces Special Grant 切 Local Authori位es' ， DoE News Releases , No. 92 , 19/2/9l; ‘Community Charge CompensationforGulfPersonnel', DoE NewsRelease , No.163 , 14/3/91). Bycomp訂ison， J

the Council T缸 was the subject of far fewer official DoE news releases , even d盯旭g its legislative passage. When releases were distributed they tended 切 be descriptive and non-controversial ('New Local Government Finance B血" DoE News Release, No. 333 , 2113/ 9l; 'Royal Assent for New Bill Which Paves the Way for Council Tax' , DoE News Rele帥， No. 455 , 2517月 1; 'Local Authorities Receive Guidance on Preparing for Council Tax' , DoE News Rele的e， No. 623 , 17/10191). Only one 叫做ely sought to open old wounds ('Councillors in Arre酬 Should NotVote on Council Tax' , DoE NewsRelease , No. 617 , 14/10191).

From public relations to news management

/

'The poll tax has become a great big political problem for the Govern個 ment. However presented, it has not worked out in the manner 恤" tended and it h的 not been a surprise to hear that the Prime Mi nister's associates are now mnting in the heaviest manner, that major changes are going 的 be made in the next few months to the way the tax works' (6 pm News , BBC Radio 妥， 27 April1990 ， ouremph扭扭).

So what ofthe subtler for血s ofnews management used by the Government in connection with the Community Ch盯ge? A considerable amount ofthe dialogue between the Government and national media élites is either u酷 的仕ibuted ~ported， but nevertheless exerts a powerful influèn:eé' upon the received wisdom of the media 誦。re generally. Did the Governω 58

Chapter 3:

se泌ngAccount晶晶妙:

Government Promotion ofthe Commnnity Ch訂ge

ment exploit these hidden links in i臼 a位empts to promote support for the con仕oversial policy or deflect criticisms of it? Agenda也uilding is often most effective when achieved througq. s山repti­ tiousmeans (Gan旬， 1982). In thisresp叫也e British Governmeñt1sïñ孟 (區而自哥 advantageous po蜘n. Not 0局面証1tlïã正站站ous re_ j亟亟 avall帥必r 屁區柄。也 but 叫he locus 峭壁枷epomτγ and the pinnacle of the parliamentary sys紛m it can expect consisten正如d considerable mediaã區面而:-Atti區鼠忌limedia a伽n位oncan be 田en 的 onerous and destab垃屆時， and a considerable amount of effort is made r/ ~也盟gl叫 many aspects of govern血ent decision-ma坦n時ommediascrut-.../ 姐y. Nevertheless , the media's thirst for detailed inside in屆主亟函祖祖鼠忌 '--ably exposes them to political manipulation by governme臨 through the selec位ve and unattribut吋 releaseofi的rmation and innuendo.

f令 I，~尸白云;

The routine l!lechanismfor thβcovert diffusion of government information 1 '_" :''': 恆 Britain is~the p叫ament呵 lobby~ a formal group of newspaper and broadcast journãlists based at West凶nster/who receive 到most daily br叫“ 恤gs from senior government sources. Under Margaret Thatchβr's leadership the lobby assumed an even more central importance to Government news management 但ennesy and Wa眩目， 1987: 126). One consequence ofthis was that the Prime M揖lli餒。 pre咽 secretary， Bernf!rd Ingh~血， who "'0 was mainly resp耐ible for the brie面肘， assumed an unp閃閃 dentedly influential position in governme帥， and was frequently criticized for his use ofthelobby 切 circumvent or undermine troublesome m扭扭ters ， and even on occasion improvise Government policy 個盯啦， 1990).

ù ;-

::0:

C倒也l具 hghmfa stamch sup防御 of the poll !cbc. Although he conceded in his memoirs that it 'did not take a genius' to identify 也echargeβ of叫恥的 S 也atcouldbe1叫ed 啤訕地et缸， hecon伽ued， 'Never canζ 乎 C t; r' ;1(1 theCommuni均 圳C w 也 祕 h呵叩 eb 加e “ 恥圳 c叫ite 吋 d 叫肘 na 祖 at 恤 盯 u rre 賦叫 叫.If e. 伽 s heha 吋 dn 叫 剖tc O 叫 缸 a re 吋 :d ， 伽 s hewou 凶 1泣ld 句空O 叫 t昀 ha 帥.v et恤 咐 ri i扭 ed 訂t 切 仰 od 臼 oa 阻 ny 抖t也 袖 hing 伊 油.b 叫 a o叫 ul 必t

μ 必

thevalue 旭 e 1ì必 ormoneyt出 ha 前t citizens get out of their local authority' (Ingha扭，

-

1991: 244). 啞巴f 伽 l抽byjo叮a削弱ts in臼rviewed for the rese缸chco央、 firmed his enthusiasm for 也e policy. In the words of one: .~ '../ J

'Bemard always believed in it. And he believed in it in the same way as she did. And Bemard always thought 血的 thisisjus丸 and that there's no reason why people earning different amounts , so long as theyeam above level X, shouldn't pay the same because they 缸'e ge仕旭g the 59

口 ν

,

T揖ation and Repr宙間組位on: The Media PO恤阻I 臼mmuni阻.tion and the PoIl Tax:

same services. He believed that, lots of 0也er people thought that was rubbish ... 1 mean he was a 姐nd of, you know, pl~抖暗自e Geoff Boycott, forward defensive on it all the 位me. Hoping that in the end that we would just believe 恤血， (Interviewwith authors). Fur也ermore， Ingham was acutely conscious of血e importance of effective

public relations when implementing any new policy. Writing a few months before its abolition he commented: 'Policy formulated wi也out regard for its presentation can come unstuck , too. Consider the poll 個x. Leaving aside its alleged 'unfairness' inrequiring 血e dustman to paythe same as the duke , little attemptwas made in England and Wales to show, by specimen revalua位ons of property, that it could have been the lesser of two evils' (The Times , 22/9/92). However , despite the loyalty and enthusiasm of this influential figure , the lobby, along with other 血ore informal governmental briefin郎， wereonly veryr缸ely used to ease 也e passage of the poll tax prior to its implementa位on in England and Wales. One notable exception occurred the weekend before the House of Commons vote on the Mates amendment, where lobby correspondents were briefed by unspecified senior Government sources about an alleged hidden agenda to the Conservative revolt: 血的Michael Mates was mas旭ng a future leadership challenge from Michael Heseltine (Independent , 19/4/88)了 However， wi曲也et缸's 恤troduc位on 姐Engl臨dandWales， thelobbyand

other forms of informal news management became f，訂

more

important.

Thiswasdue 的 the intensity ofthe poli位cal crisis faced by the Government dur旭g this

period. Damage limitation became the watch“ word and minis... ters had to respond quickly to shore up the Government' s diminishing cre品b血ty. Aside from their regular media appe缸anc帥， which we deal with elsewhere , this centrally involved insinuating through more informal channels that the Government was sé面usly considering ways 旭 which the worst excesses ofthe new system might be dealt with. In this way it w a:s * Ingham denied

that 也.e lobby had been the mechanism used to dissem凶ate this sme也 However， whatever its exactsource, newspaper coverage on the eve ofthe vote on the Mates amendment clearly suggests there had been a high level, una肘ibu始d， Governmentbrtefing 泊 whichthequ的位onofMa峙'realmo卸的 had been raised.

60

Chapter 3: SeIling A也oun組b也句: Govemment Promotion ofthe Community Charge hoped to purvey the image of a government responding sensitively to public debate , as well as provide a convenient subs位tute for action.

However，也e吵伽ations 咖枷∞凶donocc由i叫amagin跡 ba品 趾e. In the lead up to the 1990 local government elec位ons， the Prime M姐姐ter's parliamep.tary private secret缸y 旭位mated to senior parliamen個 tary journalists th?t the Government was considering fur血er legislation in the summer that ‘wòuldsig剖ficantly alter the operation ofthe new system. So intense was the resultant frenzy ofmedia speculation that se剖orm恤姆" ters were forced to publicly cool presumptions aboutthe exrent ofany likely review and to deny the prospect of加ther legislation. On occasions during this period, Ingham's 'straight bat' was replaced by a cross batted swipe at the Government's opponents. According to another lobby correspondent:

‘[The Lobby] was used very much to promote the s切ry that what went wrong was that …in theyear 胎 which the first poll fax bills were sent out，也eye缸融 which it came 恤， local councils increased their spending by a figure .., which frommemory 1think was 2 billion pounds. And obviously claimed 也at the reason the poll tax bills were so high wω because councils had used the change from one taxation sys紀mto another 部 an excuse for raising their expenditure. Which 1 think 誨， '^ W缸， a bit of a piece of sophis紅y' (Interview with authors). 弋 ~1 Ò t刊r ,!j r ,-:A7 i!' "I\5.." I I

~._

,

h J:: L c

Follo岫g the 1990 leadership cont，帥， and theapp恤帥的 ofHeseitine7ttciJ 比扒 and the announcement of the poll t認 policy review, the lobby and other unattributed briefmgs became even more important. Before the an“ nouncement ofthe policy review these briefings were used 的 gaugepoli鼠" cal reactions to the various policy alternatives under consideration, confrrming Sigal's point that 'the press is public opinion 區 the eyes of o血cials' (1973: 135). In the words of one journalist: _ 'There were kites 110wn. Certainly. There were v缸ious th旭gs talked about in the press about how to make the poll tax better ... I'm s位e therew的 a lot of, you know, ideas tried out 血rough the lobby 切 test the water ... The Heseltine stories on 20 per cent sound to me as though they 盯'e testing the water to see what reaction is 恤.e' (Interview with authors).

61

Taxa位.on and Representa說.on: The Media, Politi阻l Communi個.tion and the Poll T臨

Chapter 3: Selling Accountab磁句: Government Promotion ofthe Community Ch位ge

Or as another lobby correspondent wryly observed: 'Someone put it to m~ c叫你的overnment by clapom帥r'. Andin a sense that's true. Youcan be cynical about 尬， butyoucan 叫sosay， welllisten that' s why 仰argaret Thatcher] got chucked out …Ithink [John Major] was weak, and that he did too much t o-ing and fro-ing andshill抖ng and shallying and this and that, but having said that , it was really, yes he' s bouncing it offus … Hew部 dOing what any sensible politician would do , which is he was listening to what people thought' (Interview wi血 authors).

(_

_

-

.

. --

\

\. Conserva伽臼ntralO扭今hnd the Community Ch叩 Wenowturn0肘 attention to

the promo位onal work orchestrated nation“ ally through the auspices of the Conserva位.ve party' s Central 0血ce. Unrestricted by conventions of neu仕ality， one might have expected the Government to have used its p缸ty political reso盯ces extensively in pro血0位ng the poll tax. However, with one signal exception, the issue never featured prominently in the Conserva位veP缸旬， s o ffi.cial mainstream campaig副ng.

LL lffJ 們

‘ 4LJV IFHrJU

fQJr!v

一一一斗

,()l_!l-

可• .t"~Y~H' //.

J

----..J

62

乎r 長

Despite the Comm削ty Ch呵's puta位.ve status 倒 the 空哩世主且已/ Conservative P盯旬's 1987 General Election camp剖gn， the P缸ty consp泌uously，控告也扭扭扭~during 也eba他. Forexam阱，也iskeynote

policy was mentioned in only two paragraphs ofthe P缸旬's election manifes旬， on the 62nd and 63rd pages of the 77 page document (The Next Moves Forward, Conservative Par使 El但也旦旦在anifes胎， May 旦旦7) and was the subject of only one speech from 也e Environment Secretary during the campaign period, which was delivered to a cons位tuency meet垣gin Streatham (Young, 1987). Instead, the principal emphasis ofthe P缸旬's campaign strategy w卸的 attack the deficiencies ofLabour's defence and taxa位on policies (M到肘， 1990) , and when local government was men位oned in the P缸旬's Elec位on Broadcasts only two thβmes appeared: the suβcess and popularity ofthe Government' s 'Right 臼 Buy' schemes (where people living in council accommodation could buy the property at a discounted rate) and the spectre of socialist extremism that , it was cl函med， lurked behind Labour' s modern new image. After the Election , the Conservative MP George Young observed , 'As a flagship , it did not appe訂 tome

strategy. For example，旭 a leaked letter from the Environment Secretary's private secretary to one of the Prime 11.位nister's private secretaries, during the parliamentary revolts of 1988 , it was suggested that the reason for the intensity of 也e current controversy was 也at 'the issue is beginning to be understood by a number ofback benchers' (Independent , 19/4/88: 2). Tlle spectre of 旭terna1 dissent 叫做個ρ!Û'ublic opi哇控吵i且倒 all subsequent Ce的 alofficec誼扭扭扭gon 也epol時而他 oneexcep伽n: thelo叫 governm叫你tions in England and Wales in May 1990. In h泊 tg book on the tech到ques and importance of political 'spin doctoring' , Br四"J d恤 a咀 吋 n 趾ru芯 B l，閃 cee仇， 咖 wh 加owas 的削 st拖 恤 hee阻n 吵 叫 Dir凹e叫or ofCommunications for the Conservativel:Ø"~!l p訂句但m冊， 1990) , provides an interes位ng insight into the underlying 川、 甜的egyof 也isp訂ticul缸 campaign. Normally these elec位ons would have been considered of secondary significance by the Conservative leadβrship. However , the grow旭g support for Labour convinced senior p訂ty figures of the need for a high profile national campaign to wr郎t back the political 姐姐的 ive.

The campaign managers recognized 曲的 the election would be a rout, but were primed by ‘伊ephological experts inside central office' that results in the model Thatchβrite authori位esofWandsworth， Wes個inst海randBradfo吋 might buck the national trend. 的 it was cle訂 th些P 盯ty couldjl虫!.-­ avoid the poll tax being 也e Illi!in issue , it was decided that the policyShould becentre 証呵ed. The resulting communications strategy decided upon by Bruce and his colleague, Tim Bell, was predicated on three assumptions: that the tax would only bed down if people could be won round to the 缸訊Iments about its fairness; that the real problem was the level ofthe bills; and that 'ifwe could prove that it was only under Labour-run councils that

?…~九

」一~一一竺一--叫F叫自-----

63

T個ation and Representation: The Med妞， Poli位問I 臼mmuni聞組on and the Poll Tax

the charge was high , then we could rehearse one of our preferred general election themes: “LabourCostYouMore'" (i bid.: 138). The P缸旬， s national campaign 甜前egy 由erefore 必cused on"the 也ree flagship councils ofWandsworth, Wes個inster and Bradford, briefing the media that should these low poll taxed 缸e臼 remain Conservati間， the p盯ty would be highly satisfied regardless of their opponents' g到ns elsewhere. The adverts displayed in national and local press all focused on the central proposition that 'Conservative Councils Cost You Less'. (10 TffiNGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT THE COMMUNITY CHARGE [20/的 0)]: WHAT HAVE LABOUR DO悶 ABO白質盟 COMMUN叮Y αIARGE?PUTITUP [23/妥/90]) and the Party Chairman , Kenneth Bak:er, 切肘ed the country wielding a 'Co血munity Chargeometer' designed to demonstrate the disparities between poll 阻x levels in Tory and Labour councils (The Tim血，的/4/90). In Bruce' s opinion their strategy was a complete success , for despite heavy losses across the country , when the Conservatives consolidatβd theircontrolofWandsworth and Wes恤inster many mediareported that Conservative prospt( cts had not lookeÆl brighter for many months. See恆ng to c叫位vate.'也is 仕祕n

of though~ the P訂ty Chairman and his communicaon each and every available photo-

位ons adv崩百五nmediately/seized

oppo做到吧空空空些空姐雙些竺堅堅住也扭扭扭曲Qtion，

v

and to deflect a.tten位onfrom 'th失þlconvenient s鼠也位cs ofLabour g祉ns'. By the following Sunday: 可 'That night' s television news and 也e following d呵， s press were a director of communica位ons' dream come true. Hesel說ne's ambition to thwart a Tory defeat had been abruptly term區ated: tñe Prime Minister' s position was streng也ened; back benchmorale improved; the polls reported we had cut Labour's lead by 7 percen個gepo姐ts; the poll tax 缸gument had been shifted from one of principle to the size of the b剖， and Central Oflìce had proved thatit could out campaignLabour' (i bid.: 140). Although subsequent events,-proved these to be but phyrric vic切ries， the p缸ty leaders姐p's successf~defini位on oftheir 'worst ever local govern-

V

ment results' (Butler and Kavana恤， 1992: 10) as a vindication ofthe tax, had important short term consequences by conveniently dampening debateabout 也e future of the 阻xandM缸g缸et Thatcher's premiership,

Chapter 3: Selling AI血oun組bility: Govemment Promo位onof也e Community Ch缸ge

'The fact that the headlines were tak:en by the elec切ral triumphs in Wandsworth and Wes恤inster ensured that the flat rate principle of 也e poll tax was retained and 也e results of the ministerial review ... promisedo叫y minor chang間， (Gibson , 1990: 24 245).

•

After Margaret Thatcher's demise , and the announcement of the newι/

Council Tax, the P缸tyspin doctors 聖170rked strenuously to drawthe 前旭位 out ofthe 悅耳誼也ce deb的. In tandem with the bland and low key 因而誼協前到區可正前孟加es on the 臼uncil T泣，也.e P缸ty played down the Council Tax in their campaigning, and 姐姐 ironiβp訂 allelwith the 1987 General Election , conspicuously avoided the issue i且也e 1992 General ffiec位ml. In也e 1992 Conservative manifes胎也e Co uncil Tax ! received a men位朋 in<@抄riefparagr吶 onthe豆豆thpageofth哇。阿e j document:

心

'The Council Tax will be simple and straightforward to administer. It will be fair and w到 rightly reflect bo也 the value ofthe property and the number of adults who live in it' (1992 Conser l7ative Par旬 Mamfesto， March 1992: 38).

Information or propaganda? the propriety of the Govemment's information s仕ategies Throughout the 1980s concems had increased about the Government's use of public funds to fmance the promotion of poli位cally con仕'Oversial policies. It is one ofthe unwritten constitutional conven紋ons ofthe British political system that publicly funded govemment publicity campaigns should not 耐ay 恆to the realms of p訂ty poli討cs. A report by the Public Accounts Committee of the House of Commons, published 坦 1990 ， emphasized 'the i血"的ance of ensur胎g that govern血ent publicity campaigns 缸e~not， and 訂e seen not to be , po誼tically inspired' (Committee of Public Accõ函鼠 ， op. cit.: xii). Although the Commi位ee stopped short of recommending legislation to ens肘e 血is dis位nction， it underlined 'the need to ensure propriety is made an explicit feature of campaign planning and implementa位凹， certain1y for those campaigns identified as being particularly at risk' (ibid.: 甜， our emphasis). With the introduction of the COQlIIlunity _Charge, the conyentional di咐， sion b伽een(p副ic 凶orma時也d p~ty propaganda，站ecame v叮 blurred, and many aspects of the publicity campaigns excited m吋 orcon騙

J

~一

64

65

qr揖ation and Representa位on: The Media, Polltical Communication and the Poll Tax

chapter 3: Selling Account油油句: Govemment Promotion ofthe Commw過tyCharge

troversies. Perhaps this was inevitable , given the extreme contentiousness of 也e proposals and the lack of any broad consensus as to their merits. Nevertheless , considering 血的 thepro血otion ofthe policy was principally orchestrated through governmental rather than p訂ty resources , many of its aspects raised serio閻明智位ons about the conflation ofpublic and p缸w interests by the Thatcher adm坦istration. /

erupted before 也is occasion, when the Local Government Information U凶札G即) - a press叫e group funded by the Labour P缸ty and trades unions to campaign on behalf of local authorities 一 obtained an advance copy and dis肘buted a detailed cri肉ue to national and local" ../ media which:: identified tw~lye ‘errors of fact 祖d misleading information'. / '-:-,._.. • (v; These errors , itclaimed , revealed the leaf1et 的 be 'politicaIIy biased 姐 its phraseology, and 垣 what it includes , and what is left out' (LGIU News Release , 8/5/89: 3). When challenged about this on the day ofthe launch , the sponsoring minister completely refuted the claims ofthe LGIU, explai且， ing:

缸oversy

In October 1987, Labour's local government spokesperson complained that the booklet, Paying for Loca1 Govemment: The Needfor Change , contravened 1985 Cabinet Office guidelines 血的 stipulated that Government publica鈍。ns should only be issued afterthe publication of aBill or White Paper,

。r

with the agree血ent ofthe Opposition ChiefWhip (Guardian , 6/11/87). (At the 位me the booklet was produced only a Green Paper had been published.) Concerns were also expressed about the content of the le af1et, which it was felt overstepped the mark between information and promotion. A senior Civil Servant at the Department of Environment later conceded that the booklet was 'on the border line of overstepping the proprieties ... My recollection of that booklet w晶 thatitw卸的o posi位ve' (Interview with authors). 'V"

0~he Step_ by Ste? Guide was sim.i!，arl~ denounced ~y the ~pp.?~i~on ~s 'a ~. ( shameful use of taxpayers resourçes for propaganda to make 怕e] polltax ~ seem more acceptable ... This coÍl仕asts with the increased restrictions on I'oc!!1 government publicity' (Loca1 Govemment Chroni c1e, 20/ 1/89: 8): However , objections were not only raised by parliamentary opponents to the 組x. In 1989 , the National As sociation of Cit坦問's Advice Bureaux refused to dis仿ibute the Step by Step guide 也rough their 0血ces because it was felt the booklet 'was setting out an essentially political argument about 也e Ch缸ge without giving the other side of the 缸gument' (Guardian , 13/5/89). ( .

A

•

\

However，也ese complaints about the propriety of the earlier publicity material paled in comp盯ison to the furore over the blanket distribution of the leaf1 et The Community Chαrge (Th e So-Called 'Poll Tax'): Howit WillWork for You , in May 1989 , and the news management exercise that accompanied it.

The leaf1et was launched on Monday, 8 May 1989 at a press conference attended by the Secret盯y of State for the Environment. However con• 66

'The intention was to get a leaf1et which was just a straight factual le af1et. We've gone to gi:'eat trouble 切 do 也at. It's even coloured yellow, so that it can't possibly be thought in any way 的 be party poli位cal ... And even so , after all this effo肘， one body of a rather e封reme 旭nd， suggests that it' s biased. But 1 don't think the public wil1v也ink it when they get 尬， (Tod旬， BBCRadi04 ， 8/5/89).

We 訂e 也ankf叫 to BobFran姐姐 for drawing

our attention to 血泊位位cIe.

r

However , the dispute escalated the next day when Greenwich London Borough Council was granted an ex p明rte injunction in the High Court restraining the Environment Secretary from further distribution or publica位on ofthe le af1et. The focus ofthe Council's ac位on wasques位on~ thelea:!let, which stated '扭扭ngi且也e form does not mean you will have to pay 也e Co mmunity Charge for anyone else'. T姐s， the Council's solicitors claimed, was a manifest piece of misinformation as it failed to refer to section 16 of the 1988 Local Government Act which stated that spouses and cohabitees were 'joint and severaIIy liable' for their par組er's charges. ~~ 4AssuchJhepubhathvd組 notac∞吋咐th 伽 Government' s c酬en- 的7 位ons and standards for publications ofthis sort' (即eTim郎， 17/5/89). The \ seriousness of this omission was compounded by thβdiscovery that the \ equivalent literature distributed by the Welsh Office contained the caveat, j 'in the c酪e of husbands and wives li悅耳 together， and couples living together 的 though they were m缸ried， each partner could be held responsible for the arr阻s owed by the other' (Independent , 11/5/89: 2).

寶島 Government's 帥帥部sment\increased 也e following day when 設

J

emerged that distribution of the Jé af1ets had continued in spite of the injuncti冊， and ministers had to explain to enraged parliamentary opponents that news of the court' s judgement had come 切o late to prevent the Post Office from con位nuingwi也 their distribution. 67

,

T也a鈍。n and Represen個.tion: The Media PO加CaI Communica位onand 也ePoIl Tax

Chapter 3: Selling Accoun紹bility: Govemment Promotion ofthe Community Ch前ge

At 也efullI王igh Court hearing on 也e case , Lord Justi<臼 Woolffound for the

血ent's

publicity campaign ... 80ft selling 也e poll tax would be a gross misuse of taxpayers' money' (Guardian , 15/12/89). On 也e eve of the launchofthecampaigninFebruary1990, theLocalGovernment Information Unit complained:

Environment 8ecretary, concluding that the leaflet was not literally in郎"

curate. 'The worst that could be said about it was 血的 it was misleading by omission. However, there had to be a selection and a selection was made. As a matter oflaw it could not be said that the department was not entitled 切 exercise its judgement in the way indicated' (Law Report , Th e Tim帥， 17/5/89). When Greenwich Council decided not to appeal , distribution of 也erem訟ning 11 million leaflets continued.

‘On臼 ag剖n， Government publicity spells outthe goodnews , but leaves

out the bad, People who 缸e not eligible but who 訂'e misled by the campaign into thin垣ng 也at they may get rebates will have 切 betold by their councils what the 趴le position is ... No mention is made ofthe fact that it is central government which is the main determiner of poll tax levels' (LGIU Briefi呵， No. 36, JanlFeb 1990: 1).

尸門祖血 f 恤 h e 加仰…… 仰 O 叫叫阻叫 v d 曲叫叫帥恥 凶呦叫心位伽枷 u 叩 O no 叭 心伊削 趴t恤 n 山 叫缸

mirrored by cωont仗roversy over 加i 臼 a邵cc∞O血pan 叮 y恤gnews 血a 阻 nage血.en 凶 te 位 xe 前 r­ þ.. spokesperson for 血e Department of th加e Environment 站 ins剖is鈴te 吋 d the maI函 np叫pose of John Gummer's articles w的 'to put right mistakes and misunderstandings and to ensure that 也e publio-had 也e correct informa位on about the Co mmunity Charge' (Guardian , 13/5/89: 2). Another asserted: 'These 缸'e not political articles …Where the Minis ter co目ects mis姐forma泣。且， then attribution to local individu也 is necess的， (In品 pendent , 12/5/89). However, the t盯geted criticism of political opponents ofthe Government created considerable outrage. Leicester City Council W的 stung 旭torele扭扭g its own news release which complained about '... 也e possible misuse by the Government of civil serv也ts and public money to run a politica11y biased campaign~on 申e new poll 個x' 也eicester City f亡::...---~ Council News Release , 11/5/89[.υa叫 Blunke紋， then Labour's shadow spokesperson on Lo cal Governmè個t-wenttì盯也缸， claiming,‘the fact 血的 civil servants 缸e not oì:ùy being used to promote propaganda , but also to attack individual opposition politicians takes 也e issue on from the abuse of taxpayers' money and 姐to 也e re a1ms of cons出ltional impropriety' (Labour Par1iamentary News Release [David Blunkett's Offìce] , 12/5/89). In 也e House of Commons another Opposition MP questioned，海 itoneofthe supreme ironies of history that at the same time as the Tory benches 缸e prais凶g President Gorbachev for 位y姐g to sep盯ate the p缸ty from the state, they are doing the same in Britain?' (Hansard, 16/5/89 , col. 186). 嗨 C i泊se 吼.

Even 血e

later 'toned down' Community 堡誼民ß.FlU棋.ts campa區豆豆þ

J_' ~怕倒叫做恤 Forëi面再正副e繭 corre帆denceb而enLo叫 正函加百可瓦吾吾吾吾ia位ons

and the Department ofthe Environment expressed concerns that the adverts would amount 切 a 'soft, sub且血inal selling ofthe poll tax' , by giv垣g a false impression of the actual availab也可 ofrebates under the new system. 8imil盯Iy， Labour' s Local Government 8pokesperson spoke ofthe 'justified anxiety 值 to the exact nature of the Govern-

Overview of the Govemment strategy From our discu鉛ion we can disc吋\、-_ six key- featur的 in ) 也e Government's promotion of the Comm叫你 Ch盯ge. / ikc

也 of the Community Charge was p叫nf"iT\~nTT nÎr:uul 呵 'ernmenta1 rather thru 一­ on仕oversial nature of tlie poli呵， tfietone and qu組ity__9l l'\1"'lT!3

~一一一一一一一一一一一一一一一一一戶一一一戶一一戶一戶

i峭 甜位v a 附 臼s 。恤 e h控悔空堅嘴旦艷蚣哇哇也哇位 1垃9叩盟旦盟旦掛亟雖扭吼。恤泣吋 be伽e阻 旭 law， then.ig spirit. Third , irom 血e outset the Government iden凶ed the media豆豆_aJê磊iliù­ --TaCt()r in the ba位le for public opinion , and directed a considerable amount v--哥哥在ention tow盯ds 也em 泊 its publicity work. Fourth, the public promotion ofthe taxwas organized at bo也 party and governmentallevel in a '切p

?

」些空空空空r;wh站直高石頭而在支出品區函這疏而whicht店正 f 、 was

conceived and implemented. Fif出品的也g of both governmental publicity initiatives were specifica11y determined by broader \旦旦1世Q.élLconsidÿra且ons﹒ The description ofthe Community Ch缸ge as the Conserva位ves' electoral flagship could not have been more inappropriate. Rather , there was a deliberate conspiracy of silence on 也e issue during the 6、 1987 伽 Ge阻 n叫 E 恥 lec 臼叫叫 c吋 t位i恤 8ixt 岫 h( 伊血伽e 岫凹旦蟬益且翩g 隅 e睏 m螂 of 也伽e Govem 帥 m ent's public relations work 哇哇哇生扭頭~lly as events proceeded. 的 the policy ~erailed，輕ton會旦fformal publicity material and news releases becamemore面豆豆sured and defensive , and greater emphasis was placed on conven位0型掙祐鼠忌T孟晶石函agement to limit 也e political damage. andp訂ty

',

68

69

T盟a位onandRepr田間扭曲n: The Media, Political Coòununication and the Poll Tax

In也e

following chapters we comp盯'e these strategies with those of the main opponents of the t澀， and consider 血eir respective influence in shaping the terms ofpublic and media debate on the issue.

Chapter4

Promoting Dissent:.Anti Poll Tax Campaigning

In tWs chapter we iden位世 the campaigning s加tegies of some of these main protagonists. Given ~he diversity ofpolitical opposi位on)this review is necessarily selective. How訝址，也rough these case studies , we intend to demonstrate both the v缸iety of this political opposi位on， as well as the intemal tensions that divided it. For the political battle over the poll tax was not just a contest between supporters and critics of the poll t棍， but also among its opponents.

p

LabourP前ty opposi位on

It i~i.n)ip仰priate 切 tO 恤咖u叫t 心 阻yu剖扭可 sense.

TWs is partlyõecause L函our opposition mobilized at both local and nationallevel. However , even more crucia11y , although the the Co血munity Charge w部 valent agreement 卸的 how 叫~由_--一-司一一~一一一_-←

to differentiate between Labour's nationa1

70

campaig世ng ag剖nst

the poll 71

Chapter 4:

T個研pn and Represen純tion: The Media, PO加CaI臼mmu到位世on 祖dthePollT;紹

,{",/ η 計?只主/ !1 j

•

tax , as sanction~~ by the party's National Executive Committee; semiautonomo叫兩凶崗位v叫即制叫也勾心 au也L9ré耐L咖肘 municipallocàrauthorities); and 血eac位吋說esofP缸ty)nâÏ間﹒ s, who n:ot ./

P缸ty

launched a笠控12lf campaign, which used pe位.tions， information briefu耶 and legal chall石磊正正互訪public at臨tion to the issue and pressurize the Government. One of也e major initiatives was a ‘send it back' campaign which advised the public , through leaflets and press advertis血en俗， toquery 也eir registration forms and 也ereby overburden 也eregistrationprocess. ThePa旬 alsou耶dcouncil囉逾to co11ect the t'àoc但ark缸， r 1992). However，也is 血rtation with a 討rtuàl-hon payment stance w也 soon abandoned, and after September 1988 the Sco前ishP缸旬'scampaig­ ning conformed more closely to the national strategies employed in England and Wales.

only soughtωoppose the t路， but also the terms of 仰區屁函 opposi位.on recommended by 也eP缸紗's leadership. In也is section we focus on Labour's national and local camp剖gning. The activi位es of_Pa耶 mavericks-.、 缸e addressed in 0盯 examina位onofthean位 po11 tax movemeni, oe蕊iiS'ëV of the central role 也可 played in its formation and campai那ing 弘avalette andMoon旬， 1992/3).

".,(/ La枷伊甸州'gni呵

Jλ

In January 1988, at a national press conference , the Labour P缸ty leader /.9'(/分之/

There were clear parallels between the timing and 扭扭nsity of Labour's national campai俱ingaga祖st the po11 t阻 and the Government's prom心 位.onal 位me祖ble(Just as Co nservative Central Office sought 臼 excludethe iss叫om伽泓 7 General Elec恤，叫咱our哩呱做些些亞于旭gJff夕 也e cmpaign-Th pou taxmceived onU施立即誦。ni油e Parl 吻's 聽βction broadcasts (Observ官r， 26/3/91: 25); was mentioned in only 也E建立一/ __sentences in the Party's official manifes切; and was referred to incidentally 三 恤 onena位onal newspap叮 adver伽ment at 也e end of the campaign (當年C you're th姐king of voting Conservative , 加 he 叮 re 仇，池s a 細 fìnal che 呵 que 站 叫-闢 e-φ 枷 4 -1 11/7/均 87η).

手L νD

However , after the Conservatives' emphatic electoral victory, andß$_ moves began to promo師也enewt缸， the Labour P缸ty launched its伽莎) co叮叮例， e耽吋盯liamentary camp到伊 on the issue 恤England 涵 Wales. In September 1987, 前 at 街苔F吾苛志濁 6面 en 肘 臼 C c e， 也 theSha 吋 dθw Enviro 叫任 u1-

è

一內UJ

men 削 nt 咖k呻ersonanno 叫 un叫 t伽 恥 he 叫 e ca 呻 E血n 呻 呻耶 伊 p 咖 蝴 a i站 伊 g 恥 nw 胸叫 仙 u Il

位O 恤 n ω theβha 缸 rsh 加 nessand unm 岫 fai恤 m mβ 沮 臼s鈞 郎s oft吭 hep 仰 011 tax; the preponderance of " 七

e

72

'What would you say about a tax that cost a couple in a small flat twice 部 muchasami血on時e in a mansion?' At a national press conference mar旭ng the launch of Labo肘's election campaign , the Shadow Environment spokesperson reve11ed in the ‘huge andgrow區g embarrassment' of the Conservative P訂ty over the po11 t眩， and the Shadow Women's spokesperson highlighted the particularly severeimpa學thetaxwo凶d have on women (即eMo叫ngS腳， 14/4/88).

.....

/dJF

In February 1989 , the P缸旬'sNa位io!ll!! Executive Committee produced a

L

L一旦控旦控血型堅慨çomprisin咚咚可你哩。Mnme 也atthe

responsib也ty for the policy w由 bla益磁石n tlle Government and not local

____.:

authorities; to give people the →臨眩'pn the po11 t扭扭.d dispel public i俱orance; to help people avoi回話志託puni位ve aspec的; and to argue for a system oflocal taxation which wouldrelate to people's ab也可臼 pay('Po~ Tax Facts' , Labour P缸旬， 1989). Aside from releasing a fì盯ther swathe of I campaign packs 祖d briefings , it was decided 切仕Y to get the Party's po11 I t磁 protest sponsored. Newspaper advertisments urged 也e public to sign I theirnameωthe 加typro側， and also con帥u峙的 P訂ty funds. These 姐姐al advertisments were fmanced through an appeal to P缸ty members..J that raised :t:80 , 000 in 5 days (Guardi帥， 31/3/89) and continued into 1990. Also 坦 February 1989 a 'weekend of activi旬， at locallevel was

/

夕

In Scotland, the Party had mobilized earlier against 也e policy and initially adopted a more combative approach. In early 1987, the Scottish Labour

announced the !aunch of a nationwide anti po11 t位 peti向!l-，_The co11ection co蜘uedun叫1而.Afe蒜苗苗sÏ詣r:illfué lõéãfiõvernment elec“ tions held during the p缸liamentary passage of the po11 t缸， the P缸ty attempted to focus public andmedia attention on the likely inequities ofthe newt也﹒ For example , one national advertisment enquired:

H 入

losers under1í:1 new arr祖g面.ents; t缸而迋而E商品已扭扭 Whiteha11 control over local communities'; 'the sinister implica位ons for personal and civilliberties'; 也e並~dequacy ofthe rebate provisions; and the underm恤， ing of electoral and democra位c processes by driving people ofI the el凹的ral re斟ster. .Campaign leaflets w前'e drawn up for public distribution and a comprehensive advice note was sent to a11 Labour groups, local parties and affiliated organizations (Labour Party News Release [Campaign and Communications Direc扭扭t吋， 23/9/87).

Promo位ngÐ油ent: An位 PollT揖Campai伊ing

I

73

pJ

dr

Ta:xation and Representation: The Media, Politi個1 臼mmnnication and the PoIl Tax announced which was to form 也e start of two months of campaigning activity prior 的 the May local county council elections. Throughout that year, pressure increased from some back-bench MPs and activists , for the P 缸ty to adopt~a more aggressive stance in its campaig剖ng. This largely focused on urging the P哥哥 ωorga國ze anational demonstration aga恆的也e t~ Iri personal correspondence to the 、shadow local govern血ent spokesperson, one back bench MP wrote:

P訂ty

F、可叮叮『可申--

戶戶"旭、

'1 cannot stress 切o much the strategic importance ofthe Party backing as a way of boosting the morale of the ~志誠ìg証:1t吾吾ü]豆豆EIEEhle the Labour P缸ty 切 be 也e cen設e of attention for all the many people who would w祖t to do something about the tax once they realize the enor血ity of its unfairness'

又屯/adβ血onstra位on 姐London

(23/8/89).

/.;cζ戶 Î __'ì However, Labour's Na位onal Executive Committee{ resisted these calls/ preferring to focus 也eir national campaigning on sponsored adver位se­ ments , parliamentary ac位vity and media appe前ances.

rC;p9 O

f;祉，

j

In September 1989 , further national guidelines were distributed to 剖i Labour controlled councils , advising them of 也eir duty to implement the t紹， and the need to deflect the blame on 切 the Government. One ofthe key additional recommendations w師也at Labour councils should conduct highprofùep的lic information ca血paig凹， toens盯e a high take-up ofpoIl t位 benefits (Guarm帥， 29/9/89). In March 1990, this directiveresulted in a series of locaJ 'Claþn It' campaigns, which particularly targeted young people as concerns grew 面前前站Xwould encourage large numbers of potential Labour voters to voluntarily disenfranchise 也e血selves in an a前empt to avoid paying the tax (Guarman , 30/3/90).* Also 恤 early

1990 , the Labour

P訂ty

moved to take advantage of the

c白…恥的，卸的 心 O 曲 d 凶 u 伽叫 C旭仙 叭 g a ‘'dos叫伽sen 削呱 叫t n !加詛加位恥 C叫 al 句a 副 副id n 曲 叮 e Pill 由 ll'~ 岫 扭 hichlis 尬st叫 e吋 dc 吋 r討i位伽ca 此 lc ∞ ommer臨 1必tωsa 呦呵 ga 啪 i耐 恤 in nst 1昀s鈴閻州 t“ 圳t伽 加et恤 h 缸 axma 旭 ad 曲 e 句 b 'y Co nservative 仰 pO崩cians (怕 Gu 翩 αr 岫街伽 肌 an 凡，

2/4/90). However, as the fierce

concem about the detrimental impact poll t盟 non-registration might have on Labour's prospects in key marginal constituencies intensifìed over the next two years. In early 1992 Labour P前大y headquarters issued a campaign pack ωIocal p訂ties， highIighting this pernicious e1Tect of the t扭扭d encouraging them ωassist 旭 voter regis仕ation drives ('The Ri ght to Vote: A G凶deω ElectoralRegistra泣。n'. LabourPar句

*祖e

自mpaign Pack , February

74

1992).

Chapter 4: Promoting D協ent: Anti PoIl Ta:x Campaigning

controversy over the tax in能ns過ed prior to the 1990 local government elections, Labour also attempted to broaden 也e political agenda. Whereas - Conservative Central 0血ce orchestrated a single issue campaign on the Community Charge , Labour' s strategy organized itself around the unifying theme oftheParty ，學 'The People Who Can, Not the People Who Con' , and highlighted the discrepancy between Conserva位.veP缸ty promises and its performance (The 1'，加叫 9/的 OUhis formed part of a new tactic to 缸y to implicate a wider range of senior Tories in the policy failures of the Governme叫(rather th也 just the 也en Conservative P前ty leader (The _ Sunday Times, 29/4月 O)d包d just as Margaret Thatcher was m前斟nalized in Labour' s political attack , so her flagship policy was relegated in prominence (Independent, 14/6/90). In a series of newspaper adverts and campaign booklets , a litany of Conservative failures was listed - from the 一-才一于一-，.弓-_--戶~、-.-叮叮-】__ ~學時quac能s of ~þ'e youth\!þ福gproVis划， to the gr'叫th 扭扭terest rates , mortgagerepossessions , and generallevels ofpoyerty. In this list , the poll tax and the Uniform Business Rate were releg產品d 切缸'th and seventh place (‘ Don't Fall for t l:!.e Con' , Labour Advertisme剖， Th.e Times , 18/4月 0). Like 也e Governme肘，

the

opposi位on

saw the media as playing a highly si扭過cant role in fra血姐g and informing public percep位ons ofthe policy. For example , the centrally produced ca~paign and publicity material dis紅ibuted to P缸ty ac位.vists repeatedly (emphasized the importance of ‘ spreading the bad news via 也e media.,.;:In the 1989 ‘Information and Campaign Pack' local activists were urged: V

r

tQrga幽 a survey 句叫叫 shop陶吵e using 伽削0岫g

d

--

(1iuestion:;When poll tax starts next year who do you 也inkwillco帥01 、 most

of the money your council gets 個 run services like refuse collec-

勘亂 schools， Hbmip 祖d street sweeping - co呱呱ors or the govern-

ment 甜甜sters?' tfuiange for the local press jo take pictures of you \::'" conducting your sUrv原 Issue a press release containing the results of ( your survey alo月 with the true answer …Find out how much the poll 個xis cos位ngyo叮 council to implement .., ~end a letter 的 y()_W' local __ h且受~哩er … a suggested modelletter is provided Set up a Labour P訂tyhot 設ne 一 it just needs a telephone line and a recording machine. Advertise 也e phone number 妞"前 local papers , on radio 祖d 姐 newsletters. Ask people to leave their name and address if they want advice on civilliberty issues ... Organize a phot心callofp訂tymembers of different ages submitting their rebate applications. Talk 的 the edi切rs of local papers as旭ng them 臼 run special features on cl越血ing 、-一一一自由一-----司，帽-

…

j

呵-品d

75

,

T個a鈍。n and Represen個位on: The Media PO加開l Communi個說on and the Poll T，盟

cbap紀r 4:

Promoting D油ent: An說 PolI T，揖Campai伊ing 1 可!þ

rebates and transitional relief ('Poll Tax Facts' , Labour Party Campaigtz Pack, 1989: 2-9).

distributed the texI of a ?beech which described how the poll t血 would accelerate the erosion of local government au切nomy (2119/87). Three days later he lis紀d twenty eight Conservative MPs in who個 constituencies single adult households would pay more under the poll tax 也聞出ey would under the rates (24/9/8 η ， and the next day highlighted the structural jnequi位的 of the new system, its constitutional implications and the threáts it posed to individual privacy (25/9/87). Once the legisla位ve process had begun Rooker produced specific 血的tra­ tions of how the tax might detrimentally affect particular localities (3/11/87); examples ofGovernment propaganda abuses (5/11/87); and ~ evidence about the s伽cturalregr的siveness ofthe tax (12/11187). On the ~百蒜苗eB缸'sSec混混蒜苗亞研區區訂苗苗誼磊 of a survey he had conducted in his Perry Baπconsituency whiβhsuggest吋 that 75 per cent ofadul的 would lose under the new t臨 (14/12/87). As the Bill entered its committee stages, and the Government moved to 忍lillotine the process , he condemned its j1Il,!lemocratic ac說ons 個d highlighted ‘crucial technical ques悅。郎， that rem aiÌled unanswered due to the forèshortening of thβ committeestage (20/2/88 and26/2/88). Afortnightlaterheclaimed that a million single pensioners would lose under the tax, and in a footno臼 W訂ned journalists ,'Rememb前 every 位me Tory minister[s] t叫kof “house­ holds" instead of “people or adults" be very careful about taking the figures atfacevalue' (8/3/88). /、、

v

Two days later he drew a位en位on toth使他dLCompF慢慢明~i>f晦"嘴臉缸4 弋旦旦旦控些豎立(10/3/88) ， andin arelease 也e follo Win g month highlighted a ‘misleading gallup poll' conducted in his constituency, which he suspected might be used to challenge.his independent projections of pollJax levels in the 缸圳的 /88). A he Lo叫 Government F旭ance Bill 吵ple削 its p缸liament前y passage ;-these releases became f，缸 more intermittent. In June , he focused on 伽扭曲 costof 也etaxcomparedwiththe 學~fPoll TaxCos個 tobeDo的letheRat闊 :-23/6/88) ， and the next month he drew attention to the civilliberties issues raised by the new t位 (1417/88) ， 自 well as the naïvet泣。f an influential national radio programme in irncri位， cally accepting a m旭ister's cl越血s about the generosity ofpoll tax rebates ,

(t

Nevertheless , 'by press“releas旭geveryth旭g' (as one shadow spokesperson put it) these politicians did provide the national media with a fairly inte帥" ive stream of nega位ve 姐forma位on about the tax during its parliamentary stages. For example , after JefI Rooker's appoin位nent 部 shadow spokeperson for local government 恤 1987， hedis仕ibuted a string of news releases on the poll tax as the prospect oflegislation 呻proach地One ofhis earliest "",, releases (2117/87) ques位oned 'Is the Poll Tax Racist?' , and provided 闕， dence that Asian households would lose heavily under the new system._ Two months latβr he distrïbuted figures which suggestβd that over 56 per cent of adults would be worse offunder the new system (14/9/87). He also

76

、戶，扭扭『、軍峙，現間，也如勵也闡明J

V

~~!':;: ••_.,,,..月呵呵~可戶可甸甸戶也倒叫

'Most unusually the BBC Today programme were appallingly badly briefed for 也e item on the poll tax rebate issue in respect of poor disabled people broadcast this moming' (Labour Pa付y News Release ITefI Rooker's office] , 20/7/88). 77

T也ation and Represen紹說on: The Media, Political Communication and the Poll Tax

Alongside news releases , Labo肘， s environment te am. also s能gedav缸iety ofparli血entary pseudo-news events to attract media a批ention. As Rooker

explained:

'We 佐ied to m叫pulate 也e pol1 t阻 Bmprogmmelo thatwhenwe wererais恤g a key issue like student nurses , we' d have a

V\

public gallery ful1 of nurses in uniform. When we did c缸帥， David B1unkett organi即d a who1e wodge ofyoung carers , this that and the other to come in. We were photographed outside... We had to manipulate our own timetable so that we finished where we wanted to finish. 80 it was always good to s自rt on a Tuesday and Thursdåy mom誨gwithsome­ thing really good , because the media would be bettér on a morning than they would in the aftemoon ... We ac仙祉旬， ac位vely sought to manipulate the media , and to s呵， 100k here is a good point that we're doing today, and let the press gallery know what was on this morning on the poll tax , and this is what' s on on Thursday …We weren'tpassive about it at all. Because we knew the more people knew about 也e poll t凹， the 1ess they liked it' (Interview with authors).

As 血e poll tax' s introduction in Eng1and and W的s

approached , a s旭il盯 shift occurred in the Labour Parcy's media s仕ategyto 也at of the Governmen1:Ño 10月errequizz度的 draw media attention to 也e iS純~， 8hadow

[/s 句 p伽pers 缸的 臼son r 帥 I

\汗{'

Chapter 4: Promoting Dissent: Anti Poll T恆Campai伊ing means by which the Labour p吋 soughtto 伽llenge the Government in this po益叮叮ea. Whereas the Government sought to stifle continued 缸， bate about local taxation as the prospect of a General E1ection 100med closer，也e Labour front bench strove to maint到E 血edia attention on the issue. However, this proved an increasing1y frustra位ng task. As DavidB1unkett comp1ained during the committee s個ges ofthe Council Tax Bill: \. 'We are here, 16 hours a d9y, plugging away and the world is going on '---=':'~.L_! ~_ 3_，-d_~ outside. And everybody'sintβrested in any也ingy þutwhatwe're saying and doing. We're trying to raise the same kiÍld of issues about the anomalies , the unfairness , the critical, technical questions which falls on 也e Co uncil Tax , but its prov坦g very difficu1t' (Intβrview with authors). 3 _

A

::J- _ _ _ _ L _

災岫g 叫9叩m 阻叫叫 叫叫 raa1 血恥A 仙， 岫 Laa油bo叫盯叭a叫 s肌 o叩ugh 呻叫吋迦虫/丹e -? i__ >

po1ltax issue 祖 int血 he fmal weekb 恥 efi 扣 orl 扭 'e polling, by featuring the issuβ 祖 two 但可fi皆宜在宜于news conferences , and making it 也e central issue 恆 akeynote address by the Shadow environment spokesperson five days before the E1ection (D eacon and Go1ding, 1992; Berry, 1992). However , here , once ag到且， it found media attention to the issue conspicuously elusive.

圳、 Inhibit伽叫aboz的 na伽ZaI campaigning

.

er呵 ag 酹 edi姐 nne 昀 ew 削sma 阻 na 略 gemen 肘two 叫rk 比一IAlt也 ho 侃 ug 拉 hp 伊抖 ri旭 nci砂 pallya 剖imedã 前te 既 :xe 叮rt­

--- ing maximum pressure on the Government over the policy, this work also invo1ved d am.age li血itation … whe也er in defending their preferred refor血 option or chal1en斟ng Government accusations about their responsib也ty for vio1ence at poll tax demonstratio凹， 'We had to handle ourselves very carefully around the time ofthe mass demonstration that turned into a riot [Tr afalgar 8quare , 31 March 1990]. We had to be careful that we were able to maximize 也ei血pact of people's frustration and worry , and minimize anyt趾ng that turned on us in terms of being associated either with the riots or with the non-pay血ent campaign' (Shadow spokesperson , interview with authors). J

Once the abolition of the poll t磁 had been armounced , and legislation for 也e Counc挂 T磁 was pushed 也rougl;l， the media bec am.e the principal

'Revolution cancelled due to shortage of free rail passes' (Labour MP's memorandum to his political researcher, July 1989). :2

‘ C、一一‘、 .、: 一門 、

The tone andintensity oftheLabo盯 P肘旬'sna位onal cam.paigning aga恆的 the poll ,tax attracted consid前able 叫ticism from within and 01加ide the 支付 J缸句!三romany， theP缸旬'snation叫 cam.p滋扭扭g displayed ru(弘1位tu- /" 1.(' ;;.眨 '---.!!草虫組組也 timidity and pa叫vi曳ß)onnell， 1990; Peck, 19 B:民 Büffis~1992). In M缸ch19弱而記因而向 oftheP缸旬'sSco聞sh Lo cal Government group open1y chastised the Party's National Executive for its 恆e此ia on the issue in Eng1and and Wales: 'The NEC let us down, they let Scotland down , and they refused to organize the mass demonstrations and rallies that were necess肘y... We asked you to lead and you refused to lead , and the National Execu御自 duty is to pick up our challenge' (Guardi仰， 10/3/90: 2).

γ

78

-

v.' 屯"'，:'

79

_-A

Taxation and Representation: The Media, PoliticaI Communl間組on and the Poll T揖 Ques位ons were also raised about the interpretative dimensions ofLabour's campaign ~genda. While it is 仕ue the P缸旬's camp剖gn material often addressed {t he constitutional and democratic issu~s posed by the poll t缸， 也ese complex but signifi. cant issues became less prom姐entin theP盯旬's front line camp剖那ing 聞自e political debate developed. For example , one Labour 間 who consi蜘1tly soughtto focus pubk dkentionto 伽帥" rimental impact the tax would have on the franc趾間， complained:

Chap記r 4:

were for a ten-year phasing in period , which would have meant a radically differentt扭扭曲e one eventually imposed in 1989 and 1990. The

issue was further exacerbated by the ranks of the p缸liament叮偷眼 As one fOI'IÍler shadow spokesperson conceded: '1 went through the general election like the majority ofLabour MPs in England 恤峙， andneverreferred to itin public... In '88/'89 Ireali扭d 也e biggest mistake the Labour P缸ty ever made was treating the Sco位ish legislation [The Abolition ofRates 恤 Scotland etc. Act , 1987] 的 a piece of Scottish legislation and not British legislation. We should have had a bigger input ... But 也e fact is that 也e Scottish legisla位on was treated by English Labour MPS as Sco位ish. Wedidn't 恆terfere， we didn't take any no位ce， we knew it was horrible and everyone w的 having a rough ti血仇 but it didn't affect 肘， (Interview with au也ors).

Certainly, hindsight raises some major ques位ons abouttheconduct, con-

品已草草草莘莘…叫 C叫RF句“越性 心\/ collude 且主血型pir哩 I TP 也e policy during且~. Jjt87 G帥ral J 、

-----mection? Why did thβNECp叮帥詢YTa說“咽志為 org個ize national âeQi叩stra位ons

in England and W叫.es prior to i的詛缸oduction? And what cam-

fac個rs might have progressively inhibited the breadth ofthe Party's

paign agenda?

I \、

帥 ν (U:凶帥o曲 ub紀品你y， 抖 p e郎 仰c叫岫y re帥甜咐帥 i泌c吋位o呱 肘s吋layed 伽irp叫.D叫恤峙g 伽 i岫 n

'1980s the P缸旬's funds were un~ef severe pressure, and the resources were not readily available for organizing widespread public campaigns. In February 1989 , the P缸旬's Direc切r of Campaigns and Communication stressed that 也eP訂旬's 'Poll Tax Protest' adverts could only be financed 'if sufficient funds are generated' (Guardi帥， 15/2/89: 25). Later 也atye缸， in personal correspondence 臼 a member ofthe Campaign Group ofLabour M恥，也eP叮旬's Local Government spokesperson explained 'the major reason'why 也e NEC had rejected calls for a national an位 poll t扭曲mon­ S仕的ion was 'lack offunds' (3117/89). Certainly , the Labour P訂tycould notmatch 也e glossy and very e時ensive information subsidi帥， socentral 切 the Government' s promotional 部位vi位.es. Would.“ be, antipoÙ 扭xactivJ 姐s had to pay :t:2 for Labour's 1989 campaign pack.

y::1:?m凹， L恥'slow 叫叫 theissu叫ectedafailureofpol叫

,_ nerve.~ This was p缸ticul位ly evident before the 1987 General Election , whentheP缸ty was

under greatest pressure from Conservative P缸tyand o media 哩哇笠旦旦旦雙雙史竺些已控血L~!t' in~.噎住盟主空空空ent 。 (Goldsmiths' UniversitYMβdiaRese前chGroup， 198η. In response to 也is problem , the P缸tyleaders包p had distanced the血selves from the activities of 甜veral high profi.le Labour authorities , and purged them of insurgent influences. The coverage given to this con位nued conflict convinced many 阻nior figures within the Shadow Cabinet that local govem血.entwas an issue that the P訂ty debated at its peril, p缸位cularlydur旭g election camp剖gns ， where political stereotypes exert a powjlrful influence on electoral preferences. Accordingly, it was decided 血的也βP叮旬，刮目前estswe凹 b的t served by avoiding the issue at such a sensitiver位me.This decision was not universally popular. As one Labour politician explained:

J.( ~\" 芋，川 However fi.nanciallimitations ，姐 themselves ，叫~nòt}也!equately expl曲

I "the often re位.cent nature of the P盯旬's national càïíípaigning. There was G 屯斗』也型體草控伽些吧些些竺堅堅空空IFhβ?咱'asto 血e '(1 likely 且popularlty of the 凶sue. ThiS was most evident before the 1987 General Ele耐on.AsP恤lott (1988) explai肘，的血的 stage the likelyimpact ofth叫位 was not fully undβrs切od， p缸位cularly as the initial proposals

80

P訂旬's 旭itial 坦sensi位vity 切也e

""-全盤空空空空~within

‘I' ve raised the matter in parliamentary Labour meetings ". But 1 haven't found it being picked up in people's speeches. And 1 h a:ve always had the feeling tha~ it was felt a bit dangerous to s仕essthepoU /T'ì τ~.:::-::::去L I I tax bit of it' (Inter而如'w當h 甜的自吋

心).

Promoting D協ent: Anti Poll T阻Campai伊ing

弋

'[The Labo盯 leadership] believed that (0ωgovernment was bad news. They believed that local fmance was even worse news and 也erefore you steered clear of 比 Whereas many of us r扭扭扭d that it W部且't “bad news" , there was a battle to be had. The Conservatives had /1 mana話ed to create an atmosphere which we certainly had to change, and we' d do so by revealing what the poll tax was all about. Not merely its fi.n ancial disadvantages 切 individuals， but the philosophies and 81

,

T盟副on and Represen紹說on: The Media Politi間l Communi個.tion and the Poll T缸

values behind it which would lead to all 也e 姐nd of problems and difficulties that it eventually led to' (Interview wi也 authors).

positive , by see旭ng to offer workable , popular alternatives- which can be understood' (News Release [JeffRooker'的描ce] ， 27/7/87).

Af做出β1987 Gen位al Electio~ and as the prospect of 10叫扭扭βial '----reform became unavoidable , these general concerns about the P缸旬's difficulties with the local government issue 起tilled into two specific problem areas that continued t~些蟬的扭扭宮 carii.pai但ingupun值也e t缸 's implementation.

However, deciding on a workable, popular alternative, proved a di血cult task. Initially the P缸ty proposed a tw旭 tax 可stem which çombined a prop~ tax based on capital values with a local Ì!1.c_D!l1e t a.;!, The Goverll戶

/

(

!

I

.

并ν 叫rst co…叫岫 m伽d of opposi叫o the policy the Party should advocate. Altnòugh 也erewas 油itial indecision as to how closely should participate 坦 a non-payment campaign..._by 1988 , the Pa 缸 r~句 y' s leadership had 釷血I句 yr 吋吋盟1紀 ed the βnoβn-p

也.eP缸ty

孟 血剖it悅蛤凶 di加 t臼 tsel 臼叫 忱耐 ell叮ft切olegal 血 mβ也伽od 由sof品 fop 即 pd涵E誼rsréñ泣諾詰E蒜高alis示宙'1豆 也ePar句話已在兩EE函íftõpUr諮詢ectability，

whatever the cost to the Par鼠S:{pdical credentials (Lavale伽 andMoon呵， 1989). Such a position __ w吋p.otjþop'lll~ with many P盯ty activists ap.d the閱 tensions came to a

1". 弓

! 0~~

L 之~一白白白---正

heà'ê一-

、---一--

'"'7 0 、 ofnon collection (G闊地油化 29/3/90). At a keynote speech at the Scottish annual conference , Neil Kinnock railed ag訟的t the 'Toy切wn revolutionari帥， who suported non-payment and exho此ed them to ‘exam詛e their consciences' (The World Tonight , Radio 4 , 9/3/90): The p盯旬's di血culties on this issue were exacerbated by coincidental violence at several of the poll tax demonstràtions held at that time , which the Co nservatives sought to conflate with the 迦egal act of non-payment and the defiance ofthe thirty Labour MPs. LabourP盯旬's

;在

The second p_roblematic 盯ea for Labour was 坦 deçidingo旦到d恆地里巳/ \ the Rates or the Community Ch訂時﹒ Onh旭 appo垣恤ent as shadow loèal government spokesperson , JeffRoóker warned:

c______-!l哩!i草哈拉he同to

'Ia血 not prepared to see the L油ourp缸tyw叫knaked into the deba位ng chamber. which is what a crude and negative opposition to the poll t認 willamount 切， ifwe 盯e seen only to be defenders ofthe present unfair ra伽g system. We shall need to use our br越ns so that we are seen to be

•

82

Chapter 4: Promoting Di蜘nt:A泊位 PollT，盟Campaigr站時

Ultimately 也is disagreement resuIted in 也e deselec位on 。Iefferman and Marqu帥.op.ciι).

of two Labour MPs

./'>

JJ:. I

'':',

「在已耐高訴法局…聶祕吉它ëléc航局P鼠忌改iiEmomtp越d

under the poll t認 and Labour' s proposals. As the Environment Secretary challenged: '[The Shadow Environment Spokesperson] does not want [Labour's alternative] 切 be exposed , but we are going to expose his little wheeze. 1 invite all MPs to put down ques泣。那; there is a lot of good material here' (The Times , 26/1189: 10).

持 1989， Labour retr削ed from 也is op阱，

and reci~ien的 of 伽 new èampaign pack were told they would receive 'a more detailed briefing on 少:人/ Labour's alternative to the poll tax once 0盯 propos叫s have been refined' :,,• (Poll Tax Pacts: Information and Campaign Pack, 1989: 1). In September , at /尹 d4、 y theNEC'sp凹-conference mee位ngitw部 decided to abandon this two 組x ___ _ m闕， and inv耐 more energies in exploring ot1ïèr布前部茄航EEfAr"主 ←27/百789). By early 1990 , the provisional , preferred option became a single 舟， propq感惜自茄兩制咄咄. Although Labour av耐吋渴望部r一 ~ specific on the details of 血eir proposals , the Govern血entsought 的 deflect media and public scrutiny on to the deficiencies ofL品。缸，在控笠臨戶 h response , the NEC initiated a further high level policy review (Guardian, 25/5/90) , which addressed whether the property component of 也e 個x should be based on capital or 'notional rentable' values , and whether its linkage to ab磁ty to pay should be effected by extending rebate provisions , orl扭扭ng local taxa位on to income tax codes (Guardian, 19/6/90)j Eventually it was decidedωsupport a return to the previous rating syste血 onthe old valuations and an improved rebate systemvwith a revaluation to be based on house prices , building costs and private market rents to be conducted after two ye盯s (Guardian, 24/7/90). Whatis si那ificant about both these problematic policy 訂e的 forLabour， was how centrally the media featured in their political calculations. When the Shadow local government m旭ister warned of the dangers of Labour 83

,

T位副on and Represen詞說on: The Media PO加叫“mmuni闊前onand 也ePolI T揖

Chapter 4: Promoting Dissent: An位 PolI T磁Campaig凶ng

‘walking naked into the conference' chamber, he was also keenly aw缸'eof 血e dangers

P缸ty

in electoral terms , and 1 think that' s (Interview with authors).

of entering the media 缸enainasim挂缸 state of undress:

proved 切 be

the case'

/

'Lab our supporters and least of all Labour MPs, do ω want to be in the

position ofhaving to cringe each time a shadow minister appears on the bo誨， knowing the flrst line of attack on the POLL TAX will be converted rapi d1y into a defensive position on the illegality argument. Overseas Labour Par-

、/Labo的 local campaigni呵 ‘Above all，也is booklet gives you the facts you need to make up yout

ties 盯e 恆cred叫ous at the prospect ofthe British Labo盯 P虹tyshowing

血旭d

an outstanding degree ofpolitical incompetence, by was伽genergyon the 磁egality argument at the expense of血e real issue ofthe POLL TAX itself. Those who tmnk they can get away with both on the media are deluding themselves' (News Release [JeffRooker's Office] , 14/9/88 , our emphasis).

on the poll tax. An informed debate needs an informed public.'

•

(Paying the Poll Tax in Liverpool, booklet distributed by Liverpool City Counc挂， 1989).

The P缸旬's prevaricatio益，叫d eva'SiveneSs over the設 policy altemative were borne of a s旭詛叮 anxiety. According to The Times' Chief Political Correspondent , Labour's renunciation of the twin-tax option ref1ected concerns in the senior echelons of the P盯》屁巴t 'the value of 也epropa﹒ ganda weapon which they believe the poll tairepresents to 也emshould 旦旦be undermined by T，。可 charges)hat it wants to replace one t認 with two' (The Tim俗， 27/9/89: 2). 8加盟訂'ly，也e later decision to discard a 'capital value' property tax system, was based 'more on presentational problems rather than on practicality' (Guardi帥， 19/6/90). 、L

The problems Labour faced in deciding upon and defending a coherent stance on the non-payment issue also ha(a knock:“OMEecbnterms ofthe issues the leadership was prepared 如 empnasize 旭 theirp缸I加nent缸yand media campaigning. As one 8hadow 8pokesperson explained: 'The problem for 間， and there's a real issue here, is 血的 themorewe pressed the ques位on ofthe register and its intrusiveness , the more we knew we would accelerate the e.組sting non-payment campai醉， non­ re到stra位on， non-vo位ngcampai但﹒And there was a genuine ambivalence. That we had to be extremely careful that we didn't discourage people from register姐g to vote. As it is 4 million disappeared off the census, so that was something that we were right to be concemed about. 80 it did temper a little 也e way we described the likely intrusiveness，姐to people's relationships ，姐to who lived in the household , on the grounds 也 t ha 前t.t由 hi泌s could be a 血a 吋jo 叫 Ir 品 dis閱 ad 御 v阻t旭 ag 酹 e 切 to the Labour 84

In 1987, sever叫 Labour authorities conducted pre-emptive publicity cam-

_ ,'__ paigns that clea甸甸lalled 恥ir antipa血yto 伽 poll t也 fu-S~~te~ber j 9 j)只 \/'i 98 Z, Leicest冶r City CouncU produced .i:! sixteen-p略e brochure,'HQW the ..--.fQlI垃艾麗蒜苔k噎住， whi伽ariou吉布區品鼠忌立志pr晶石 ('It is unfair ...立 is undemocratic ... It is costly and di姐cult to adminster ... Itw扭扭crease house prices' How the Poll Ti仰 Affects Leicest肘， 1987: 6一 7); its likely redistribu位onal effects; and its limited suppo此 Thism剖n brochure was supplemβnted by several shorter le af1ets which summarized its rq. ain points , and targeted specific sections of the community.

心hef1ìeld的印uncU's， 'Beg恤的側的 the Poll Tax' , published at伽 *

When Stoker observes 也at 'Government mln1s ters 10st the propaganda battle wi也 10cal authorities' ov官r the introduc位on of the poll tax, he is primarily referring to 也e high profi1e campai扭扭gofLabo叮 controlled 10cal authorities (1991: 186). t The 1988L∞ al Government Finance Act also con扭扭ed provisio即 which p1aced a 1egal obliga位。non1ev拆ng authorities 切 collect the tax.

85

-'"',

f

T揖ation 阻d Representation: The Media, PO加個l Communi間位onand 也ePollTax

same time, drew attention to the huge discrepancy between Government and Council esti血ations of likely ch缸ge levels in the Sheflìeld 缸'ea; the preponderance of likely losers under the new sy臨困; the exorbitant adm姐istra位ve costs; and the potential threat posed 的 ind'ividual privacy.-/ Eight 'supplementary sheets' were available on request, wrnch gave more detailed exposi位ons of 也e policy' s defects and refu扭位ons of Government cla旭s. /、\

In December 198Z , Reading Borough Counc~ ran a publicity campai但 也rough

the local rriβdia which invited local residents to ring a telephone hotline andreceive an information pack delivering 'PI誠nFacts On ThePoll T間， (PRWee陶， 10/12/87). Initi a11y it was intended to run the adverts on local independent rad'io but they were barred by the Independent Broad.“ C的位ng Authority. The IBA's ban did not reflect 血e content ofthe adverts but rather their subject matter, which it was claimed put 也e adverts in contravention of the Broadcasting Act which prohibited adverts of a wholly or mainly political nature (Loca1 Government Chronicle , 11112/87).

v

J

The following year , Liverpool City Council distributed a glossy booklet: Th e Poll Tax: What it is and What it Means to You , and in its in仕oduction clearly stated the council's s個nce: ‘Liverpool City Council is opposed to the poll t磁. It believes that it will make poor people poorer, and will drive many more people into poverty for the firsttime' (1989: 2). Alongside explana. 位ons ofthe origins and details ofthe policy, the document drew attention /to the potential 也reats posed to personal privacy, the fallaciousness of Government Community Ch盯ge projec位ons; and the 'cynical' nature of the safety net arrangements. It concluded with a s o-ca11ed 'ready reckoner' 一 se個 of tables which highlighted the likely redistributional impact of the tax on a ward basis - and a discussion of how the new system would systematically discriminate ag越nst disadvantaged sections of the commu凶ty.

戶a/J

hEF令-

~ ~郎s 伽 t he 帥 b 伽r 叫 仙叫 t曲 吋 he 伽趴恤 t 臨，冶s 恤陶 pleme 閒 nt扭 a伽恤 n 祉帥 仰 e wcωlose 叫 叭

/i

們叫 -AHfdF

86

…

d 伽恤e in this 句pe of publicity material. Although this material continued to signal the levying au曲。ri位es' antipathy 切 thepoll Jt心nore emphasis w叫lacedon t!!里的帥彈1通~hose unable to pay the tax. This s包ft reflected 也ree factorsl First勻，給 was a response tø NEC direc位ves for Labour authorities 臼 conduct local rebate campaigns. I Second, the increasing detail available on the rebate package coupled with - the Government' s volte face on the transitional relief arrangem凹的， made

became more l-avrgJLll

app訂ent

Chapter 4:

Promo位ngD泌sent: An位 PoIl T，阻Campa'i扭曲g

the need for revised information all the more urgent.\ Third, these au血， orities' recognized it was 垣 their own self interest 卸 secÙìe a high tak:e up _./ofr由ates ， as the greater adminis仕ative burden placed upon them by the new taxation a叮angements would only be exacerbated should a sig剖弘 cant number of potential claimants apply once enforcement proceedings had begun (Convention of Scot位sh Lo cal Authorities , Executive CommitteeMeetingItem, 3/3/89).

想認eld C均Counc~r耐ed publici恥n喇叭mprised a seri叫 leaflets which v缸'ióusly explained the benefit system ('What is poll tax benefit?.. Who can't claim? ... How does 也e council pay poll tax benefit?.. Where can 1 get more 旭formatio肘'); its implications for various sections ofthe community ('Poll Tax and Young People' , 'Poll Tax and the Black Commu凶旬'); and the impact ofthe uniform Business Rate on the business community ('Poll Tax [sic] and the Business Communi句'). Liverpool City Council's revised booklet, Paying the Poll Tax in Liverpool, included an expanded section on poll t臨 benefits ， how they could be claimed and a negative assessment ofthe system's frrst ye缸 of operation in Scotland.

r from late J9~O ， the informational aspect ofthese campaigns became more 砌的nt拉住坐車里雙雙位~哩嘩扭扭吧旬， the publicity mainly fôcused on 也 e ne:ed for people to pay the t缸， the sympathetic _ he叮恤g they wouldreceive frornthe 切cal cOu1lcil 前E哥 were experiencing diflìculties , and the legal obligation of the authority to p肘'sue those who θ 。三 2 、 persiste叫y 叫lsed to pay. For example滔 February 1993 , Leicester City { ιMC/ Councillaunched a concerted televisi間， radio and newspaper advertisement campaigElassur姐g those 恤訂閱缸s that they would receive a sympathetic hearing 仕om the council.",As one of the advertisements in the council' s own freely distributed civic mag扭扭 eputi缸 ,

'We know that some people 缸'ehav垣g d'i血c叫你抖抖ng their Poll T位­ But, as a local au也ority we have a duty to collect it and w岱 do so. If you are on a low income and are worried about Poll Tax arrears we can ~;i r 、 offer you a way out. Talk to us. Together we can agree how much you ~ I i 'v _' ...~ can afford to pay off each week' (Leicester Link, February 1993). 4 司 J3 次〈支 而--

The reasons for the change in emphasis were 也reefold. Firstly, by mid- 全 1990 itwas cle盯曲的也βlocalau也orities had won the propaganda 陶鎧 with the Government, an在商討 the publiC6Iamed the G前ernment for high poll t臨 levels. Second, the tensions between these councils' wish to com- 文 87

,

Taxa討on and Represen組討on: The Media Poli位.cal Communi阻tionand 也ePolI Tax

11 m叫叫 th你也位.pa何制he 呵，輕些生坐坐些組建但到飽眼ad L1I>叮ment to protect their revenué yiel劑， became increasingly severl令i& ~IaH海器官叮制訂站騙的帥bon:rly 恆的， and the pressure (j豆 these authorities' finances increased, a more tÚD.sYm pathetic 叫做lde to non":-/ 門 payees c_a:rp.~個 predominate in ruling groups_~_.Third， a~ the_c::on仕oversial \戶可長話石兩位商品話詢宙語五再志高耐esE再搞函az 面反而正E芯証前訂苗在訪11 tax groups who sought 臼 encourage non-payment and condemned council complicity in enforcing the 跑了s ~ implementati到lAsa ∞nsequence ofthis , the political aims of也esea啦" _, orities' publicity work d盯ing 血e tax' s final period became more concerned with refuting the claims of anti poll tax groups about the levels and advisability ofnon-payment, than 坦問sponding to the rhetoric of a government 也at had long accepted it had lost the 缸邵:unent. ,.. r , r ) ,/ Not surprisingly, thé，、local 也dre斟onal news meqiEt, feJltured cen個lly 區 the communication strategies of those Labour aúthorities who mobilized against the poll tax. To some degree this ref1ected 也e general trend towards grea伽 investment and professionalism in local government news management. As one internallocal authority document summ訂izedit: '=乙二戶】之一一----一-戶一一一-可呵-

'Good relations with the media 缸e not an 'optional extra' for the City Council; they must be an 迦tegral p缸t of the Council's attempts to improve its image. A “good image" is not a goal in itself. But it can help inattrac位ng investment, improving relationships with outside bodies , and reducing unnecessa可 and unwarranted hostility from the public we serve' (Guide to Relations with 血e Media , Liverpool City Counc益， May 1991 , our emphasis). However, the political controversy over 也e Community Charge made these contacts even more crucial, both in informing 也e public and presen位時也e councils' views (Dale , 1989). Interes位ngly， !h~ significance ofthe local media 姐 the 恤佐oduc位on of the poll t紹 wa~~空910st on the Audit Co mmission either , who stressed the need for a11 authorities to attend to their media work when administering the system: providing hypothe位cal scenarios where local authority cou此 actions could either be displayed positively in the local media , as an illustration oflocal e血cien呵， ornega­ tively , as an example of local bureaucratic insensitivity (Audit Commission , 1990).

our difl'erent local sample 訂e的 exposed a great diversity in the sophis位侃" 88

Chapter 4:

Promo位ngD協ent: Anti Poll T且Campai伊ing

v

tion 個d organiza位on

of media work by councils~ Whereas severallocal authorities had invested in press offices employing experienced ex-journalis旬， others operated on a far more ad hoc basis. And it appe缸'ed 也atparty political fhct凹s played ap盯t 旭 determin旭gthβextent of investment 詛 F t趾sare些\yhereas most of也e Conservative authorities we spoke to tended to favour a more individualistic approach to media relations - with senior figures in the ruling group adopting sole or main responsib也.ty for media liasons - a11 of those Labour authori位es we contacted who actively campaigned against the t缸 preferred a more systematic approach to press relations, seeking to channel a11 press contacts through 也eir press offices.. , / An example of this political difl'erence was provided 旭 one authority, where political control ofthe City Council shifted from the Conservatives to Labour in 1990. Under the Conservative gro坤， press and publicity work had been directly controlled and organized by the Councilleader. Wi也 the shift 切 Labour，也e council' s press and publicity operations were completely transformed. A formal press office w部 established and a 也rective was passed to all au也ority departments 品的 theysho叫d..direct all future / press contact via it. Labour authorities also tended to invest more 旭 ersatz local media - free mag扭扭郎， newspapers or news inse此sau也ored by local press 0血.cersand designed to provide a one-step communication f10w from the authority to its residents. These were also widely used 切也ssem旭ate information and opinionon 也e Community Charge: 'We [put 融for血的ion] in the Council newspaper. 1 hesita臼 to ca11 it a newspaper ... It' s sent out every two weeks. It's sent out with one ofthe local free newspapers ... It goes to every house. You would usua11y have 也e front page for purely editorial. We did quite a lot of poll tax stories. 80 that was go恤g out to a11 homes' (Council Press 0血.cer， interview with authors). Prior to the introduction of 也e tax, many Labour authorities had found 址 (也血cult to attract consistent media atten位。八 to the issue. However once it had 缸rived， they found themselves deluge$fwith requests for information •

。

In manycas郎. thls systematic approach was more of an ideal 也anareali旬.withlocal Jo叮nalists prefeηing to contact local councillors and professlonals directly rather 也阻 going through the press offi切，個dwi也姐姐uen位al figures withlnω跨越n departments pro討ngreluc個nt to relinqulsh thelr direct contact with news media.

89

Taxation and Representation: The Media, PO加叫Communi間位on 個d the Poll Tax

Chap鉛r 4: Promoting Dissent: Anti Poll T臨Campai但ing

andintβrviews. As one press officer put it, 'The poll 旭x is a never ending source of fascination to the media ... It' s definitely added a new dimension' (Interview with authors). Although a considerable amount ofthis contact concerned straightforward information provision , or facilitating access to senior local government officers{ press 0血ces were also used旦旦控ιJ charges of administra位vejp.compètence and where appropriate to make a political point. For exampltf, àfter 伽 Chancellor' s surprise blanket r耐心 位on 恤 poll tax levels in March 1991 , one authority expressed its pique by inviting the local media to photograph and interview 也eir senior finance officer astride a mountain of now redundant poll tax b血&

producing 'political' pub盼旬， which is discerned from a test set down in ~ <2. sec位on 2 of the 1986 ActQvhether the material ‘appears 的 be designed to ).(:J affect public support for a political party'. Although there has been wide- :; 1:, spread confusion about 也e extent ofthese powers ，的 well as some of 也eir 、; ~ ,"",/ central opera位ng definitions , these regulations could haye considerably 、乞守其是。今/ \ - '- ~J v :7{;.-( inhibited these Labour authorities in their p的licity worklCertainly , those authorities who formally campaigned ag訟nst 血e 個x were highly cOÌl“ sciousof也e dangers offallingfoul ofthe law. As a council press officer from one ofthese authorities explained:

1υ/ 枷bi枷so叫 叫 nz1叫 La伽叫lt 助 t的h州

r

'[The Co uncil's publicity material] had 如 be ve可 lβgally ve前:ed ... Anything that 1 wrote that was interes位ng and had a little bit of s可h about it got taken out basical旬， (Intβrviewwith authors).

'1..,.

It should be s仕essed th呼otdL伽叫ocal authorities chose to conduct 扭曲 profùe anti poll t路兩l話可 camp訟gns.Forexam阱， inN。他gham， V J

"'-

whilstLabour councillors were always willing to castigate the GovernmeIit and the policy in the local 血edia， the council itself distributed very little publicity mater.:.ial on the t眩， and when it did so the literature focused either on how'f>eople could apply for rebates ('We'll help,when you've been Poll Taxed' , Nottingham City Council Leafl前， 1990) or offering incentives forreg叫前 and efficient payment ('Pay your Community Charge/Poll Tax by direct debit and you could WIN a fabulous 血， 000 holiday for two' , - Nottingham City Council Leafl仗， 1990). Simil缸ly， E;:ts垣gton District Co uncil' s formal publicity merely amounted to a series ofpress adverts 祖d posters informing the public of where to apply for rebates. While this difference 胎 thena個re and extent of publicity produced by Labour auth。rities sometimes revealed the differing public relations capabili值的 ofthese 刷刷t討i抬伽伽 協臼悅 s， 址 it 曲咖 or 岫 晶 efl 缸 n e伽耐 dp 仰oli伽叫 州 1∞ con她叫on 叫 1

those Labour cωou旦郎ci血 ls who conducted the most ∞ c on 剖 1泌t缸 roversial publi蚓 .cit句 y and mobilized most pre缸ci椒 抖it旭 p a位vel甘 y against the ta 磁 x， were those larger municipal authorities who expected to lose most under the new
Such cau位on was not ill founded. Throughout the poli旬's implementa-"l tion, the Local Government Unit at Conservative CentraJ. 0盟ce carefully I moniωred Labour council public旬， and on one occasion had unsuccess- I fully tried to get the Audit Commi甜on to pursue a 仰 pr ro 帥 s扭 ec 叫 u 叫ti恤 叫阻且 O n against one \ Labour authority for contraven均 thele站起疏于一一一一一__.

V

However, if these re訊lla位.ons inhibited thé styl~ of presentation, they did 」ρt signific品盯盔茁茄函口古跡的mωmm忌函訂hekpreferred message. As one commentator pointed out in 1988:

'The restrictions …should not really inhibit the conduct of any camdifferent style 切 that which an authority may otherwise prefer. But where , as here, the facts themselves 缸.e so damning, it should be easy to devise la咐，祉， but effective , pub誼city' (Willmore , 1988). p凶gn about the poll tax. It may require the adop位on of a

.<<-:\針LYAF吋

fJ

D

川仁

HowemAcbk旦控gce強組些控妙。些型過哩呱蝴幽/ wereemMhgong述且也包坦控但也扭扭.~partfrom 商品ntra幽 dic位ons created by denigrating a tax they also had to collect, these dissenting authorities confronted a more im血ediate threat. In Britain, local government publicity is governed by s扭扭te. The 1986 and 1988 Local Government Acts laid down regulations which prohibit councils from

90

Nevertheless , even ifthe practical effects ofthe regulations were negligible, the legislation may have been a significant factor 祖 encouraging some authorities to focus 也由 campaig剖ng against the t服 through the local media , which apart from having the benefit ofbeing considerably cheaper th祖 large scale information subsidies , was not covered by the legisla位on (Dale , op. cit.).

91

,

T但a位.on and Represen紹說on: The Media PO加間l C.ommu凶闊的.on and the Poll T揖

TheLabourP訂句一個d other opposition p缸位es-wèrenot 血è only sourëe ofp缸ty

political opposition to the Community Ch盯ge. The tax also antagonized a wide range of Conservative P缸ty opinion, which eventually grew 切 such an extent 也at it proved a crucial factor 扭曲e deposition of 也eP叮叮 leader (McGregor , 1991). Given the vehemence of 也is ôpposi位on， and its profound influence on the conduct and evolution of也ispolicy f'\ debate , it is important to consider its nature and how the message _gf r{_j血型rection was communicated within the P缸tJ a函聶聶哥函 to the gener而5. 一一~一-

There was an impo加nt qualitative change in Co nservative opposition as .j the policy cycle proceeded. Prior to mid-1J ~， Conservative opposi說on 立一←一一一-一一一--W的 mainly located among ~些白的自fqf些控!y who 喇 ectedto thep吋nciples of the policy (Nor切益， 1990). However , as 也e prospect of implementation loomed , opposi位on spread to other sections of the P缸旬， who balked atthe effects ofthe tax. ByMarch 1990 , the soundofConservative Backbenchers applauding the idea of the Co mmunity Charge but condemning its practice was a familiar refrain around Westminstβr.Aswe discuss later，也監控車坐且出現且由.QPposi位GÐ:切 the Community Ch缸ge held major implications for the conduct and construction of public debate on 也e policy , particularly by the me也a. " .- Furthermore ,\th~且也μfthe public 叫ression of th旭 internal dissenY W的 highly sigIÌificant. Despite the vehemence of some in their oppositión ωthe Tax , no influen位al figures within the P缸ty went public with their objections until after the Co nservative party' s success in 也e 1987 General Elec位on. (In deed , Mi chael Hesel位ne， Mi chael Mates and other high profile CI咄cs voted for the Scottish legisla位on in 1986/87.) There were several reasons for this addi位onal absence of co血ment on the issue before the 1987 副ection. As we have explained , opposition within 也e Party was not 的 broadly based 凶 itwas 拍 become. As one of the most influential right wingback“ bench critics , explained: 'The principle which I accepted …and still'accept -血at just the same as the American revolution was 'no taxation without representation' , we had representa位on without taxa低on， which is s削1 to me politically 4個moral， andI s位II stand by that. The nitty-gritty I did not look at. And at the 198 7 Electio訟， on platforms I defended it because it w的 im­ mensely popular in Conservative circles' (In terview with authors). ,

92

Promoting D協ent: Anti Poll T酪Campaigr過ng

Furthermore，句re w 句 basic lack of awareij.!品 among m叫 back

Conservative Party opposition

l

ch句ter 4:

benchers 部 to 吵吵.enceof the isSÌìe. In a revealing exchange with the authors , one of the most prom泊ent Conservative opponents of the Tax dur坦g its legislative passage offered the following explanation as to why he failed to address the issue before the General Election and before the Bill was presented to P缸liament:

'Because 抽s Thatcher - en位rely on her own -也rew it 旭to the .,/ manifesto , wi.也out consulting anybody. None of us knew about it 于石研討tapp正站iñtíîë話這聶士1而且s 訴遁詞時副司局正 伽 GreenPap叮 aE剪混混d孟晶叮叮叫...凹的 wasan '81 [Greên Paper] , there was an '83 [White Pap叫 and there was 祖‘ 86 [Green Paper] , all specifically said - oh , and the La持e旭 report - all specifically said 也.e poll tax is not the answer. And then it got slung 旭to 也e manifesto' (Interview wi也 authors). q間間，聊"“"峙-冉、、劍-司，司、

一一呵，

However，斟ven 也epolitical 的tuteness 也e 臼mmunityCh缸醉，

of several Parlirunentary cri位.csof it is unlikely that political my句iaal曾到也對des""'"

a 叫ìci.e~睡nati個fbrth尚昆主研麗詠梅最嘉cti叩開控ι

Rather, their silenc已站oprõ6的lyrêUected-a:tãc位cåì'decisioñ-to-lÍòhlftre malthe eImamh位扭扭也!..-aft叮 W恤ch 出ey could exert 也eirgre胸前 單宙語高高聶r the direction of Govemment policy._

Þ (:) t:>

(;,

多r

One uni方ing feature of all

Conserva位ve

Party opposi位on to the poll tax

wasits些虫叮體型ed臨詣的區長?難披在錢能會，alme心全y

"l

'~...'

whicnCons的相精神朧的凹的前監控mtmZHSisg 腳

石站站前函 matter how deeply felt 也eantago剖.sms among Tory r a:nks, party loyalties and obligations made it unthinkable that Con臼rvative dissenters would disseminate formal , an位 poll 怯xpub且citymat冶rial.

Briefmgs given to 也e media by Conservative dissidents were bo也 ove此 and covert. One p缸位c叫訂lyinfluen位al overt media briefing was delivered by the ex-Iocal govemment 扭扭ister， Rhodes Boyson, who in 1989 approached The Ti mes with projections about the likely impact of tþ.e tax on low rated prope此ies in the north of England and expressed his concerns about the threat they posed to the Conservatives' electoral prospects. He explained his motives thus:

‘Presumably The Times comes out every day and I am told people read it. I may have been misled , but I'm told people read it. And ifyou can't 93

.:;...丸 {，:'γ

Chapter 4: Promoting Dissent: Anti Poll T也CampaigI通ng

T坦a位onandRepr臼個個tion: The Med妞， Po加cal Communication and 也ePolI Tax

get government to see sense then you go there. When it was written up in The Times afterwards [about what had happened] - the Sunday Times did a big write也p which you'll have seen which said 1 leaked [the 1 didn't leak any也ing at all. 1 just made public what was public. What 1 did was interpret what it mea帥， (Interview with authors , our emphasis).

n訊rres].

C!

~

B卸oyso 叩o帥 poi旭n酬bou也 1起均也心i 甸蚓 E 滋 s i但i由 f且ìca 叩 ntι.\In 0盯 pre 研 :vi切 ou 凶 s 曲 c ha 呻 pt 跆e 缸 伽忱 叮 r

we noted the

叫 aut切 ocα 叮 ra 旭 祕位 c a

___白~ F

白， ­

highly

白

i泌 s

J 盟控叩血到控哩空空型哩h堅吧些艷空n 叩“竺些史且起n 呵 z 叫些世噓幽G萃 v

.一，!

Jmc1

i..J) 仗~

It is clear that 噎體空空aldi些聖哲垃n the Party grew在要空扭扭缸" ship stubbor..nJ扭曲sed而苦的pond to these criticisms! 'go姐gp控~ criticisms beca哩 the principal mechanism for e甜甜甜吉亞臼啞巴lpO!l i t. This approach was 聶哥ecia叮叮ident a血 ong~gr部 s roots Conservative op凶。泣， which had been p缸tic叫訂ly alienate'a1)ytlîë旭troduction of the polic孔 For example , in March 199侃而認這ÏÍt of 也e political 如'Ore ~ over l:b.e tax, there were several high profile Conservative council resignations in connection with the issue. At least one ofthese - the且要血型盟旦Ld Co nservative councillors in Beverley, Humberside on Budget Day - was deliberately timed t9 attract ma到血um media attention and thereby op蛤 mum political emb金Tassment for m垣isters.

亨、;JThismedia 前ientation 尬。 refl叫ed the reciprocal inter臼 of伽 mediain '- - / • - Co nservative critics. Those Conservatlves who voiced tneir concerns pu弘

gaining access to the media to air their views , that the inherent newsworthiness of their message obviated the need for sophis位cated news management. Whereas a Labour frontbench spokesperson spoke of the 'very hard work in the back room, of the job of convincing people that [the poll tax] mattered, and then convincing them of our credibilty and then keeping up the flow ofinformation to 也em' ， Co nservative dissenters were able to adopt a far more relaxed approach to news management: licly had

li位le 也血c叫你 in

recogn扭扭g

/TIn not one of these people who puts a press release out every two minutes, or even once a week. 1 put it out as and when 1've got some也ingp訂恥叫盯 1 want to say, which 1 suppose is maybe four or five times a ye~. 801 don't have 'press work' as such. When 也e poll t阻 happened， \it was all done by talking to journalists' (Conservative MP. interview with authors).

94

Beyond these public articulations ofConservative opposi位0日， our research uncovered another, hidden , dimension in the communication ofConservative dissent via the media. At the height of the poll tax cri電is there w部 a surreptitious but highly significant breakdown in collec伽eresponsib也ty 坦 the Cabinet over the issue. his p血句ally involved 但也叫or m旭isters conveying to trusted media confidants their j)!"ivate antago誣革 towards the Commu到ty Charge. But whereas other Party obje叫。自 'went public'wi血也eir concerns to the media，也ese senior gove攻lIDent figures went p郎ately:中roviding information 也at w的 not to be reported, but which the reporter should use as(the pinch of sal~ to season any public -._/ proclamations the minister might 血 ake. As one/lobby journalist recollected:

•

)

!J

/;.'-;--今 fì 去~，

<..._ 1~_"_ 可:J !

三/

~

J司交

ιv

-) ô

-/

.

p,

1

4斗，

'[Aseniorm隘ister]

went to the offices of one na位onal newspaper, just for a sort oflunch thing, and the editor w由 there， the political editor, local govern血ent correspondent et cetera et cetera, and he said 祖 categorical terms - and you've got to bear in mind that these 缸e “deep 也roat" off the record occasions - he said he thought it w扭扭 awf叫 idea, and he really didn't want 叩y也ing 的 dowith 祉， (Interview with authors). Although the甲、 onfidential' briefin_g s were mainly only divulged 切 very s~nior 10 bby journ aI亟茵河在哥were clearly intended to filter outfor broader空 三世配ial cons臨時ion by journali呦，投?枷 a 're臼ived石油哥哥h the priva但 views of 也e po加d凹， whatever 坦s public rhe的ric might suggest. As another lobby correspondent explained:

'1' d bump into people at the b缸， you know at the end of a long day , and 1' dsay “ oh god , [names minister] wasn't very good today was he?" And they' d say 'well you know about hi血， you know he hates 也epoll tax'. And you' d say 'What do you mean he hates the poll tax?' And that' s , it's all drip ， dr旬， drip and it sort of oozes out like that' (Interview with authors).

The deposition of Margaret Thatcher and the announcement of 血e poll tax'sabo惱。此 effectively drew the sting ofConservative disaffection. However, as the prospect ofthe next General Election loomed closer, the P訂ty

部?lWL

spindocto凹的oa枷

95

可r盟副on and Represen組組on: The Media, PO扭曲l Communi問.tion and the Poll T，盟

of 仙似etwit恤血eP的& one high profile P缸liamen個ry critic 時 plained: j

'1 have been silencedl' (Interview with authors).

Other 缸'en晶。fpolitical

opposition

Sowhatofo也er sources of political opposi位on to the Community Charge , beyond the p訂旬 po誰也al 缸'ena? For 也e rest of this chapter ~e explore how a range o~professional organizations and pressure group,S publicly o-- mobilized against the tax, and the factors that influenced theit campaign strategies. We begin by exam扭扭g how local authority associations and pressure groups responded to the new policy，部 they played a crucial role incons佐ucting and co-ordinating the broad response oflocal govel'DJllent 怕也is highly significant constitutional reform.

v

Local government organizations

Not surprisingly，叫llocal au也ority associations identified the salience of 也e reforms at a very early 如那個錯， 1986b) , and expressed a considerable exasperation at 也e inertia ofthe main poli位cal parties and the media over the issue. As a senior fmance officer from one associa位on eXplained:

‘ Our leading members were instructed to raise [the

Co攝muni句

Charge] and get a high profile wi也 their colleagues and 旭 the p缸， liamentary field. And it was just a sort of 如tal surprise 切g.s that not a lot was made of it un叫旭血ediately after 也e General Blection. And then the contrast betweenJuly 1987 onw缸dsand 也e previous eighteenmonthsw的 just amazing ... 8uddenly, Whaml It took off. People realized it was for real , it was coming, and the media was full ofpoll tax stories , which then began to feed off each other. Life was very 恤ter郎" ting here, thereafter' (Intβrviewwith authors). ".

λ

-t~ (JdC-\

~

rd、

(山，一/

Although these different organiza結ons wer~)扭扭im啥叫n the控 opp叫“ tion to the tax, there were cle平墊控巒sintnena組rp oftheir oþposition. For example , the Labour controlled Associations (such as the Association ofMetropolitan Authorities [AM峙， the Association of Lo ndon Authorities

96

Ch呻ter 4:

Promoting D油ent: Anti Poll T，缸Campaigning

[ALA] , and 血e Convention of Scottish Local Authori位es [COSLA]) assumed a more oppositional posi位on: hi出lighting how 也e system eroded v" loc叫 governmentautono~yand regressively redistributed ce甜algrant 一荒而古話說的 aßluent regions. By comp訕。訟;the lobbying and c祖國 pai扭扭g of th.é、Conservative controlled &sociation of District Council (ADC) had a mòre-revis怕別的 stance: iden時ing practical problems with the legislation which would prove particularly disadvantageous fo日墊-t cons位側的 authori位的. (For example , the ADC playeaa very si扭過 cant role 恆 the political furore which forced the Government to rescind the ‘self-financ恆g' safety net proposals 坦 1989.)

v

There were two re酬nsfl叮枷 di伽enmes叫twasrec恤吋伽t the municipal au也ori位es would be hit hardest by 也e new system, it w自 inevitable that theirftpresentative organizations would adopt a more combative postu風 ~econd， the political complexion of difIerent &sociations exerted an ob'vious influence over 也e type of political po悅ure it could assume. Because general Conservative disaffection wi血 the Community Charge in local.government only began to appear tow缸ds mid1989 , the ADC had to be cautious 姐也eir campaigning on the tax during its Parliamentary passage in 1987/88. As one 0血cer explained: 'We had the continual tension that you get when you've got a local association ... con仕'Olled by the same political p叮ty down the road … [The &sociation's Ch剖r's] attitude was: the Conservatives have got a / big majority, we can jump up and down añd scream asmuch as we li峙， but 也e Government majority has the right and 也epower 切 push it 戶rough. 80 there comes a point when it's silly just to go on and on opposing ... We should really be spending our time looking at ways of a血ending details' (Interview with authors). Interestingl:s{, as the poli位cal deba記 develo_ped， (j;he focu~of each Associations' camp~但垣g and lobbying subtly 剋te品涼。re主ample， where的 the groundswell of Conservative disaffection with 也e poll tax from 1989 permitted the ADC a freer hand ωattack the principles as well as prac鈍， calities ofthe 個x; the worsening fmancial privations experienced by member authorities ofthe AMA led it to place less emphasis on issues ofprinciple and more on the practical issue of ge仗扭g people to pay. Whereas before 1990, the AMA had frequently highlighted questions about the dangers thet磁 posed ωthe franchise and 也e threats posed to privaèy , by the end

v

97

Taxation and Repr路聞組討on: The Media, PO加開l Communi個說on and the Poll Tax

~

of 1991 , one oftheir main objec位.veswas 切 persuade the Go.vernment to conduct a 'Pay Up' promotional campaign. As a senior fmance officer from the Association explained '[b efore 1990] we could take a principled .view and be upset about information gathering …防 1990/91] we st叫“ to have to take a less 也an principled view，叫d accept we had to get on and do 也e job' (Inte r.view with authors).

-,/ All associations perceived~he media as being very important in the develo-

debate on the policy, and engaged in news management work as an adjunct to their lobbying in Whitehall. 的 onepress 0誼cerput it: 'we use the media whenever we c~to promulgate our line, obviously. It's one of our major weapons'. As with other poli位cal actors in the debate , 也eir press work w的 both proac位ve … highlighting issues and parading th耐 concerns - and reac位ve， deflec位ng criticisms and castiga伽go也er sources 'when we 也ink 也ey haven't got it q叫te right' (Interview with _ authors). On ano也erlevel，也ey were a significant source of comment and technical exper位se for the media, which provided another opportunity for them 臼 present their concerns and op旭ions. p坦g poli位cal

i以叭 KIt

-布 h 什后

An example of an e訂lyandprom祖ent exercise in staged news manage“ ment by one association came in December 1988 , when 也e Daily Mi rror f

ran a front page story under therather improbable headline: SEXAND 扭扭

1

(呱呱叫Mir附叫8 叫心 也e

u V

next day 一 GAYS G阻盯' 郎TTER DEAL ON POLL TAX (Daily Mi rror, 9/12/88: 18). Both stories ori斟nated from a sem旭缸 organized by the r AMA and the National Council for Ci叫Liberties on the privacy implica位ons of the new system. }'he first story related 的 the power oflocal authl ori位的 to acq耐e information about血旦旦些恤金@t_us_Q扭扭~ers I _(hence the ‘SEX' dimension); the second, to the rules governing joint and i 而兩 lia品 IZ而ich di倘:t apply to hom帥叫 couples (hence the I 'Gays get better deal' angle):

Chapter 4: Promoting D協ent: Anti Poll T阻Campai伊ing huge splash. It kept Orbison off the front page' (Interview with authors). Although delighted with the initial sp扭曲， theAssociation waslesspleased with the subsidiary piece:

'The follow up story next day, which we sort ofhastily disowned. First we concocted it and then 1 got 扭扭 some trouble on 也is from our equal oppo前u到ties 恥ys' (Inter.viewwith authors). Apart from the campaigning of local authority associa位ons ， the views of certain councils were also forcefully represented by the pressure group , the vLocal Government Informa位on Unit (LG叩). As this grOUp was ini位ally established in the early 198 Os as part ofLabour councils' political response to attacks from central govern血間已 itw部 not surprising 血的 the Community Charge came to dominate all aspects of its work for a considerable

L 品/((

periodofti血吼，

Throughout the debate , the U:剖t distributed a consid扭曲le amount of publicity material on the Community Charge. Aside from their monthly newletters , which often covered poll tax issues ('How Will The Cap Fit?'LGIU Briefl旬， No.38; ‘Poll Tax Package: the Real Storγ ， LGIUB吋ef­ ing, No. ~日)， fromM缸'ch 1989 , the U:凶t distributed a monthly ‘Poll Tax Foc肘， briefing, which was superceded in October 1991 by a monthly 'Council Tax Facts' br叫ng. It also produced a 訊tide to the poll ta玄， which outlined its det aiIs and déÍìciencies (LG間， 1989). This material w由 dis­ 仕ibuted to registered members , and also to najional and media outlets. Furthermore, it published, in co吋 unction wit呵þe Child Poverty Action ) v Group , a .very influential analysis ofthe redistribñtive implications ofthe /' t缸， which directly challenged the op位mistic veneer of DoE projec位ons (Es amand Oppenheim, 1989).

'Wetrieditin 也e 民i[irror and spent the best part of the day talking them through 也e story and fmally

at the end ofthe day [the jo叮nalist] said ge 仗t 誌 it on the fr ，on 切叫 lt pag ，伊 .e" Watching Newsni勾ghtt也 ha 前tn 剖igh 趾t， it was the same day 也at Roy Orbison had died , so all tabloids were leaping on Roy Orbison , and then they fmally got to the bottom the ofthe pile , and Peter Snow, 1 think it w帥， said'‘1 see the Mirror' s got something about the Poll Tax". There was a

“1 ought to go and run this , 1 也 th姐k I' ll

9忽

news media of its deficiencies well 旭 advance of its 0血ciallaunch (LGIU News Release , 8/5/89). The 也CÒÌ，ld si扭的cant contribu位on was 些具Lf f想些些些空控吧 bys耐E此也ourauthori位的咿insttheGov

99

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Politi個l Communi個.tion and the Poll T阻

Ch句ter4: Promo位ngD協ent: Anti Poll T揖Campai伊ing

County Councils, and that' s probably 訟， and possibly Tony Travers ,

ernment' s capping decision in April1990. Apart from providing legal and technical advice for the councils' defence，也e Unit was also responsible for

you know or s抽泣缸﹒ For us to get a quote 旭， it' s either got to be e甜e血ely good, or they've not been able to get hold of other people. Just because 也ey go for the establisbment ones first , because we're recognized as a sort of press盯'e group'ιGIU press officer，區terview with authors).

v、 e~uti部主h雙 councils' 位伊ments wer，詢詛y prese時ι!hEg姆拉血e

了Eea. 叫，而孟加蒜苗滋滋ëãsesonp耐鼠忌帥，如edis肘buted by the Unit between the capping announcement on the 3 April1990 and 也e House of Lord' s rejec位on ofthe councils' appeal on the 16 July 1990. These highlighted iniqui位的 and anomalies in the capping criteria ('Poli品 cal spite' 恤 ma坦ng cap fit , LGIU News Rele的e， 3/4/90; 'Poll Tax capping: power without responsibility' LGIU News Release, 1617/90) and informed 也e media of future news conferences and media events (‘ Poll tax capping - Media Events , June 4 & June 5. 11 am. Council Chambers , Camden. Opportuni位的 for film crews to meet capped councils' , LGIU News Release, 1/6/90; 'Press conference of capped councils. 3 pm. Legal 0扭cer presentto answer detailed ques位ons' ，問IU News Release, 4/6/90; '10.15-10.30. Outside High Court. Photo-Oppo成unity' ， LGIU News Release, 5/6/90). As -=the capped authorities awaited the outcome ofthe 趾st 扭曲 Court judge_ ment on 也e 14 June 1990 the LGIU sought 切 ensure that, even 宜 the v' I councils' did lose the judgement (which they did) , then their viewpoint l would still be adequately represented in the media:

'We booked God knows how many rooms at the L[ondon] S[chool] [ot] E[conomics] for a press conference for the media 切 hang around and do interviews 垣 ...That w肥 very good because 血ey were actually trapped 血eremostofthemoming， wai位ng for judgement. So they had background papers 的 read. It was quite effective. 1 remember a couple\ '/' ( ofjoumalists s呵，“GodlI didn'tknowthat. That'snotfair,isit?"... We) '- were concemed that if we lost, then you' d have 斑e Secretary of State 旭 his office , lookingv兩 smart and, you know，可個tesmanish". As it happened, Chris Patten [Secretary ofState for the Environment] was in .. Bristol, 1 think it was , and he was followed round by people with “Down With The Poll Tax" banners. So we did quite well out of that' (Interview wi也 authors). However , although specific interventions of this type were quite effective in securing media attention to problematic 也pects of the new system, the Unit frequently experienced di血cul位es in being prominently andregularly quoted in the 血edia， particularly at nationallevel: ‘口'he media] run their quotes 一 The AMA, the ADC, the Association of

100

/

j

Anti poll tax 0耶nizatioDS

•

One ofthe most remarkable effects ofthe Community Charge was 也eway it mobilized large sections of the community to express their opposi位on through impressive gestures of collective ac位on， be it in a stubbom refusal topay 也et路， or via large scale public demonstrations. The Anti Poll Tax -\ movement - a generic term W 且隨些竺且盟白哩哇坐坐世Eaof j form祉，如gle issue , unions , alliances , groups 祖d federations establ恤ed I to fight the poll t臨一 first emerged in Scotlan~d，_.aJ!~ then spread south- \ wa帥. ByNo闊的er 1989 there were ov呻吧抄且越 Poll T血 Unions

J

(府官Js) 祖 Britain.

role in establishing this protest movement. In March 1988 , the Campaign Group ofLabour MPs pr吋uceda 'Statementonfigh伽g the poll tax' which emphasized the need for 'a broad protest movement prepared , in the final instance , to use civil disobedience to make tOO 'Tory Tax' unworkable'. This would incIude 'send it back' an岱咽gistration campai血仇 mass appeals ag到nstregistr缸s' assessments and the occupa位on of council build旭gs (Labour Party News Release [臼mpaign Group ofMPs], 30/3/88). As a 'symbolic action' , the signa切des declared their intention neither to register nor to pay the tax. These dissenting fac位ons within the Labo叮 P訂ty and other political pressure groups on the Left , mobilized f;前 more precipitatively ag剖nst the 脂X than the mainstream of the P缸旬， convening several early meetings and 101

,

T認a位on 阻.d Represen個tion: The Media PO加開l Communi個位on and the Poll Tax

conferences to discuss strategies for opposing it (Independent Labour The first Anti Poll Tax Unions 旭 Scotland were established before the 1987 General Election 扭盯肘， 1992).

p缸紗， 1988).

However , although the movement was unified by calls for a more concertedand 型ical means for opposing the Community Cha耶， itwas also 叫 rive捏住艷艷些史?如 thebest 且也。"學~ip._g it, and how the 血。vement should be s仕uc旭red. 弘一 Manyac位vists asserted 也at the tax could only be defeated by engineering (~ a mass non-payment campaign) and that Labour councils and trades r ' - unions should actively obstruct i自 non-implementation (Scottish Anti Poll Tax Federation. 1989; Sewell, 1989; B田us， 1992; Labour P缸tyYoung Socialists, 1989). Others expressed doubts about achieving a sufficent 'level ofresistance' through non國.payment (b ecause ofthe ‘serious costs for the people undertaking it') and recommended instead thβP!!J:S凶t of'colþ _L lec位ve 旦旦些但世dieme amed to mazd呵.onstrations' to 'sig凶ficantly 一 r也祉Île po加 cal temperature' (區區已endent 晶晶urP缸旬， op. cit.). The p叮tic叫叮 strategy preferred by different anti poll tax fac位ons had direct implications for their rela位onship with other sources ofpolitical opposition to the tax. Whereas those who recommended non-payment had no compunction about publicly condemning the 'pay up brigade' in the Labour P缸旬， those advocating the latter approach still sought to keep the cha仔 服ls of communication open with 也eP缸紗's leadership. For exa血ple， ina news release following Labour's defeat at the Govan 坤-election， one Labour MP urged the p叮ty to adopt the mass protest option as a means of circumve耐ng ‘the sterile debate between simple non payment and simon pure legality' (Labour Party Press Release [Harry Barnes's Office] 16/11/88). 〉、 "

'1

品?

恥、

\4 、 Ji

102

tl

There were also disagreements as h州ormaliz的hemoveme~~也ould become, and who should exe此∞n仕01 over it. In November1988 , a conference at Oxford established a national federation of 阻位 poll tax groups in England. The next month the Socialist conference established a competing national forum. In November 1989 , the All British Anti Poll Tax Federation was launched , whose immediate aim was 'to organize these millions [of non-payers] into an army of mass non-payment' (民仙似肘， 24/11/89). The increasing tensions between these national federations focused on qu自由的 of s仕ategy 個d political control. For example, a newsletter released by the frrst national federation critidzed 也e 'sectarian-

chapter4:

P四個oting Dissent: An位 PollT:也Campaigr曲g

ism' of those endorsing a straight non-payment strategy ~ dis血issing thβ_~ v Socialist Conference as ‘m 叫凶-leftistjamboree' and the .A1.1ß自話ñFëëíeí:a位on as 'Mili tant don:iiñ研a-cN誠而正1月晶晶tion Newsletter, Janu缸yν 一一一------且也叫一-::--可戶一 1990). Militant's involvemerit was 個 prove an increasingly tendentious issue. both within 也e movement itself, and in extemal evaluations of its mandate and credibility. According 切 a member ofthe Federation's 趾st nationalcomm扭曲， M血tant's domination both seriously compromised the Federation's credibility with the 血ovement as a whole , and generally served to obscure 血e devolved nature of 也ean鼠"扭扭x movement (Burns , op. cit.). Despite this fac位onalism，_ all anti poll tax groups recognized the importance 司、-啊------一--個--一一 of establishing effective communication sti純gies ， to publicize their 叫到， encourage people to p盯ticipa切 in the campaign. However ，也ey ess media.ωorie!l，tatedinJÞ.eir publicity work than other political

V

~

哲EEFhba妞， q些授曾掛空空k哩哇瘋話屁也 mëetings , gra_~s roo._~~_五研旦控g!lÞ.!g_a.gd l~吵空空空g. Forexam阱， 自I而é-peêíëratlûn面s仕ibuted a qu肘ter of a million copies of its first newsletter, and Anti Poll Tax Unions in Haringey claimed to have delivered over 1 million leaflets door to door by 1991 (B ums , op. cit.).

叫f Y

i[, 枷 H 州 O weve 賦 e

mediai恤 nthei廿 rca血pa 剖ig 伊 ni站 ngd 街id 曲 n't忱ref1e 闊 ctapercept位io 翎 n 也a 前ttheβmed 晶iawe叮 3亨 re

I

吋

~Q 主缸里做主~va~

For example , the Scottish Anti Poll Tax Pedera泣.on attributed a lull iri the non-payment campaign 旭 Scotland in late 1988 to 'Tory spokespersons supported by the big guns of the popular press [who] have created a crescendo ofpropaganda to sugges t(tnat the high percentages now registered mean there will be no camp由gn of non-payment' (Scottish Anti Poll Tax Federation, op﹒ ciι). Rather, the less media centric approach of anti poll tax groups ref1ected a recogni位on that anyextra-legal _stance was unlikely 切 receive a sympathe位c response from journalists. 手 ( Furthermore，也ey often had di血c叫ty in get位ng the mediá - par位cularly I at national level 一 to recognize them ,!s legitimate fu旦控址。f political / '-一一_，，___一一 j ac!!Yity (a pr由lem often experienced by poli.tical pressure groups [Hansen ,__/ 1991]). As one APTU representative complained: •

Militant Tendency is a far Left.泣。 ts均ite group. which was e時elledfrom 也eLabo叮 P位tyin 也e mid-1980s. It had pursued ‘en缸拼成. me也ods. 'a classic tactic of 也e revolutionary Left. which 姐volves infiltra位on of the mainstream Labour P訂tyin order 切 pushitin切 moreh紅d-line Socialism. win convertsωits cause and provoke divisions and possible splits from which it might benefit' (Coxall & Robins. 1989).

103

v

T磁ation and Represen個tion: The Media, PO卸叫“mmuni間tion and the Poll T揖

‘Wemighthave 旭i位ated as切旬， but then [the local media] w盟 gotö the Council for confirmation of 祉， and quote the councillor or councillors , rather than use the story we've given them. 80 its diflìcult 如 get 也y血ingac仙ally directly i且， especially direct quotes or information in that sense ... For every s臼ry we give the media，也旬'llask 也eCoùIlcil for their statement. The vast, in fact 剖1 council statements will be unchallenged by the media. They won't actually come to us unless we coincide - deliberately coincide - with one that we're expec說ng 仕om the Council' (Interview with authors).

一

AJ吋

，When 叫poll tax grou伊拉伽耐e ∞veragd，胸部 princip均a幽ved

也rough public gestures: 恤mandingme曲甜enaoE面高高祖恥， S官ations orlmagiiìãfíve publicity gimmicks:

-何明-切-個阱，戶叫司、，..__。可明兩蟬，

Ch旬ter4: Promo位ngD協ent: Anti Poll T;恆Campaig糊g

responsibilities under the new system (for example，也e new arrangements for charitable rate relie f); reduced local government funding (Mabbo仗， 1992); and increased demand for voluntary sector services as financial pressures forced cutbacks in statutory provision (NCVO, 1987; Entezari , 1988; Da晦-8mith， 1988). Second, the t認 seriously affected the living stand缸ds of c扭扭的 or members of these organizations (NCVO , 1987). T趾祠，也e policy raised contentious political and soci叫 issues， with which many organizations were directly concerned; for exa血ple， the erosion of civilliberties in Britain and the grow旭g inegalitarianism of opportunity andreward.

.f

伽 T 'heB 捌 咐 rii崗岫討如o 叫 m扭胸 叩 r y 蚓o 叫 吋 n1咚 F 帥 ao 凹E叫

v

句pe 臼s ofvolunta 缸ryorgan 剖i扭 zat 位ioñ 函 8t紀 endedt切 ofocusond 晶ifl'er 昀 ent aspects ofthe po 晶 lic 叮 y 旭也eir

'On Monday 17 June ... Members of Oxford Against the Poll Tax will present a cheque to the City Council. The cheque will be made out for the sumof 油solutely no也ing' and signed on behalf of the people of Oxford. It will symbolize the extremely low level of payment that we e耶ct the poll 個xdep訂tment to receive in t姐scom旭g year' (OAPT

NewsRelease , 14/6/91). Most significantly, local groups focused 也eir news management exclusively on local media , partly because of their greater pro到mi旬， but also because they perceived their principal political opponents as being the local authori位的 who were enforcing the charge. National media contacts, on the other hand, were 剖most exclusively dealt with via the Militant dominated All British Federation. As we discuss later, this difl'e ring contact W個 to prove highly significant in the respec位ve evalua位ons made of the an位 poll tax movement by these difl'e rent media sec的rs.

j

Voluntary sector voices Over recent years, charities and voluntary organizations have assumed an ~一 increasingly prominentÀ? olitical and social role in Britain, whether supple-

menting or replac旭的個叫臼ry provis恤， defending and express姐g the needs ofmarginalized and disadvantaged sec位ons of society, or campaign酬 ing for change (Deacon & Golding, 1991; NCVO, 1990).The Community Charge held serious implicatioIl$Jor the sector. 的rst， it had a major impact upon the resources ofthe sec如r1intheprospectofincreasedliabiliaesmd L

104

-

-

\

public ca血pa凶igni姐 ng. Many conducted public 凶ormation campaigns to 姐crease public understanding and inform people of 也eir rights. For example , in October 1989 the Information and Policy department of Age Concern dis仕ibuted an information briefing on 'The Community Charge (poll Tax) and Old People' which gave general details on the system and when and how people should pay. On occasions, these 姐forma位onal initiatives were conducted in tandem with Government.. However, given the policy's major ramifications for the sector , many organizations went far beyond passive information provision in their publicity work on the policy. Campaigning on the resource implications ofthe tax was principally conducted by intermedi呵 organizations - those org妞" izations who provide train恤g and advice for a wide range of organiza位ons， and represent the generic interests ofthe sector (e.g the National Council for Voluntary Orga凶ations and regional Councils for Vountary Service). Campaigning on behalf of specific sections of societywas m剖nly conducted by caring or service providing organizations. For example , Age Concern sought to bring the Government's attention to the particularly penurous efl'ect the tax would haveòn the elderly, par討cularly with regard to the rebaté arra勾ements. Issue based campaig血g， which 呻licitIy ad國 dressed the broader political implica位ons of the system , was principally ~nducted by issue base~ pressure grolψ. For example，也emostsign過cant source of comment aòout the privacy implications of the new 缸range­ ments was the pressure group 'Liberty' (previously known as the National

* For example the Royal Na位onal Ins位拋給 for the Blind and 也eBri自h Deaf Society cc• operated with the Depar個ent of the Environment in producing braille 阻dsign language versions of Government Community Charge informa位on. 105

Chap伽 4: Promo位ng Dissent: Anti Poll Tax Campaigning

T個ation and Represen個位on: The Media, PO恤阻1 Communica說onand 也ePollT缸 V

Co uncil for Civil Liberties). In 1987 , the organization dis仕ibuted a booklet

One ofthe most siguiÎIcant collective sources ofvoluntary sector campaiguing at a nationallevel was thePoll TaxForu血， which integratedresource, issue and client based campaign work. The Forum's founding membership included leading charities such 的 MENCAP， NCVO and the Salvation Army , as well as members ofthe clergy , professional associa位ons， trades /勻 uuions and political pressure groupf. It was established to 'rese缸chand publicize the effects of 也e CommuuitY Charge and related matters' (PTF Newsletter, 1 , April1989). One of its main contributions was to issue a 'charter for a fair local tax' , which listed a set of criteria against which any local tax should be evaluated (PTF Newsletter , 2 , June 1989).

which highlighted the potential threats posed to individual privacy by a more in仕usive system of personal taxation (NCαJ， 1987). In 1989 it played a pivotal role 姐姐ghligh位ng 血e oftensp盯ious nature of many of theques位ons being asked by local councils when compiling poll 個xregis­ ters (Liber旬， 1989a).Furthermo間， in conjunction with the Association of Lo ndon Authorities , it produced an explanatory booklet answering questions about how people could control the details and accuracy of personal information collected about them (Liberty , 1989b) and two ‘best practice' guides for registration oflìcers and councillors (Liber旬， 1989c, 1989d). By 1990 , it became embroiled 姐也e controversy over 也e policing of the Tr afalgar Square riot, and conducted its own independent observation of the policing of a subsequent national demonstration 恤 October 1990. From early 1991 onwards , its attention focused on the legal enforcement ofthet紹，姐 p缸位cul缸， the threat to civil rights posed by the unregulated useo晶晶ffs and instances where courts were deu向g peoples' legalrights (Liberty , 1991).

Once ag啦， thmedia featlI叫 prorr帥吋 in 伽 communi叫on'ì strategies of those voluntary organizations whó publicly entered this pol- I icy debate. For example, a ‘constituency ac位on pack' produced by thê CPAG in February 1988 hìghlighted the regressiveness of 也et缸，也etw旭 threats it posed to local govemment autonomy and provided a 'model press release' which would draw local media attention to ~he organization's concerns ('Poll Tax: 'm聞ngPoorH缸dest弋 CPAG Model Press Release , 30 '- February 1988):..ßimil吋，也e Poll Tax Forum urged all its aflìli的d organizations to 'issue a press release in support ofthe Charter. Make s囚e your local papers and radio know about the Charter and 也e 叮gumentsin support ofit' (PTF Newsletter , 2 , June 1989). Not surprisingly，_issuβbased '.-' pressure groups revealed the most explicit media orienta位on in their cam-

This distinction between resource , client and issue based campaiguing wasn't always absolute , reflecting a general blurring of distinction in the

J

f~ti，ons~ofvol~t~ o，rga~a御的 (NCVO， 1990). Forexample , theManchester Council for Volunt缸y Service convened an Anti Poll Tax Forum whichca血paigned on both aresource and client basis. Aside from attempt輛 坦g to produce a more concerted response from the sector , the Forum specifically campaigned against any further undermining of vohintary sector funding , and for residents in short stay accomodàtion to be exempted from the tax (Greater 岫nchester Poll Tax Forum LeaJl仗， 1989). Another organization that campaigned on two fronts - in this instance on a 'clie帥， and 'issue' basis - was the Child Poverty Action Group. Although the organization's 迦i位al attention to the issue reflected a recognition 血的 the tax would seriously affect their client group (in this case , poor people) , their campaigning 祖d publicity material frequently a伽cked the policy on an issue orientated basis , focusing on the poli位cal implications of such a 舌仕uc旭rally regressive system. In the words ofthe Group's Director:

函函區區~

~--…一一------_，~-~

--

喝一

'One way ofreaching the public , of course , is 也rough 也e media; Every week we issue press releases or make statements to journalis低 Staff members 缸e frequently interviewed on local and na位onal television and radio. As well as giv祖g interviews , we 叮e constantly called upon 切 brief journalists prep缸旭g stories with civilliberties implica位ons' (LibertyAnnualReport , 1988: 15). 、、

However , although voluntary organizations sought to engage actively in the evolving political debate over the policy, there were factors that po扭扭 tially inhibited them in this aspect, and discouraged some from conducting i鞠 部 s s帥 O 叫 rie 削 剖 n1此ta 翩 紀 t ed 仇 ca 阻阻p 伊 ai恥 缸叫 g 伊 nl

‘We believe that the poll tax proposals are undemocratic. CPAG has for manyye缸s been concerned not only about the incomes ofthe poor but

also their ability to participate fully in s∞ie旬， 1987). 106

(Quoted 旭 Oppenhei血，

鈴ta s 昀缸恤芯恥， andd 由 ep 脾 en 吋 de 吋 du 呻 ponà 組且.íge 鈺旭 n 阻cial ben 即 1昀 efi 伽 1並t俗 血 s thereby accrue 吋 d， had to be very cautious about how they publicly participated in a highly charged political debate. Beyond these specific restrictions , many organizations avoided addressing the political i血plications of也e reforms because

107

T臨ation and Represen給位on: The Media, PO恤開l Commu剖開位扭扭dthePollT.坦

Chapter 4: Promoting D協ent: Anti Poll Tax Campai伊ing ~哩。n

they feared par位cipation would compromise 血eir long cherished apoli位cal position (as the direc切r of a Citizen's Advice Bureau putit in interview,‘ we 缸eanimp訂位al senrice and do not comment upon Government policy').

v

ofthe political debate. Indeed, because of the divisive na個reof ---悔、、the policy, and the particularly au卸cratic manner 祖 which it was introduced, the mβdia assumed an even more cen仕al rol~jn the political lobbying ofmany sources. 五s theGovemment c10sed its e缸stothev前ious concerns , and circumvented conventions ofnegotiation and consultation, the media became the principal forum by which political sources - even those closely allied to the Government - sought to exe此 pressure upon m坦isters. Sixth1 media consider叫泌的呻仰叮切 haveb切n a major factor iphapingthecampa1~é!g虫。可 and strategies ofkey oppositional voices. 、-品、“-“~_.-繭-甜甜M帽--﹒呵--戶---可自-.._----，-

Second, many organiza位ons， p訂位cularly 也ose operating at a local or regionallevel , foundthemselves 組討ng at_two windmills: the Government 心一-“"一、、、睡一--間間自由on the one hand，阻d the local authorities whose expenditure decisions directly impacted upon 也em. Interestingly, whereas voicing cri討cisms -ag到n.s t 也e 祖xvia 也e media tended to be a first resort 祖 organiza悅。帥， strategies to influence central government decision-making, it w自 gener­ ally a last resort in their dealings with local authorities , where it was feared 也at a high profile complaint about funding cuts mighthinder, rather than help , delicate flllancial negotiations.

手

Having described 也em剖n sources and strategies of political advocacy for andag滋nst 血e Co mmunity Char阱， our atten位on now turns to how the media reported this complex and controversial policy deba切， and the factors that influenced 也.e generation of these accounts.

Summary and conclusions

、 o

Nevertheless , through the cases presented we can discern several general principles about 也立型的 trudon and aracuationqEMEE蛙空空空ourses aga旭st 也epolicy.

←一一一-一一一一_-

「、 First，

the sources of political opposi位on 的 tl!e policy were disparate , and ...r-" “勻一-- extended well H~yohd the p訂ty political 缸éna. Even more signific祖母， the distrïbution of this cri細1 opinion di~t conform 切個個onal poli位cal divisions. In deed , there were主?。由er sources of support for the ~.

z

policyapartfromtheGovernment， evenfkomwith迦 itsownP前你 Second， ~

可

J

the battle fl叮靶些恆生能監控立p. the po加cal deb的 on the poll t路 debate w咱史1世吧堅血dm些些堅壁壘扭曲Esd且些企 be~n opponents of the policy. Different sources highlighted different 鼠忌示反兩函函剖面屁ntstrate蟬的， and these were the product of broader political facto JJl. Furthermo間， 也eir issu 肘 ea 叫懿e 型且盟豆扭控盔且且.w刪 w 叫咖 wa 咖 ys ∞ c onst嗯哩U哇些型昆趾且旬 as 伽 th 加 ed 帥 曲 e ba 晦 t扭 e de 帥lop 抖e 吋 州州 d.Fo叫h， 吋 幽 di盟 E師n 叫t

I

、'-'"''-.

oppositional 叩 s ourc 臼 es mobilized aga恤s 懿t the ta 揖 xa 前tdi單 能 E 忱 b ren 前ts 成:ta 苟 ge 臼s of 嘍 tþe policy's implementation. Again , this timetable was underWJ;i侮iioya ~史、 range of complex political accidents and consideratio恥 Fifth( anJ of these ./ policy protaganists identified the media as playing a significant role ip. the 且也""---------一一~、-一

108

、、

109

Chapter 5

Policy Made Public: Media Coverage of the Community Charge

W~ ………。…… Ch前酹 generated

an intense and far reaching poli位cal 品， bate , in which the main pro祖gonists identified the mβdia 部 副aying a key role in shaping public opinion. This r副sesthe question of how 也emβdia reported this complex and controversial policy throughout its turbúlent history. In this ch,!pter we explore which preferred readings of 也e Comm咽ty Ch叮ge ~ere 0位red in local and I natlonal media coverage, and, in particular, how these readings variβd ) _/ across media sectors..

Aro部le

by any other name? The media and the so -called 'poll 組玄，

幸言拉手 r f府 ρ ♂坑叮 /-μ'/ -/.訪訪j 字

I立ti旭ss叩ome 叫 ew 伽 ha偽哪 Ch缸 ge' ,

whe口d 叭:-t:出 he 帥 medi 曲 a 血伽 ems 肘se 你 l卸 ve 臼s so over 即 whel加 mi旭 ng 跡 l甘 yp 許 re 的 f跆 emd t h e

血orefam血缸， and deliberately pejorative lab空1， 'po11tax'. Lessthax(l .~per

dt3 凹

J

C心tνJ 仁

-

仰 cen 叫toft晶 he 吋 3 ， 165 仍 句 5 州 p ol1 恤 ta 缸 xfl 伽 ∞ O cαu叫 i加 t侮 βmsp 仰 曲 u 1油 祕 b 扭 1is 伽 he 訕 恤 d 控 i nt 旭伽 heG 伽 叫α u 叫 腳 枷 r 街 dla 伽 肌 r

1986 and 1991 凶 use 吋 d ‘ω血血叫.ty 圳 川 y Ch帥， !， s竺 -.../' in their hea也峙，也d the term was mentioned anywhere in onlý29' per 向扎 cent of a11 nation~ po11 t位吧監控sused and related) between M訂chand 2-令，行了 May 1990 ， ani(~多 perce凶姐也elo叫 media. 缸 an 祖恥 d theS 趴 und 曲 'ay 扭甜咖伽枷 'l11 卸加枷 rηme 即 l諂E臼sbet伽 we 臼 en

We have discussed elsewhere the Government's strategic and politiβal reasons for preferring to label the new levy as a 'ch缸ge' ， yet these findings expose its spectacular failure to promotethet:erm into the nation' s political 一叫一-一 lexicon via the 想到旦旦扭曲. Subsequent intermws 而前站nalis的 rêVèãfed thè 函dla' s resistance to the Government' s label reflected several

./

'- / * Please refer to 也e appendix for details of the content 阻 alysis sampling 阻dme也od. 111

3/6

,

T揖ation and Represen個tion: The Media PO恤開1 臼，mmunieation and 也ePollT，揖

-‘

聞自品的問

{4 耐F 心

鳴。0月

自由mA 旬SRHU口具主

苟且gaga

苟明gHUA

』 baAEEOU 呵 U a

(4FS

m它 a卅 H日 g 凶EE 咱 mau拉 .吋。 晶晶H 回 mUMSEUHoh包H 岫B 已 明白 kam e 。u 恥a 。o間 au宵 u。目可自由 -HEad-SESSSO u Eg H詞

咽兮兮。 I

2至 ]1 是

圓圓ogod 』gushau

ii3li

o』 h也 g gMHS屑。白 宮閉目 AgEhuguG苟 HM

.::_~

{法皂

(小 4 NH}

{法 -2) nEDMU usa 官H 叫 8 向曲"b 國官呵閻咀吋 向國 也g 呵h 間

UUO晶 H UKHS 閻明

ES 主 白話。叫司日記

328

UH

S旦

聞自由法4 。 wdv

曳

，蕊~~

間留申請。啼啼

O

回-

閻健血泊 Nm 咱

z

Ji3~

bH咽仙詞SS

EE gE

r:>. :>

U

{4FNH)

凶忌諱

g

g

M

皂S 白白發 (4FS (4F

昆明 {dp曲h }白發UH bHZUK圍b HMZ Uaa

H 閣。 {去}聞目白色

m

圓圓U叫 HNN∞

的 UH HO (法也mumH恥

bH個恥ubS 咽 Rogs

們p 州) {d

忘 aozgnug o自叫

圓白 HUb閻 O 向U 國QM Hau

U崗 K位 HOM --自由認

UO 呵呵 向anEU

(4FCSSES

EatHhaoAZ

(4Fdvs

明自由翁們睹的

(4pg

明S 白話。恥 (4F 8的 間} 扭曲o 回amOH (4$ {涼) 的gu 徊u 。 晶H 宮怨自由。 gg bH師告拉回 Ruas 0 日圓 AH a 紹。 SUE- 宮閣。字皂白的 月可

恥的 gb 話似 扭扭苟Bmaou

S 官es

(4pmH)

gao

o 聞自 聞自 (4FN H }e 記 L自 H同 M 。耳』詞a曲 由。

:> a

SL 且.5i ci

(法 HH自 )昌 oa

p甜n OH曲。k可 甜uH 輔U呵呵

ii

WC d叫 F 岫 ME自 U由曰:函。 -U (高 4已 眉目 tac MEA aA眉目，凶。當怠。可 它 旬U可 苟它也 咽函 晶單 -HH鼠 (法詛}皂o 話昌迫自自治恥 訝。E 白euH 窗也回祖 這 og 咽 可saumM 聞a O凶 bo 咽Baa-u 、胡目。U bauggg坦 O問 M泊。 詣。ago-o叫它UQM 、MUUSED位老。 odo bh 圓似UPZ 阿M圓

ag-詞 -。E 柚口調 叫U咱 U

之斗

a

(4EC

臨EA固自由 SEUU咱

..::l

(小 4苟同} 冒冒咱自由E 百

調指肉

1"-..'-<

g

UE

h∞\。 HI 咀∞ \m

1;迢迢

HO 月 MM個 M洞 U口uh閏 auQH

誼

\hl∞ h \HH ∞∞

EZ

(小 4的。 臨品當gEao 呵mg可

N、 HI A咱 M、 ∞∞『∞ 1 ∞

國a 包 uaSM

。恥、B 申Om 話

一斗

~

I 、。杏

:(|藍藍

印

112

oa H 曲的O 口 QSH (4 VF N曲} (小 4嚀。回帥 的g自 百mgAHE 耐 話 US 祖祖肉 guba 』 。別再回恥 a叫 u唱 o組 OH。 g Eau-普拉法 ns \Hgggu凶 、輛自圓 h』 o UAS

HM O國間也 H詞 H O 祖 』 、moss 宮閉口。。

", 1

g .s

:=

b 固 U固旨 HEOM

4 【恥N 、I 。凱、的

",1

Hg )MUAH。 、#自g 圓sauU。

IH m們\ (例航 行 前

叫甜2 甜岫 月 qH

bgsb

d型哩哇些型nsof 蚓由空空空空edover 恤e.

晶晶 gem-瀉出

d

When we consider the main themes of Community Charge focused coverage in the national press during the difl'e rent stages in the policy cycle (see Table 5.1) , it 每.!llso clear 也at the interpretative agenda of national press coverage dið(notìremain stable 也roughout the policy cycle. However, these figures oìïfy provide. a crude mβasure of the fluctuations 姐 media discourses , and it is necess盯了苗苗証區正e qualita位vely at the ch叩頭時 能rmsand 切ne ofreporting to properly capture how the控哩哇哇扭扭ι

g

between media sect切or，路'S 也 t hroughout the policy cycle.

U一 J詞。當認品 -。 Hh

↓ C部t coverag岫s chart 叮叫td 伽 岫 e mo 心 肘s你 n 帥仗伽 t扣 he “ CωO 心 帥怨恤侮恤削 m 凶tt枷 n 卿 en 腳 no 叮 o r叫

、六

EEt

its passage from inception to abolition. As~ig. 5.J) shows , its news wor也b ness varied considerably 組d consistently-a叮ing 也is_six ye叮阱riod. . Although we lé!Wr identify clear thematic difl'erences in pre聶聶哥broad-

、一、

HHOZ 句U 。H 扭H M 扭固

~

W凶 K 詞。叫甜甜 自H由酬

Thepollt阻 attracted varying amounts of9ßÍÌon~ media covetage during

aog 訝。 A〈

National media coverage ofthe Community Charge

。mugg 制d 品“昆同 晶晶 但甸回Hag -mA 宅g 區詣。也看sagsg 旬gga 單晶。ah

werem缸絃旭alized 泊 me品acoverage.

1.11

SEHR

J

.、、

誼會草晶晶高

/

80 what of 也e broader features of media coverage of the poll tax? Our analysis divides into 也ree broad sections. The frrst describes how the policy W部 reported in the national media , from inception through to abolition. The second provides a comp前a位.ve analysis ofthe coverage of 血eissuein local media during the introduction of the 旭x in England and Wales. The 也ird considers which aspec的 ofthe broader political debate 的outthetax

('-

{小 4∞ S MaAgag日 3叫咱

factβrs:

sg

in particular, the unwieldiness of 也e term 'Community Ch位醉， (which is over twice as long as 'poll t缸')， andtherecog凶.tionthat ‘pollt缸， had a wider public currency (a point conceded in the Government's own publicity). However, jo叫n叫ists' preference was also informed by a particular value posi位on on local taxation - i. e. that t Q.e new levy should be <---Seep. as a 組x not a 'ch缸ge' ， and 也at its fa凶.ess sho叫d be_ass間草1ι 一一 哼 一 relation 茍塾堅堅空至~.Cle缸跡，盟主 have here a basic and conspicuous O-'=' f;叫ure by theGovemment róco珈otmedia defmi位ons in thew叮 t崗位 」可証I因氣証詞:古函h， acc占區立志高吾吾t巨石玉石y have been a key reason behind the policy' s fail盯e (Winetrobe , 1992). While such a claim may be overstated, when we consider other features in poll 個xcov前age， 也e symbolism ofthe media's resistance on this point becomes particularly apposite.

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media 臼verageof也e 臼mmunity Ch前ge

113

T揖ation and Represen組討on: The Media, Poli位個l Communi阻.tionand 也.ePollT阻

諾伊掰開

V

7鼠苗騙:If;'胡志手ert 盛再再草ζ持濁;-despite t孟晶弱而吾吾品i函過心 a區已石õf what was being proposed and the furore over the rating revaluations in Scotland，也e national merua showed little initial interest in the fundamental reform in prospect.

50

( Ìì

Presentation (January - February 1986) 。

。

6

12

Months

)片

The first , formal public presentation of the Government's plans , in the Green Paper of January 1986 , sparked a brief flurry of merua coverage which quickly tailed 0時 the formal COI叫脂tion process bega叫她拉茲 ì respec位.ve political mβmoi路， both the then Environment Secretary and the 平 1 至 U
-

Fig. 5.1. Comp訂ison ofnational TV andbroadsb間tpoll 個xωverage (January 1986 -September 1991).

Ð.

Inception (October 198~且一 December 1985) Despite 也e clandestine nature of the initial Government .discussions about

the reform op位ons， it rudn't take long for the merua t.9 .discern the direction

心 Go附nment's 也梅克晶晶証時的前刊reen Pa闕's publica位on， ChanneI Four 'News accurately prêùtcled that the Govern-

ment's rate reform plans would be a 'combination ofproperty t也 andpoll tax' (23/9/85). Several of 也e broadsheet papers anticipated the Government's plans even e盯lier. In July 1985 ，出e Guardian reported .dis sent within the Cabinet over the poll tax option ('Cabinet balks at early reform of rates system' , 1/7/85) , and The Times ran a piece warning about the potential unpopularity of the poll tax op位on(‘Poll Tax flaws that could see Tory heads rolling: the basic arithmetic of 蛤s Thatcher's rates alterna位ve' ， 1517/85). Throughout the remainder of 1985 , the Guarruan , Th e Ti mes and the Sunday Times ran twenty-two adrutio.nal poll tax focused and relateds的ri郎， which either speculated on the Government's plans ('M凶" isters may press for extended ruscussion on plan to reform rates' , The Times , 24/12/85) or recorded negative reactions ('London stores could face rate rises of f 1.4m: calculations of Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy' , The Times , 2/8/85; ‘Poll Tax 叫 ected by boroughs' , Th e Times， 2/8 月 0; 'TUC at Blackpool: No to a poll tax' , Guarruan , 5月 185; ‘ CBI Co nference: Rates Plan “dangerous''' , The Times , 20/11/85).

114

呵 P 。玄，。

ronu

This coverage reveals 也ree points about coverage during the inception period. Despite the ini位al secrecy ofthe Gover~ent' s decision to adopt the polltaxop位on，通型.d-1985 ，也ese叮et was outl. In adrutio咚， the accuracy ofmerua preructions suggests the information w個 released by tlie-Gσvern-

h刊 d A可C

nυnu

會主申 H Z 可0.E ←O 〈曲章申 ZZ←hdE申Z EEomgzozomz恥 8〉←恥。語言是

叫 Pr:|

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Ch前ge

\Jn伽 br。她he向r佩翱PPMwdism帆lOUS組~_the Dafly _ 文7

t的graph wel叩med the

、

V_.

,/, v

，""卅一一一一一一占酬

Green Paper, deSéribing it as 'quitethe cleverest way yet devised' of resolving the need to control expenruture and secure local accountab也句(‘Light on Rates' , Erutorial , 29/1186). On the other side , the Guardian identified a cautionary tone to the Paper due to the poll t缸's 最ely 甜抖抖加旬， a_I:J.d 訂gued that a local income tax would have beenafarp~商ble refoITn option (伽問時E吉爾õWLfiies'油加rial， 29/1/86: 12). The Financia1 Ti mes applauded the Government's aim to 、 increase the accountability of local government(but;c oncluded that the Ckerustribution of the domestic t認 burden that v品 â occur would only

之

J 了 1.

115

T臨ation and Represen組組on: Th e Media

ν1

excite

public 凹的pathy

, Political Communica位on and the Poll T，揖

and erode Conservative

P叮叮

support for the

\me的ure~ ('The Wrong Way to Help Rate-Payers' , Editori祉， 29/1186: 18).

(j

G

The Times 叫說cized the public蜘nfromalo叫i州ance， concluding 血的 'The Green Paper's plans will convince only 也ose who 個1St the. central government , right down to 也e nitty gritty of parochial dé聶面占磊忌蝠， 可官enefits ofRates' , Edi切rial， 29/1186: 11). Thenextdayitpresented 'The Case for a Local Income T缸， (Edi臼rial， 30/1/86). 會_-且--、-妞-囡-

Co nsu1tation and Formu1ation 扭曲rch 1986 一 October 1987)

If initial media evalua位ons ofthe Green Paperwere somewhat mixed, theit a位ention to the issue was quickly dellected. Duringthe formal consultation

在

process for the policy in En gland and Wales - which concluded in Decem“ ber 1986 with the publica位on of a terse summ前y of responses (Do草， 1986b) 一 the 臼mmunity Charge received minimal TV and press 甜ention. This disinterest continued through most ofthe formUlative peri03 , despite several signifi.cant related developments. For example , the passage of the Scottish legislation was almost completely neglected. Similarly , the Community Charge was 到so curiously absent 企om national media agendas before the June 1987 General Elec位on， despite its ostβnsible status as the llagship ofthe Conservative' s campaign. Indeed , the issue received considerably more media comment in the month after 也e baIIot，也an in the month before it.

4)

f月一、』

Following the election , national media attention gradu aIIy increased as the prospect of legislation loomed and discussions at the Conservative p缸ty conference produced a profound revision in the m也ner of the pol關 icy's implementation ('Tories reject plan to phase in poll tax' , Independent, 711 0/87; 'The charge ofthe rates brigade' , Daily Mail, 7/10/87; ‘PolI T位: Maggie names theday' , Sun, 18/11/87). Although governmental decision-ma垣ngremained 也e principal focus 9f coverage 函函訂區商品甜高高的rmulation peri嗨.C吵而tive 區豆豆示函泣晶晶而聶哥函話n-ÏI函函而面石油ca(re~函鼠忌了 路 did projections of the likely redi的ibutional effects of 也e domestic tax reforms (' As sessing your poll position. The Times answers the key questions about the new poll tax and shows how much each adult will be e耳泊的edto pay' , The Times, 13月/87: 10; ‘A price on your head ... Maurice Chittenden takes a look at the effects ofthe proposed Commu到你 Charge' , The Sunday Ti mes. 25/6/87: 25; ‘W姐的rs and Losers , a 那ide to the poll 脂x' ， Guardi帥， 717/87). In addition. debates about the potential 也reats posed by the tax

116

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe 臼，mmunity Charge to individual privacy and the franchise were fi叮 moreprom祖ent during this period th也 they were ever to be ag到n ('No representation without t阻a位on?' ， Sunday Tim帥， 19/7/87; 'BigBrotherwon'tbewatchingsaythe new polI tax planners' , D叫旬 Mail， 9/9/87: 'Privacy row over polI祖x computer plan for Scotland' , Independent , 9/9/87; ‘NCα.W訂函ngofpolI tax national surve血.ance' ， Guardian , 5/10/87). Although edi旬rial press comment on the policy during this period w帥_-/ J腔史包哩哩。f it was 坦坦旦控昆虫e Sun何加es echoed 伽

localist conc前面S of Th e Times , condemning ‘a sinister threat to councils' createdby 也β 宜過 to centralism' 扭曲eBri位shcons位tution， of which the polI t路 was but one example (Editorial , 12/4/87) , and after 也e General Election spelt out its unequivocal opposition to the policy by urging the Government to re-vamp the rating system ('A Pox on the PolI Tax' , Edi切F ial, 5/7/87: 26). In late 1987，正he Itzdependent castigated the Environment Secretary's 'poor defence of a bad t眩，的 the Conservative P缸ty conference，也.d highlighted how the t磁 would increase WhitehaII's control ('To spend an extra pound , a local authority w由 have to raise about four. This may be an admirable way of controlling spending, but it strengthens central power, not local democracy' [Editorial, 7/10/87: 16]). The Guardian remained consistent in its support for a local income tax and opposition toa 個x 'which is bad in principle … whichisbad 旭 practice ... and which h的 appalling electoral consequences for the Toriβs' (‘A bl站 ack hole 叫 0f 妞

吵 Only The海 T卸加le 叫 臼 e，:s sig 伊 剖i泊詛can n 叫tl甘 ys恤fte吋d its ω po師si揖紋on. In two editorials 旭 late 1986 , the paper commended the Government's aims of incre卸旭g the accountability of local g_ov~rnment ('The rating game' , Editorial , 14/11/86), butconclude~that ‘this welI-meant change will be much more damaging 切 the Governmenfthan even its for血.er attempts to reform local government' ('Co血munitych缸ge' ， Edi切rial， 17/12/86: 21). However，旭 /['~ 7.刁凡A an editorial during 也e General Election, it abandoned its previous localist ~ concerns by urging: 'The radi吋 approach to local government wo叫 dbe 、zlZv ~.. to tré!llsfer to the Exchequer the cost ofthose services which are essentialIy J nationaland 缸'eI聶哥聶nloc封面1也ori位es by the central government …A llat-rate Community Ch訂ge for the rest would be much more acceptable' (‘ Rates and the Tory voter' , Editorial , 25/2/87: 16). L

句 LegisIat仙似的叫叫均 1州 The

in仕oduc位on

of the Community

Ch訂ge legisla位on

for England and

117

Taxation and Representation: The Media, PO加開l Commu剖開封on and the Poll Tax Wales 坦 late

1987

w扭曲e

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Charge

間 ~un 曲山e抽e 心跡。c叫枷枷g 伽 poll tax)

first trigger for concerted national media

atten位onto 也e issue. In stark contrast to the lack of interest in the Sco位ish

ρ 刊〈令

rk i L

legislation , the 1987 Local Govemment Finance Bill 峭的d up significant. wwes dme恆話函正講闊前苗Seco頁EeadiE前fthe苗苗在; ----質而正奇古迢迢話可話d then the Commons vote on the Mates Amendment and the passage of the B也 through the House of Lords , in April and May 1988. Apart from th坐坐竺史旦控帥， therewere 尬。叫“ inthe 旭terp月三 !_ative agenda ofpress coverage. First, political rifts within the Conservative

空里坐且堅且也虫涅盤豆豆heBE站前站泣師高忌日苗泣， rec位on' ， Sunday Ti mes, 17/住/88; 'Anasty a位ackofmid“term indiges位on' ， Sunday Telegraph , 17/4/88; 'Thatcher poll tax m吋 ority may fall to 20' , Independent, 18/4/88; ‘Maggie faces poll tax war' , Daily Star, 20/4/88). Second , projections of how local government would implement and ad.“ minister the new taxation arrangements , and discussions about its re幽幽 tribu位onal effects , gained greater prom姐ence.

Clearly, the Co nservative P缸ty rebellion provided 也e personality confl垣L pm些要聖賢部副臨寺河石油 underlined b州站站站正JE 可δ苗吾 critical vlews of the 缸:-Conservative Leader, Edward Hea曲， andthe disaffected , ex-cabinet minister , Michael Hesel位ne， who were both known to harbour profound grievances against 也eir P叮叮 leader (包eseltine Leads Poll Tax Rebels' , Daily Telegraph , 17/12/87; 'Heseltine Heads Attack on 'Obdurate' poll tax' , Guardian , 17/12/87; 'Now Tarzan Swings in for a blast at the poll tax' , Today , 17/12/87; ‘Heath Savages Mag蟬的 Poll Tax Plan' , Daily Star, 18/12/87; 'Thatcher 仕eats us like scum. of the earth' , Daily Mi rror , 19/12/87). The prominence ofthese two politicians in media reports of the Second Reading, far exceeded the sum. of their contribution to the Parliamentary debate:

('ii位

抽加泌旭 turn

rebellion: th削het目前豆豆隕石EGmforthoseonthe1.eftoftheP酬 並 ~allenge高日函函聶亟Je函兩已('He叫出βadds伽江口;bei ringleader claim' , Sunday Telegraph , 17/4/88; ‘Heseltine 恤 dirty 仕icks row' , Daily Mail, 18/4/88; 'The desirable residence [10 Downing Street] at the heart of that poll t位 revolt' ， Daily Mail, 20/4/88: 6). In November •

118

Ascru伽yofH阻S叮ddur旭g 也e Second Reading shows that In a five hour debate , deyouring 2_16 colurnns of Parliamentary report, Heseltine had provided just fo盯 colurnns and Heath. one and a half.

包

in England after supporting legislation for Scotland ('Many Faces' , Editor划， 18/12/8ηand the following day attacked Heath for ‘act[ing] like the 那um. of 也ee缸血， ('Up the poll' , Editorial, 19/12/87: 6). Similarly, the Daily Express asserted 也at 'it is not hostility 的 the Co mmunity Charge that animates most [Conservative rebels] but hos磁ity 切 the Pri血e Minister' (‘Qui仗， Ple倒海， We'rerebels' ， Editorial , 19/12/87: 8). Priorto thevoteon theMatesA血endment， the Dail叫tfaiI wamed that Michael Mates was 'just assurelydo恆g Mr Heseltine's work as if he were a ventriloquist's dummy ... That is a very powerful reason for ensuring 血的 the amendment fails' ('Travails of a rebel', Editorial, 18/4/88: 6). This debate was not just confmed to the Conservative-aligned press. For example, the Independe洞t asserted after the Second Readi峙， 'In everything Mr Heseltine says'and does , he makes plain his ambition to succeed 抽s Thatcher. It is in that context that Mr Heseltine's Wednesday night con肘bution to the debate on the rate reform Bill must be seen' ('A Salutary Ambition' , Editorial , 的 12/87) ， and the T，岫 y newspaper observed that 'n~ed ambition has been[Hesel伽.e's] undo姐g' (‘ Calmdown Tarzan' , Editorial, 18/12/87: 8).

附叫gω B 叫 a叫 edi 卸枷 i忱t I._ -:.ι .o.

•

~..

.'1

已%斗r叮r可r一-一♂τ間』一{γ 們tτT 呵一戶一也一「叫一可凹γ一可戶 i

一一

due reform. It is right that we should not have to wait for it a minute longer than necess訂y' ('Ins tant reforml A 卸st rate move' , Editorial, 18/11/87: 8) , but the Daily Mail's support was appreciably more equivocal: initially suggesting the root of the Govemment' s problems lay with the poor presentation of their case (Editorial, 19/12/87: 6) , and later, only tacitly r - endorsing the poll tax by deriding the rates as ‘ arotten t磁'， and 也eMates Amendment as 'a fiscal mongrel' ('Ridding Bri個祖 of the rates' , Editorial , 20/4/88: 6). The Sun avoided ma垣ng any specific editorial comment abo叫 the erits of the policy during its legi~lat:ive passage. Qrthe broad~ sheetpress扭自血扭扭raphc空蟬叫叫做雙雙J旭 a more muted Wve妞， comníenting on the eve ofthe Mates Amendment 'the Government's proposals at least have a certa恆 simplicity and a sort of flat rate fairness. Mr Mates' amend血ent appears to be neither simple, work?ble , nor p訂的cu戶 larly fi前， ('Flat rate 妳ness' ，且也愉剖， 18/4/88: 16). 'l{h e Ti mes, too，恤 a ( major change of stan呵， commended it for establishing a clear linkage ~ between the cost of sery;Íces and local taxation levels (‘ Cost oflocal democ- 1 racy' , Edi切rial， 19/12/87: 11) , and describedit as a 'preferable subs位tute I

m:

J

119

,

T紹a鈍。n and Represen個tion: The Media Political 臼mmu別扭tionand 也.ePollTax

for the present 201生188: 15).

unf凶r

system of local finance' ('To the Lords' , Editorial,

In contrast, the clamour of editorial conderrmation beca血e f;叮 more 迦sist，騙 e帥， andw品 not ~exclusively restricted to the n呱啦ligned or Labout s1ip>apers.(Th叫做il on Sun旬， a staunchly ConseJ

1空空空想蟬 to 的吧!嗯嗯偎在詩那

unforeseen political crises that interrupted the transition tow缸ds implementation in England and Wales. The first was the political furore over the Governrnent' s controversial Community Charge publicity campaign in May 1989. The second , the rebellion in Co nservative parcy ranks following the announcement of the self fmancing safety net arrangements ，扭 I叫y 1989. The third , the Governrnent's decision to completely ch祖ge the Charge's trans的onal arrangements , from a self-financing redistribution tow缸ds a centrally subventβd system, in October andNovember 1989.

j 、'、 、白、仇

120

Instead , the m到n triggers 切 coverage during the preparatory period were

JWAV

\一

By the time the Bill moved to the House ofLords the edi個rial concems of the press sh証詞d to the constitutional repercussions of a defeat or amendment ofthe legislation atthis stage. The Daily Mail ('The Peers shouldknow their place' , Editorial, 23/5/88) , the Sunday Ti mes ('Time to break the spell' , Editorial , 1515/88) and The Ti mes ('Vote of the Lords' , Editorial, 24/5/88: 15) wamed against the Lords amending or defeating 'an historic tax reform approved by the Commons' (Editorial, Daily Mail , 20/4/88: 6). The Guarruan 切ok a different view of such cons位tutional protocol, attacking the Governrnent' s strategy of filling the Lords with ‘backwoodsmen' as 'aform ofge叮ymandering which has drawn attention once again 切 the anomalous place of hereditary Lo rds in our democracy' ('The sheep troop 垣 from the shires' , Editorial , 25/5/88: 18). The Labour affiliated Sunday

Following the passage ofthe 1988 Local GovernrnentFinance Act, ahiatus in national media coverage of the tax ensued , revealing, once again, a conspicuous disregard for the policy's impact in 8cotland, where the Charge's introduction in April1989 brought only a minor 姐crease in coverage ofthe policy.

J巴

v

常 rJAf 已Gd wu'j

ν/

the 198。但至emained 'unconvinced by 也e case for the po11 ta宮， becauseit threatened "'to cripple the proper functioning of local democracy' (' Advances againstinertia' , Editorial , 22/11187: 34), andurgeditsdefeat('Po11 tax should not p的s' ， Editorial, 17/4/88). 8imilarly, the Independent encouraged~晶.e rebel Conservatives forces to 'press ... with all co盯ag多必ra banded polftax 悍的i位ve alterna位.ve to the poll tax' , Editorial, 14/12/87: 16) , and later excoriated the Govem血ent for becoming 'complacent to the point of arrogan凹， (加s Thatcher' s moral dilemmas' ，到itorial， 16/4/88: 10)(The Guarru間， too , expressed support for the Mates Amendment ('The \ rebelS s位11 have a good ca血，'剖itorial， 16/4/88: 22) and its absolute opposition to the flat rate charge ('Flagship Fu位lity' ， Editori祉， 19/2/88: 20;'8叫1 up the poll' , Editorial , 25/3/88: 22). Today concluded 也at'when R在rs Thatcher] looks at the altematives , she will fmd that rates 缸'enotso bad after all' ('Tax that's not worth revolt' , Editorial , 18/4/88: 8). Not surprising旬，也e Labour suppor位ng Daily Mi rror , after ignoring the issue d肘ing its 8econd Readi呵， later attacked the po11 tax for its manifest regressiveness (‘NoPrime 拍到如r' ， Edi切吼叫， 18/4/88: 2).

Preparation (August 1988 - December 1989)

，九份

Meanw凶e(伽 Sunday Ti吵-\\

~ts increasingly explicit suppÕfffor the Conservati

priv勘ge 切 help a Governrnent which didn't deserve that help' (‘ Lowlife' , Editorial, 2915/88: 2).

1

,_2 4/2/88: 8).

('Nought out oft加eehrI

Mi rror expressed simil缸 sen位血凹的， reviling those peers who 'abused their

•

During the pr咖ratory period , coverage ~ central governrnent and par- /、 "--liamentary decisipn叩咐ngon臼 again caiÌi.e to tli百五re-rme苗苗苗ant t摺伽部前碎的位茄克呵呵， p血cipally concem旭ggovernrnβntd 官

J雙雙雙型堅堅巴巴空空 (8 per 叫 of all items) ai:ia由啞U 位于TangelIl~!!!s (7 per cent). F 叫hermo間， coverage of issues related to local 通空函ent implement甜on ofthe t阻帥部記dmore 甜en蜘 (18
When we examine the evaluative tone of the national press coverage of these 盯eas ， it is cle缸 thatt 史笠壁~ of doubt sowed during the legislative period , were rap@y_germ旭ating 吋侃制.gIì[S兩磁石又可 among F主體ers t豆豆豆豆正面正亞哩哇哥這ing .itsÌègiSi添 伊ssage ('恥II Tax: 由.e nightm訂c"iIiä叮叮n't go away' , Daily B押向路， 14/9/89). When opponents ofthe t血 halted the launch of the Govemment' s Community Charge mass leafleting campaign , press ridicule of the Govemme肘， and particularly the ministers responsible, was me凹 iless. The Daily Mail on its front page likened the local governrnent minister to a

一百 叭W 叭 Tdbd λ」F ;需 yldkhHJ\

些空空空盟主主臼哈哈郎，

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Commu凶tyCharge

/

121

,

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Commu叫你 Charge

T研ation and Repre鉛甜甜on: The Media Politi值l Communi開設onand 也.ePollTax

f children' s cartoon character; lampooning a ‘Whitehallfarce over Postman Pat' (11/5/89) , and in its editorial condemned ‘politic祉 arrogance of the 姐nd that is in danger of turning a 血ighty depar位nent 恆to a public relations disaster' (‘Gumm缸'sgr姐'， Edi的rial， 11/5/89: 6). TheDaily Telegraph noted 'the marks of, shall we s呵， carelessness' in the publicity, and 恤， served how the principle that Government publicity should not be used for p缸typoli位cal purposes 'has frequently been winked 前， p叮位cul缸lybythis Government. All the more reason for a w叮到ng shot' (Edi切rial， 1115/89: ( 16). The Guardian too attacked the 'biased' nature ofthe leaflet (‘Gett旭g fair play on the poll tax' , Editori祉， 10/5/89: 22).

v

However , this controversy was soon superseded by media attention to the poli位cal battle over the Government' s $afety net proposals, announced on 19 July 1989. Theangerthese 缸range面面tsevokeda血。ng Conservative back-benchers , generated another intense bout ofnews coverage , much of which patently editorialized about the competence and prospects of the Secretary of State. The Daily Mail' s front page urged ‘Ridley has to go now' (20/7/89); the Mi rror noted 'It's another fme mess，脂Ridley' (2017/89); and the Sun described how 'Ridley drives commons up the polll' (20/7/89). Today was in no doubts about 也e consequences of 也e announcement: 'Poll-缸ed Ridley signs his execu說on warrant' (2017/89) , and the follow“ ing day pictured 也e minister adjus位ng his spectacles alongside the headline: '1 don'tremember precisely what I've done today' (2117/89). Even the staunchly loyal Daily Express scathingly attacked the minister as 'the unacceptable face ofThatcherism' for alienating 'Tory rebels who 0均 ectto their constituents pay姐g a penny to bail out voters , m到nly in Labour areas , from facing the full penalty for electing a spend血rift council' (Editorial， 21 月/89: 8). Ameliorative statements from the Prime Minister were also seized upon , for signs that the Government was about to change tack on the policy ('Thatcher juggl加g act on poll tax' , Sunday Telegraph; 23/7/89; 'Thatcher tries to defuse row over poll tax' , Daily Telegraph , 21 月/89) ， and the Cabinet reshuffle which pro血ptly followed , which saw Chris Patten appointed as the Secretary of State for the Environment, produced considerable media specula位on as to what this change in political emphasis might mean for the progress ofthe policy ('Patten opens with poll tax pledge' , Guardian , 26/7/89; 'Patten moves to defuse Tory anger on poll tax safety net' , Daily Telegraph , 26/7/89). The issue resurfaced later in the ye缸， when it was announced at the Co nservative P缸ty conference that the Government would centrally fund

122

υthe 仗a 〈 咖 即 n 甜 s i扯 t位i旭 岫 伽 O巫 nal 缸甜 rang 酹 em 凹 e叫螂 s afte 缸E叫

s訟ionwa 卸swid 配 elywelc ∞ ome 吋 di姐 nr血 nanysect討ionsof也enat位iona 叫lpre 臼ss趴， although , r

血uchwa 肘s

made in the news re句 'po 位 r位ngof 也e additional ex 耶 pe 阻 ns阻 e ofthese subsidies (‘ Government will spend :f. 1bn to smooth poll 個x' ， Independe肘， 12/10/89; 'Tories unveil :f.1. 3bn poll t阻 cushion' ， The Ti mes, 12/10/89; ':f.1. 5bn Tory bid to buy offpoll tax revolt' , 伽 Dα a伽 il旬 Hρ 拍直位必伽伽 M 孔 計加 ir rη"1γ 吋 ro 吭 η o 臼sc e 閒 ap 脾 e on poll ta 臨 x' ， Dail旬 yM凶 ail， 12/10/89 到). The Daily Telegraph , having reconsidered its initial opposition to a centrally fìnanced transi位onal system ('Poll t位 p凶n' ， Editorial, 6/10/89) , commended 也e Government' s 'poll tax ingenui旬， in producing transitional 缸rangements that were 'much fairer - as well 品 more saleab]e politically 一 than those of his predecessor' (Editorial , 12/10/89: 12)..Jn contrast, only the Guardian de“ tectβd 'a certain awesome amorali旬，坦 the Government' s decision to buy their way out oftheir 仕ouble(‘Baling in Billions' , Edi如rial， 12/10/89: 22). Despite the 旭tensity of media deliberations on the safety net issue , the altemative cri位que of the safety net 盯rangements 呻:ni証磁石y helped to obscure the extent of the~distribution of resources fròm poorer to more 」五血而t areas (Lee , 1989; Esam and Oppenhei妞， 1989;LG郎， 1989)-w部 almost completely absent from national press debate. Rather, what reflective discussion there was either accepted the formulation that the p缸鼠" monious were being penalized for the sins of the profligate ('Ridley's Riddle' , Editorial , Daily Mail , 20/7/的: 6) or expressed concems abouthow changes in the funding ofthe system would impact upon the Government's macro “ economic policies ('Poll tax blues' , Editorial , The Ti mes, 10/7/89; 'Mr Ri dley's Safety Net' , Editorial, The Times , 20/7/89). The prep缸atory period was also the only time when attention to the political response of the Labour P叮叮 exceeded coverage of Conservative responses ('Labour heads offP訂tyfe缸'， TheTimes， 27/9/89; 'Kinnockalso threatened by poll tax figh t', Daily Telegraph , 2/9/89; “Confuse忌， planfor local taxes causes concem' , Daily Telegraph , 6/10/89). In mid-1988 , the Guardian noted Labour's 'mangled dis盯ray' over how to oppose the tax, and the Govemmen t' s probable delight in the mess the poll tax 'seems to have landed its enemies' ('Poli位cs of dissent' , Editori祉， 3118/88). AlI the ----national press , regardless of their political orientation, cautioned Labour aga泊st adopti且在百茹苦ayment/implementa位on strategy. In 1988 , the Daily MaiI attacked the Labo叫吋 leadeh空些空空空姐 enc叫ag旭g voters to snarl up the registration process , asserting that 'any political leader who dallies with illegality, shoots his own p缸ty in the foot and trots 123

Taxation and Representation: The Media, PoliticaI Communication and the Poll Tax

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Charge

out such foolish advice doe早_D.ot deserve respect' (Editorial, 16/4/88: 6). A few months later this point was echoed , in de跑過， ifnotin 切ne， by a Dai1y Mi rror editorial which attacked those Labour MPs - including the shadow spokesperson , Robin Cook - who supported non-payment. It concluded 也at Cook, 'as a democrat … sho叫d set an example to others' 個ditorial， 25/8/88: 2). This host也ty towards non-payment remained throughout subsequent reporting of 也e 個x.

。由er

~?Meha加的ion

also focused on Labour'sl'tw旭 t間， reform options,\ The

i組 de 侃 awa 卸spr 凹 吋 e dicta 油 blysavage 吋 db 句 yt 也 he Conserv 油亟訕副 位 t i訪 vepress叫(‘La 站 bou 盯 rrp!a 甜覓Iinin啤 g

~Table

5.2 shows the relative prominence and stance ofthe m剖norgan垃a­ individuals in gpll t臨 focused and related national coverage d回祖g this crucial period~ Despite 也e policy' s explicitly local implications ,

恥的 and

the 想些主制叫vi伽s ornation句。加C岫 ye竺EEomdW竺豆豆位 a r前01" more 也扭扭盯兩伊恤前more， attention

品.ot曲 d 1油 blerat恤 臼sburdena e 阻 ndcω0\阻 mcil 泣lf企 h r臼 全 ee 令叫圓-f，伽 叫肘 O r吋 -"

世恆fanSby

血e 位設 d 由 ec 你 i旭s訟i沁 恥 ont切 or 間 ec ∞ on 肘sider 血is

focused on the 甜tes of the two m訟npoli位cal戶前i帥， and conspicuously marginalized representatives from other political parties. Non p缸typo誼品 c叫帥的rs were also 恤金equently featured. For example, local authority associations appe盯 ed in 3 per cent of items across a11 media sectors; representa位ves from the voluntary sector in under 2 per cent; and local government professionals - whose responsibility it was to administer the new 可stem - 2 per cent. Even those single issue pres~ure groups estab“ lished to fight the tax … the An位 Poll Tax Unions andFederations - received a proportionally insign逃cant amount of coverage (le扭曲an3 仰 cent). Indeed，也e only 缸ena of debate and ac位vity beyond parliament that attracted any s地區ficant coverage was among the general public (reflecting the widespread reporting ofpublic demonstrations against 也βtaxthat occurred at this 位me).However ， peater media prominence did not , in J./ its祉，訊1缸anteead.efmitional advaritage . For example , although 也.eGovemmenY石研區也血姐姐t po面否也tor 旭 national coverage, it w部 consistently more defensive in its st組.ce' 血an its poli位cal adversaries. Govemment represen個位.ves only ofl'ered support fì叫 any aspect of the policyi泣 a minority of instances , where自s other spokespersons displayed a IQ 之 consistently_critical stance towards the policy. The cumulative picture this produces 時 of the Community Ch叮的 a~ a controversial 扭扭旦恤拙ative with a widerange of critics , and wi也h îew supporters w也旭g， or able , tωo

option ('Big brother tax 也reat... Labo盯 is devising a controversial new t也 on homes ... Tories raised the spectre of spendthriftLeft wing town halls being given free rein to snoop into people's pr卸的 fmancial afI甜s' ， Daily Mail , 18/9/89: 1). However, even the proLabour Daily Mi rror expressed serious reservations about the tw迦 t臨 proposals , describing 泌的 a system which penalized 'the couple who invested their capital in a private pension' rather than 'those who invested in ß spree in the Caribbean' ('Labour's Loser' , Editorial , Dai勾 Mirror， V 22/7/88: 2). (Ó叫y 也e Guardian showed any enthusiasm，部闖出g: 'Labour' s proposàls may well have more attraction in the way they provide a financial framework for giv加g local authorities back 的 people' (‘If notthe poll t阻...'， Editorial , 30/9/88: 22).

θh叫 In quan位組t紋ive 切做r血s，血e 加拉oducωηpedod wasfhe most 旭tens可e phaseofmediacomment ón the Community Charge. During January and Februa可 1990， local g。如rnment finance began to move up the press and television agenda; however, once local authorities started to set the f扯到 poll tax leve怡，坦 lateFebru盯y， coverage 恆creased exponen位a11y. Ind 曲 ee 吋 d，

(也伽ere …咐m 呻但兩區誦兩t

咀 a 吋 n dApri挂11990t血 h叩恤伽 whol 叫leof1 989 守

In our description of the 也βmatic details of na位onalmβdia coverage prior to its in仕oduction in Engl阻d and Wales , we have focused on 也emain themes in national press coverage of the policy. Although this provides a useful barometer of the shifting emphasis of media coverage over several ye缸s， itis but a crude m閥割rre，的 it ignores poll tax related coverage (where thβissue was mentioned in a secondary context in items which focused on 124

matters) and doesn't quantify subsidiary themes within items. Fur“ thermore , we have no formal basis for comparing divergence in press and broadcast news agendas. In也is section, we analyse 也ese issues more directly by drawing on data from the more intensive sampling conducted between 1 March and 5 May 1990.

c∞ on 凹 .ve叮 Y 也 the祉址 s阻 up 凹 po 叫此 v 咖 i旭 a 伽 t he 間 mβ 吋 品ia.F d 茄孟証 F否益吾抖區7詛茄E 茍豆hM缸呵 z儡t

11

、J /

士… Only th 加.08鉛 e indiv 悅idu叫曲 50 仿 r 扭s 甜位仙位伽 ons who were ac位御 vep叮t位L蚵 .cip祖tωs 泌 anews 加 i 紛m were coded. That 詣， they had 80me independent status in 也e reporting of an ite圈， andwe認 not just referredωbyano也er actor. The s組nce of each ac切r 切W位白血B Community Charge and related reforms was 也en noted ('critica!', 'neu仕a!'. or 'unstatedlneutral') and was exclnsively determined by the explicit views he or she conveyed. or was attributed with. in the item.

125

T臨a說onandRepr的entation: The Media，的加cal Communica泣。n and the Poll Tax

was reported ma旭ng explicitly suppor位ve statements inless than a qu叮ter ofherappe缸ances.

閃一

13

17 8

15

10 14

5432

4735

1.-a

11 574A3

可4

Responsesωthepolicy publicr的:ponses

9

6742

凹的 tsofpolicy Ineql凶位臼lanomolies of new system

Electoral de釘imentofthe

8 8

5 9

5

9

2345145 2434235 5362113 CO 弓，“a 句z 口， A 唔，喝 qd

Government Wlnners andLosers Nega位.ve impact on local services Other negative economic efl'ects Culpab也ty for high poll tax levels Ine陸clency ofnew system Eq uity ofnew system

6

12

。正herefl'ects

5. Otherthemes 2224

趾planations

Flgures relate to news and feature poll tax ltems only (focused and related). Column 1: percentag俗話 proportion of ltems which featured at least one actor in ca臼gocy. Columns 2 叩d 3: percentage 口 disposltlon displayed of each actor/frequency of appe訂anω. Percentages 紅esep訂ate 個d do not add up to 100. \. The defensiveness ofthe Government's postu時 becomes even clearì:Jrwhen we analyse the prim盯y and subsidiary t扭扭ès of pol1 tax15 0verage during the in仕Qductory period (see Table 5.3). General1y , national media shared ~interest in the historical reasons for the policy' s development (such as the failings ofthe rating system and the problems of control-

an

126

4

可-A

1

iτ-A

Research Agencles Buslness & bus恆essfedera恥的 。也.er actors (other professionals, journalists) /Totalofna位onal TVIpress/radio ltems

88

唔，

吐adesu凶。ns

5

Other actor responses

可-aA

。也er voluntary organizations

是

Labourp缸tyr<的po泌的

13225779 2 113732038

Loc al government professlonals

5

Conserva位vep訂tyresponsω

4.

An位 pollt臨 groups

Broadsheet Tabloids % %

Implementa討onofpolicy

Lo cal government administra位on

7 10 7 3

Radio %

governmentallparliamentary

3.

句，旬， At2JKU1hp3τA

groups General public

2.

decisio鼠"making

Nonp叮ty political actors

Loc al government 諮詢 ci且 tions/pr<臼sure

1. Origins ofpolicy Iniq凶ty ofrating system and other

TV %

可A

11

\2553781139 }0

一

21 8

。…

6

Table 5.3 Them聞旭 national Community Charge coverage (1M前ch - 5 May 1990)

%

也

11

ling local expenditure) , but paid considerable attention to the negative responses to the policy from the general public (see below) and the ConservativeP盯ty ('Baker's panic plea to Tories on poll tax:', Observer, 25/2/90; 當op the hysteria' , Daily Mail , 8/3 月 0; ‘W盯 in the Tory ranks' , Daily Mi rror, 24/3/90).

Col. 3

、

Other Conserva御自開rtyactor Labo咽 shadow cablnet OtherLabo心r national politicl扭 Local Labour politic旭nJau也ority Other Labour party actor AlI otherp訂ty political actors P位typo扭曲alacωr (p訂ty not stated)

15

Suppor位ve

4859

Other national cons冶:rvative politicl個 -Lωal Cons 釘va位ve politiclanlauthority

C查抄

a-nwmA-

/μ-

ν/Government

〉074361 {it53 呵 J， h

partypoli位.cal ac心路

Co1. 2 %

nuw HU-

>

nu自 v

presence in all items Co1.1

nb

nv自 iu

Propo甜onal

恥一蜘

Table 5.2 Political actors in national Community Ch訂geωverage (1 March - 5 May 1990)

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Charge

an

about aspects ofthe reforms Al ternatives to the reforms

Total themes coded

2

1

3

2

4

3

3

2

876

559

2491

940

Figures relate to I時間， feature and editorial items (poll 恥 focused and rel耐心. Uptofo凶 themes could be coded for each ltem. Percentages 話 frequency of appearance/aggregate of themes coded. All figures arerounded. x 2 = 230.41; df=話 51;P<0.00. Coverage oflocal government implementation roughly balanced attention to parliamentary decision-making during this period, with most local interest focused on the exceedingly high charges initially levied by councils , 127

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Politi開l Commnni個位onand 也ePollTax P缸位cul前ly 恤 Conservative

areas ('Labour councils' ch缸geonlym缸gi­ nally higher than Tories', Observer, 11/3/90; ‘Comparing the figures: ‘High spender' jibe mis卸es' ， Guardian , 12/3/90). Coverage ofparliamentary decision-making mainly centred on speculation about Government a位empts to resolve the political crisis ('Climb down over poll tax blunder' , Daily Mail , 22/3 月 0; 'Rethink ofpoll tax begins' , Daily Telegraph , 12/4/90; '10 ways Maggie can help us like poll tax: She's readyto 缸ynewideas' ， Sun , 28/妥/90; 'ThatcherU-Turninpoll taxchaos' , Daily Mi rror, 28/4/90).

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage of也e Commnnity Charge over information (Golding, 1993) which cre馳s an ob珈山 with the comp抬頭ties ofthe legislature and economy.

impatience

Another important 自由on for the variation relates to 也eac伽拙的

ofkey_ 13、

乙」啞巴哩伊﹒ For exam阱，也e GovEmmsntOamagJEmitatioam而 J work - which sought to blame high po挂能x levels on councils and then theme that 'Conservative Councils Cost You Less' 一 W部 principally targeted at television , because of its grea切r ubiquity 血dperceived inf1uence. This would explain the greater prom旭enceof 也.ec叫pab血ty issue in TV coverage，的 Government m旭isters strove to turn every sound-bite into a tirade on local government profligacy. promote 也e

Finall 曲y川品心叫叫 祕 01l垃i闢位叫 p伊叮叫位恤 s組a耶帥h句仙沾叩叫uen 阻倪叫dneβw 削sp抖 枷叫位叫耐i址t 伽 d

C

pro-Cons 間忌社 rvat位ive a懿lia位on

手，;\勾心

s側叫伽nati圳 C口v削酬a位on叫枷m 伽 re句p咖

在糾 l已;均立弘咒叭己 'l，

卅

:

扭 s ecto 帥 rs. The 帥 s臼 “叫 e d吋ii証f缸叮fe 帥 rer郎 lce 臼sma 血 i垃n旭城 lJj， rela 臨 t臼ed 缸t切 仰 ot伽 her 均 句 e po 咐 r丘t位 咄in 呵 goft伽 hei旭立 mp 戶 lemen-

-:t克拉

tation of the tax and its effects~ In coverage of the implementative process thetabIoiapressgavek?s attentiontoparliamentaqkcisiozνmakingand more 臼 local government implementation of the t缸.包也erepo的姐g of ~/ effects ofthe tax , a more varied pattem emerged{Fìrstly, television a吋 the---:-"> ta 枷 idp 仰 res 叫 spa 刮 i吋 dpr 仰 rop 仰 仗缸 O r枷 t位i泊 伽 O

~扭阻e 咱咀空個叫tw部 Cα 叩 ul旬 pa 曲 blefj 必 or 叫 'th 加 e 扭g 拉 hch缸g 酹e 叫 糾l枷 研 e ve 恥 lhks 釗1's 茁 êc ∞ ond， 也 theb 祉roa 切峙 dι­ sheet press g晶晶晶而誼通插話括為at訪問ono蜘 ef泌的 ofthetax，

whereas television news gave it far lower prominence( Third , television V news focused more atten位onon 也e negative electoral implications 血的 the tax was having on the Co nservßtive Party, whereas this issue was more m缸斟nal in broadsheet coverag屯Fourth， radio news and current afI尬sJ coverage paid more attention to questions regarding the inequities óf the new 可stem (such as the inadequacy ofrebate provisions , and the failure of thesystem 切 take into account ability to pay).

持叫凶erac叫C州州thes到心血叫S叫

1they refkcted the d前erent_æ控si叫gEE啞巴P包里巴~~acedon news media sectors. Both televisIon news and tabloids have far less poten/位al news space than either 也e broadsheet press or radio , which seriously 誼mits the opportunity for contextual or reflective discussion. In addi泣。泣， they are f1缸 morem旭df叫 of the visuality of a story when selecting their ~， news. In the tabloid press ，也ese concems 訂e compounded by a deep commitment 的耐ident populism and the priori位zation of entertainment

128

of most of 也 the 臨 tablo 剖id 臼s， coupled with 也eir historical v也fica位on ofthe' loony left' in local governme肘， made them the -<::-一、一一一一一一一}一一一~一--一巴 mostreceptive to the Governmëñrs argumenttha他igh poll tax levels were the fault oflocal authori位es. T4is would explain 也e proportionally greater attention paid by the tabloids'-to local government implementation and culpability for high charge leveIg. However, as we see below, by this stage , any attempts to demonize loc叫 government proved very hard 的 sustain. The introducωryperiodm帥缸GW個耐心胸nof也elastves臨L) 也組到坐虫也扭扭扭且fgrth時也呵， even among the proωConse可ti，ve press. Al也.oughtheD叫'y Mail brief1y m剖ñI商品由區γ甜可ffiïëîõÍeof the

心

品在t也… is sound', it criticized 'the pathetic failure of 也e Government ... to put its case across' ('Rough p的sage for the poll t眩， Editorial , 2/3/90:

6) , and later conceded the poll tax was 'plai叫yalos叮， (' About-turn on the poll tax' , Editorial , 28/4/90: 6). The Times asserted that the case for revert戶 ingtoaprop前tybased 可stemof 組xation was 'overwhelming' (可旭kering with error' , Editorial, 28/4/90: 11). The only concerted support came from the Sun, whiβhhear位ly endorsed thβGovernment's 缸guments that excessive poll t研 levels solely reflected local profligacy by declaring ‘W缸 on poll t臨 wasters'. Readers were invited to call a poll t誼 hotline with examples of'barmy burghers' ‘whofritterawayYOURcash' (1/3/90) , and throughout March a litany of缸ticlesw部 printed citing examples ofwaste“ fullocalexpenditure( ‘Council cash was going to potl Grant went to pay for drug farm' , 113/90; ‘￡凹， 000 to look after lesbians' , 2/3月 0; 宙間可onea loonyl Leftie council waste .f，68也-head poll t研 on 300 daft doleωouts' ， 20/3/90). However, the Sun soon tired ofthis li帥， partly because it became increasingly evident that it had been seriously misinformed in many ofthe 129

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Political Communication and the PoIl Tax

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Charge

‘facts' it cited (Observer , 25/3/90) , but also because the paper realized it had seriously misjudged the p曲lic mood, and had placed itselfin a dangerously isolated position in comp訂ison wi也 its na位onal press rivals. (For exam阱， the Daily Mi rror ran a countβrcampai扭的坦ng'Is yo盯 Council under attack from the Sun?').

in Kent, in which she invited frien由 and neighbours to share their anger aga姐st the tax with the viewing public:

However , despite the chorus of condemnation against the t缸， itwouldbe mistaken to assume thatthe Governmentwas consistently on the defensive during the introductory period. If it signally failed to generate journalistic support for its policy , the media' s interest in report姐g antagonistic public responses to the Community Charge, afforded an opportunity to divert the focus ofpolitical debate away from the tax and on to the issue of也efarleft's insurgency of也econs位組討onal Labour P缸大y. It is important to look more closely at this aspect of media debate , not just because disa缸eement about the political meaning of the poll tax demonstrations constituted a key moment ofideological contestation in the deba切， but also because the way in which the media explained and adjudica切d upon 也eir signific祖ce provides a revealing insight into how they defi.ne the p盯ameters of legitimate dissent in 0盯 political culture.

'We're not paying the poII tax': nationaI media andpublic dissent the 釷st public demonstrations occurred in rural and suburban and the 血iddle classes of 'Li位le England' took to the 甜甜ts tovent their wrath against the Government, they were universally reported as beingpr由lematicfor 祉， with both press and broadcast media emphasizing the unforeseen and unlikely nature of the rebellion:

When 訂eas，

'This countryside is the countryside of the middle class England of myth. You almost expect to meet Winnie the Pooh and Piglet in the woods …The creator of Alice 姐 Wonderland lived just down the road from here. ‘'Just down the road' nowadays , means the M25: the fast track through the Co nservative he缸tlands of the home counties. But it' s in towns around this motorway that some ofthe fiercest cdticism is com垣g of the inequalities of the Community Charge' (Newsnight , BBC2 , 29/3/90). This formulation was exemplified 旭 a Channel Four documentary which followed an outraged resident on an ambling tour of an idyllic rural village 130

'We'rehere 切 look round the village 切 seeexactly 也e problems which havebeen wo叮ying me , at any rate , and 1 don't think it' s only me. 1 血泊k a lot ofpeople feel the same as 1 do. That some questions are there and they need to be answered. And, hopefully , ifwe enquire politely enough , we'll get some answers' 的 PoHte Bnquiry, Channel 4 , 29/3/90).

However , as the demonstrations spread to inner city 缸'eas and became more violent , a second interpretation emerged, keenly fanned by Cons缸" vative Central Office. This was 也at the demons仕ations compromised Labour more than the Government; or as one television news bulletin put it: ‘Although 也is protest was aimed at Mrs Thatcher' s poll t眩， there's no doubt that it's 愉Kinnock who will dislike these scenes mos t' (ITN News at Ten , 1/3/90). Intrinsic "to this political 隘的rpreta位on wàs the notion that the violent outbursts were deliberately orches仕ated by political extremists on the left, who were hi租船ng the an位 poll t磁 protes臼 for 也eir own subversive purposes ('Dumped militants s位r up poll t臨 violence' ， Daily Mi rror, 8/3/90; 宜。w militant plotted the campaign: A Sunday Timesinv間， tigation team exposes the secret methods of the Trotskyite travelling circus' , Sunday Ti mes, 11/4/90; 官ow the activists use hotlines to mobilize armies ofprotest' , The Times , 9/3/90; 'Return ofrent-心mob' , Daily Mail , 7/3/90). The possibility of far left sedition al缸med the liberal media 的 much as the Conservative press. For example , the Guardian attacked 'the playground revolutionaries of Militant and the SWP, maintaining their long tradition of polluting every cause they espouse' ('The mobs move 姐'， Editorial, 8/3/90: 18) , and theDaily Mirrorattacked 抽litant as a 'pes位I間， tial nuisance' on 也e constitu位onal Labour p缸ty ('Vote this t研 away' ， Editorial, 8/3/90: 2). As the violence of the demonstrations increased, the news repo此ing in幽 creasingly adopted familiar inferential frameworks evident in earlier reporting of urban unrest (Halloran et aI刊 1970; Murdock, 1984; Solomos, 1986; Hansen and Murdock , 1985). Making sense oftroubling and unusual events req凶res their interpretation by the media into terminology and narrative readily understood by audiences. Here two competing 'stories' were available for this task 一 the sturdy resilience of the British 131

T盟副on and Representation: The Media, Poli位問1 Communica位onand 也ePollT臨

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Commw詰tyCharge

people in the face ofpotty au也orit缸ianism， and 也e dangerous sedition of m缸g姐al wastrels , flouting acceptable standards and exploiting decent goodwill. In也e event the latter narrative , readily nourished by generations of copy denouncing the dangerous classes of urban Brit到此 pre­ vailed, not least because of its insistent elaboration by authoritative sources. One classic feature of 也is was 祖 the widespread use of 'binary oppositions' (Eco , 1979) to demarcate permissible and unacceptable pro咽 test action. On one level this involved contrasting the spont祖eity ofthe earlier demons仕ations with the alleged premeditation ofthe riots:

presenter asserted it was ‘generally agreed that the street violence had nothing to do with local government reform. This was no act of ci就l disobedience 迦 a noble cause. It w部 an excuse for hooliganism or worse' (World this Weekend , Radio 妥， 1/4/90). Th e Times , meanw扭扭， looked back nostalgically to the an位-Vie個am war marches ofthe 1960s,

'This is all a f;盯 cryfrom 也eini位al English poll tax protests , when the was more umbrella and green welly than n旬-sack and bicycle cape. In the last week or so the agitprop left have seized on an issue they know 的 be massively unpopular 姐也e hope of riding it 切 respect­ ab也旬， (Newsnight , 6/3/90). s句le

On another level , juxtaposing the bewilderment ofbystanders 阻d victims with the knowing cynicism of the rioters:

‘ One elderly resident ofHackney condemned the looters who smashed 姐to shops during last night's protests. She said,“why do they break things? They can speak to each other in a nice way, and have it out'" (Closing trailer , BBC1 6pm News , 9/3/90). And， final旬，

comparing the fragility ofthe rule ofLaw, with the powerful, lurking forces of an訂chy: “‘ He was holding a metal bar. He used it. He must have known that he

might even killme": How a policeman suffered in the defence of democ“ racy' (Daily Mail , 17/4/90). All of these features were particularly evident in the coverage of the most serious violence in Trafalgar Square on 31 M缸ch 1990. After the riot,

severaI sections of the tabloid press conducted their own brand of triaI by media, as坦ng the public to identify the faces of rioters photographed during the trouble (‘Nail 也e Poll TaxThugs' , Sun , 3/4/90; 'Wanted: Help Hunt Down Tax Riot Thugs' , News 01 the World , 13/5/90). And if the broadsheet and broadcast media avoided such excesses , the same underlying emphasis on criminality and conspiracy exertβd a powerful influence over their analyses. For example, the day after the riot, a Radio 4 news 132

'The British have learnt to take street disorder more seriously since songs they bellowed were nonsense jingles without a brea也 of politics 祖 them. 在 there were deeply angry people among them nursing a heartfelt political grievance，也ey kept a low profile. Street protest was a gentler ga血etwentyye缸s ago' (2/4/90: 3). 也en … The

The Sun da. y Times llnked the poll tax violence with the e血ergence of an alienated Bri位sh ‘underclass' ('The figh位ng underclass' , 8/4/90) , a theme which the Daily Mail subsequently developed 恤 a sustained and vitriolic abuse of the disadvantaged and dispossessed ('The bloody birth of an underclass' , 9/4/90; 'A class to fit the cr旭e' ， 10/4/90; 'Idleness of the shir坦ng class' , 11/生/90; ‘Where does society go from here?' , 12/妥/90). Although serious questions later emerged about the role that over“ .zealous

and incompetent policing m叮 have played in escalating the violence,. the displayed a marked deference to police interpretations of the causes of the riot: frrst隙， in the privileging of police commentaωrs in reports ('The Metropolitan police have begun a high level investigation into the riot. At a news conference a short while a帥， the Deputy Assistant Commissioner, David Meynell, talked of the savage violence used ag組nst the police' , BBC1 lpm News , 1/4月 0) ， and , secondly, in a tendency to por仕ay the police as victims of, rather 也an participants 妞， the violence ('Victims 祖 blue risked death in line of duty' , Daily Mail , 2/4/90). Where representa位ves of an位 poll t路 groups and maverick Labour MPs questioned the police's tactics , these issues were consistently subordinated within a dominant framework of criminality. For example，也e Guardian's full page account ofthe demonstration provided a 'protester's view' which report旭g

* The civilliberty group, Liber紗， was so concerned about police tactics it agreed to moni切r the policing of another na位onal demonstration against the poll taxin October 1990. In March 1991 ，扭扭ternal report by the Deputy Assis個nt Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police on the policing of the riot iden恤ed a serious breakdown in police communications during the riot, with officers unaware oftactics used by other units. It also acknowledged that 也e precipitative u銬。f riot shields and the fr呵uent movement of speeding police vehicles had 'raised the temperature of the crowd' (Guarman , 5/3/91: 4). 133

Taxa說onandRepr的entation: The Media

, PoliticaI Communication and the Poll Tax

the heavy handed and disorganized policing ('Police “ broke 那idelines"' ， 2/4/90). However , this accountw臼 balanced by the police's description of'A simple brutal 的sa叫t' ， and set with垣 a larger piece with the headline: ‘Black f1 ags signalled violence to come'. Alongside it a contextual piece explored the 'Shadowy so肘ce ofviolentrevolt'. ques位oned

This discursive closure was not absolute, but what critical ref1ectiveness there was about the fra血eworks and assumptions of mainstream repor位ng， was confmed to the peripheries or the letters pages (e.g. the Guardi間's letter pages , 2/4/90 & 7/4/90). For example , on BBC2's Late Show (12/3/90) a journalist asserted that ‘by dramatising the poll tax 也rough images ofriot and violence , the press endangers the democracy it purports to defend'. An d in the Guarruan's youth section, another commenta的r observed how 也e simplistic stereotyp旭g of 'mindless militants or m迦dful mutants' obviated the need 'to go 也rough the dreary business of 也恤站ng about things' (14/3/90: 16). The shifting interpretation of the public demonstra位ons by the media had a powerful inf1uence on the campaign strategies of the m剖n protagonists in the debate. Apart from the Governme凶， whoac紋vely encouraged debate 盯ound the hidden motives for the demonstrations and Labo肘's c叫pabili旬， the coverage prompted a swift response from the Labour leadership , who derided the no心payment strategy and unequivocally condemned the public disorder. After Trafalgar Square , the P前旬'sDeputy leader , Roy Hattersley , stated 'the people responsible simply have to be prosecuted and punished very severely indeed' (BBC11pm News , 1/4/90), and 迦 Parliament condemned 'without reservation or qualification the violence that took place in and around Trafalgar Square last Saturday … All democrats will combine in demanding the rooting out ofthe 也reatto our free society which was perpetrated by 姐dividuals and organiza位ons who were responsible for the disgraceful scenes and conduct in the capital last Saturday'. (Hansard, 2/4/90 , columns 89 4-895). The e fl'ect of this strategy was twofold. Firstly, as opinion polls demonstrated the resilience ofLabo肘's lead throughout early April, it helped to further dampen media * Journalists played a key role in drawi時

the responsib血可 of far left groups for the violence to the attention of the Home Secretary and Shadow Home Secretary. After the riot they presented both with leallets distributed at the demons仗ation by the An archist group 'Class W缸， , which stated .Scraps with the cops may not stop the poll 個耳， but ... who needs an excωe for a fìght wi血也e Bill?' (Hansard , Column 895 , 2/4/90).

134

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Charge interest in implicating Labour with the violence. Second, by deferring to the inferential frame provided by the police and the Government about the riot and its causes , it reinforced the denial of 也eir political significance and the discursive closure around the exacerbatory inf1uence of over-zealous or incompetent policing.

的 E吼叫叫May 1990-February 199fJ Although media interest in the Community Charge startβd to wane as the _debris was cleared from Tr afalgar Square and the first bills w~re delivered , ?主吵2、 f心、 一 仆media attention fell away m。“ dramatically from May onward;s. 一 J‘ / The m也 r ζreasonfor 也e decrease in coverage was t坦國控世助理nc豆豆何msogk tlïëresults of the 1990 loc凶的ctions， held on 3 福y. In百ap伽 3 ， we 1 .{G5, B闊前站蒜苔只布這益gstrategy of Conservative 倒出 Oflìce I ~~ deliberately focused media attention on their performance in the詮 three i 仰而 'f1ags峙， boroughs ofWandswo帥， Westmin伽祖dpadord， Mth 也ek i pruned services and low poll tax levels~， to de f1ect ~on from their poor ) '--~峙，一一、-也-- / U~)..:~;;: performance 垣 other councils.._This politlcal strategy proved highly efl'ective in media terms. In the le釘up to the ballot, the f1睹的制hori位es Ahy 和 were consistently at the forefront ofmedia attention , and when 也eConserV 立月Ii vatives' consolidated their power 姐 two of the three authorities (despite catastrophic losses elsewhere) the result was generally interpreted by the national media as品conclusive. Accord旭g to Newsnight it was ‘ adayon which honour could be salvaged on all sides' (4/5月 O).Or，旭 thewordsof the lead item on ChanneI Four News , a result that ail'orded ‘ thet磁 and 愉S Thatcher herself some breathing space …Labour will insist the idea ofthe poll tax was generally rejected;. In the end，也ough， it's likely 切 be 且堅t pretedboth ways' (4/5月 0). -戶一_-嘲~一

一圓圓甸甸--一』

f:;

Throughout the summer months of 1990 , the Co血血unity Charge was temporarily relegated 垣 national news agendas , but re-emerged 姐 November 1990，的叩verage of 出eConserva位ve leaders句旦旦控theightened speculation about what would happen to 血epoliβ:y in the event of a new leader securing 0血Ge. After Mrs Thatcher's deposition and a fundamental review of the policy began , media a位ention waned once mo間， only to 旭crease again in anticipation of the announcement of 也e policy review.

r'li/;).. 1/

The interpretative focus ofthe press agenda also shifted during this period: 13S

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Politi間1 Communication and the Poll Tax

Chap伽 5:

away from public opposition and back towards Governmental decisionin particular, the concessions and revisions being contemplated ωofIset the political difficulties the 個x had created. Local government enforcement of the t位 also attracted more coverage , as di祉 the impact of thet盟 upon local service provisior(.îñ. addi位。泣，也e issue of Conservative h均fpsazectionreminda 句ruhca帥， ifsub位dinated， subtext during this period, particularly during the leadership contest. When Michael Heseltine announced his intention to stand against Margaret Thatcher, a lot ofmedia commentary focused on what her defeat would mean for the future struc個re of local finance and the electoral prospects of the Conservative Par句 ('Labour's Poll Lead Shrinks In Ballots' , Sunday Tim郎， 11/11/90).

vative Party who wished to see the tax retained (‘Tarzan to probe the g闊的 -口~': -, L ?iÍ poll tax leak' , Daily S鯽， 2113/91). 忱的內只

ma蛤ng，

Although media interest reduced after the excitement of the leadership contest there was sporadic evidence of governmental 'kite fly垣g' under幽 taken to assess the likely popul缸ity of difIerent reform alternatives via the media ('PM rules out abolition of poll tax' , Guar也帥， 7/1/91; ‘Majorback­ tracks on Poll tax gaffe: TV statement ruling out aboli位on a con位ngent thought' , Guardian , 16/1/91; 'Major refuses to rule out return to rates' , Guardian , 31/1/91).

( q f)_

f_ ι正一叫

孟鼠忌亞研前eAddedfu蒜苔of志ZEEE品話已品ahgGIEW缸 一一一一一一一一一-白白白一個且，一一一一←

terminol呦， approved of 性把雙坐竺控旦旦抽血腥豆且也控哩mhat

、the

move_might mean for the timing ûf the next General Election T'f140 poll fiix is slashed , June election looms' , Sun , 20/3/91; 'Storm旭'Norman totherescue' , DailyMail, 20/3/91; ‘VAT missile takes :f, 140 out ofthe poll t阻" Today , 20/3/91; 'Storming Norman's poll tax massacre sign剖s early elections' , Daily Express , 20/3/91). Only the Mi rror and the Daily Star considered 也e hike in the VAT rate 切 be a price not worth paying ('T位 on 蚵缸， sweeties: “ it's the poor who'll pay for 也isb沮 CONI"' ， Daily Mi rror, 20/3/91; ‘Vatman goes robbin': Norm makes us all pay up' , Daily Star, 20/3/91). d

The final intensive period of nat絞iona 叫l 血ed 泓ia cωoverag 酹 e ofthe Co血mun 剖i~ 句 y Cha 盯 rg 伊 ec 問 amei恤 nMa 盯 rchandApri組11991 ， when media speculation about the res叫ts ofthe poll tax review reached a fever pitch. After the GO\rernment' s lobby w部 given formal notice面前 the poll tax was to be co血pletely Times , 10/3/91). Later that month , these covert briefings became 也e subject of media 甜ention themselves, as senior Government so肘ces leaked details of the Environment Secretary's statement to Parliament three days 旭 advance, app缸ently without 也e prior knowledge or consent of the Prime Minister ('MPs bemused by the leak of Heseltine Plans' , Independent , 20/3/93; ‘Westminster leaks outlined the course of poll t阻 successor' , Tod旬， 20/3/91; 世eseltine on the No. 10 c缸pet over poll 個x leak' , Dai1y A個1， 20/3/91). Thereasonsfortheleakswerenevermadeclear, although the political edi忱。f one national paper 句eculated)ihat 'senior sources' had sanctioned the disclosure to 0前-manoeuvre tlíose within the Conser-

The national m耐 had _Q控缸里要Efdgpstthe cha叫lor's surp帥， before they}aced the_9fficial旦旦旦控cement of 坐車~litiol!.9f 伽 Com­ m uD.ity_Charge. Al伽ugh the Secretary 0的函ewasdβliberately evasive / about its replaceme肘， this public signing of the policy's death w缸rant sp前ked an orgy of comment about its failure , and the replac~ent 恤 prospect. The relief ofthe pro勵COIlservativetaboidswaspalpable-hEHιv urged~Don't weep for that tax' (剖itorial， 22/3/91) and the-Dai1y E街press welcome恥苗E暉，前吾吾ãID函鼠忌 itsig副金cantly improved the chances of the Government's re也lection ('End of a taxing Tory nightmare' , Editorial , 22/3/91). TheDaily Mailwas s恤沮缸ly enthused but warned the Govern- , / ment against introducing a 'son of poll tax' , and - conveniently forgetting its earlier v挂過cation of Labour' s 'roof tax' - urged a return to a property

幼b加O岫 A

??

disastrous 伽wing 姐伽Ribble Vall何 by-elec伐。巫山的蜘ch，伽

r 尸 4AZζ_ abandoned (‘ Major decides the poll tax must be scrapped' , Sunday

136

This 血的tormwasimm吋iat吻 su瞇些也血型但也已扭ncel- v

lor' s decision to finance a universal :f, 14_Q re_!!1!Çtiol!_in all p_9 11 tax levels by

The response from the broadsheets was more mixed. The'Daily Te1egraph judged that the 'massive 卸st aid to the poll tax' would 'provide a fi到rwind for an early election' ('Prudent for Britain, but bold enough to win' , Editori祉， 20/3/91) , whereas The Ti mes was more incredulous about the generosityof 也e subsidy, describing it as 'the nearest any British Government has come to handing out fivers on the 甜eet corner' ('Recession Unrelieved' , Editorial, 20/3/91). The Guardian saw it as just a s的pgapme韶山etodeal with a policy that ‘con位nues malevolently to distort domestic policies' (Editori祉， 20/3月 1:2月 and claimed it would ultim鼠tely disadvantage the poor ('The other side ofthe wheeze' , Editorial , 21/3/91).

(}才(吵兮

Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe 臼'mmu到ty Charge

、J

137

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Political Communication and the Poll Tax

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Charge

based tax linked to capi怯1 values ('The tax that turned traitor' , Editorial, 22/3/9 1.: 6). The non-Conservative tabloids were more centrally concemedWith the Charge's replacement)The Daily Star cau位oned theG帥， mmenthattherewadhroomfohbotzh 坤， (她tori祉， 22/3/91: 8), and Today observed thaC血ehardp盯t of [Heseltine's] task lies ahead' (‘ Last rites for the poll tax' , Editorial, 22/3/91: 6). The Daily Mi rror was fiercely scornful of the Minis ter' s deliberate imprecision and concluded 也at 'like the undead' 也e poll tax would continue '姐姐ng its toll on people and haunting the Tory party' ('T訛ing 勘岫chael'， Editorial , 22/3/91: 2).

to this brave new tax' , 24/4/91). The Daily Star's news report of the M姐ister's statement was accompanied by a cartoon of the Environment Secretary as St George , sla抖ng 血e poll tax dragon ('By George，恤'sdone it' , 24/4/91). The response of the broadsheet press，証 less ecstatic w也 broadlyenco肘aging. Th e Times judged the Council T悍的 be 'sound in its essentials' ('Sound and sensible' , 24/4/91: 22). The Independent pointed to V the growing consensus between the two main parties on the matter oflocal finance , and castigated the Labour leadership as 'idiotic' for promis胎gto repeal the new tax before they had fully examined it ('Need for a tax that willlast' ， 24/4月 1: 20). The Telegraph concluded that although 也enew tax，達旦旦 triumph for radical reform or Government spending ... It is an impo此ant pragmatic , political achievement' ('The local solution' , Editori祉， 24/4月 1: 16).

\_,/

γThe broadsheet(sha叫 the tabloid's 盟~ous support for the rep叫 of)

the Comm.unity Ch缸的 but displayed a greater indulgence ofHeseltine's reluctance to be 切o sþecific about its replacement. The Independent detected 'a refreshingly open-minded approach to the difficult task of relating local taxation to the structure and functions oflocal governme肘， ('Anettle grasped' , Editorial , 22/3/91: 20). The Daily Telegraph congratulated the Government on dealing with a ‘great poli位cal embarrassment ... with political skill , almost panache' ('Release in sight from a lot of local difficulty' , Editorial, 22/3/91: 22). The Ti mes declared Heseltine's speech 'a political masterpiece' and , revealing a spectacular a血nesi位 about its own 守 endorsement of the policy during its legislative phas哩， chided Tory MPs and Cabinet ministers for not having been more resolute in their opposi位onto thetaxduringits earlystages ('Towardsthelight' , Editorial, 22/3/91: 17). ~. The Guardi側， too ， reg缸ded the turncoats in the Co nservative ranks with a palpable contempt, describing their brazen support for the repeal of a tax they had actively supported, as ‘one more ripe episode in a deeply shameful episode ... Any ring of competence in this miserable farce is yet overthe hills and far away' ('Dead and buried with much ignominy' , Editorial, 22/3/91: 22).

V

Followingthe announcement ofthe Council T缸， anditslargelyfavourable response by the Conservative P缸ty and the mainstream media , lQcal fm- ..,./ L坦坦型但巴拉omthem咱的 political 哩阱though，也e 涵而Z tion provided in Fig. 5.1 only covers the period up until "September 1991 , data from our sample ofbroadcast news coverage during the 1992 General Electionc岫血型哩哇!conhu仙el哩哇扭扭旦想盡到會主.fg>m '。可 ~n並且ber 1毀主盟旦使i扭曲:-rn 函 ìromc p叮aUel

•

to the absence of 10叫 finance from the 1987 campa嶼， the issue barely 增加ded into the national broadcast agenda during this period (Deacon and Golding, 1992). Ind叫， who could have projected a他eh句hto4Þepolltaxriotsin1990，) that only two ye盯s later the 個x and its replacement would be the main focus in only one news item on the main evening news bulle位nsonBBC1 and 叮V during the whole of the campaign period?

0

0

(This neglect is in many respects as remarkable as the media' s disregard for ) I the Community Ch缸使yrior to the legislative period for England ancY Wales. For in April19 91 , many salient issues remained. The Council Tax still faced many hurdles before its implementation, and the poll tax would remain in place for a further two ye缸'8. Yet the national media were only r訂ely 仕oubled by the death-throes of the latter or the birth pangs of the former. í"

fz! V'.

Local coverage of the Community Charge 'Chooseyo盯 poll t眼I

(\./

1

138

個nity

The News today gives readers a unique opporto have a say in 血eset位ngof 也e Wirral's Commu剖tyCharge. 139

T磁ation and Repr的enta的on: The Media, political Communi個位.on and the Poll T揖

r

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Charge

On the assurances of the two political p前位的 involved 曲的 they will heed the result of our phone-in , you are invited to cast your vote on the special News Poll Tax Lines set up by us' (BirkenheadNews , 28/2/90).

our 蜘ntion

the poll t也 will mean' - Michael Howard, 17/9/87), it did so against an earlier condemnation of the ta率也dthepromo位onal exercise ('City MP 恤 salesman jibe at poll t位仕ipm姐ister' ， 16/9/87).

r酬ti呵。f也is policyby 伽呵onal

Perhaps preferable for 也e Minister was 坦s tot4iEVUib謝你旭 Reading， where there was no report of the visit, merely a letter castigating the poll t路 andthe 岫nisters' a位empt to 'beguile the gullible' frA._m a Ratepayers' Association spokesperson (Rearung ChronicIe, 25/9/8 7) (The Yorkshire Post r血 a leader beginning , 'It demands a special strain of optimism to imagine that the Govern血ent will win converts with its plans to in仕oduceaCo血， 血.unity Charge in place of domestic rates' (宜ollow opposition' , Editori祉， 2/10/87) , while across the Pennines the 孔tIanchester Bve叫ng Newsran a more equivocalleader raising several ofthe problems raised by the poll tax andma垣ng ambiguous co血血凹的 about its introduction in April1990 ('CabinetListens' , Editorial, 18/11/87).

We now turn to the and local news media. In Chapter 3 we showed that the local media, P盯位C世缸ly the local press , were specifìcally targeted by the Government in its attβmpts to sell the tax reform. By the same token , many opponents of the policy - particularly those opera位ng at locallevel, or who were unable to get their views presented 姐 the competitive environment ofthe national media - also focused considerable attention on the same channels. Given the perceived si俱ificance of the local media, it is important to examine whether their discourses about 也e Community Charge appreciably differed from those in 也e national media.

is based on local press and telev泊ion coverage during the most intensive period of media and public debate …between 1 l Q?tkT 、 M叮ch and 5 May 1990. However, as a precursor to this , we pres叫 the )' " -.../ results of a qualitative survey of a very early response by the local media to the policy , and the "Government' s news manageme峙， which provides a ν 也g 垣sight 扭扭 hβ仰eral disposition oflocal m吵a 叫enewt位、

/./

即些盛且包空些吧。n

Elsewhere 也e

story was similar. The Ne闊的tle Bvening ChronicIe ran a series ofunflattering stories concen仕a位ng on the Government's defensiveness over the reforms - 'M垣ister 凹的 rate criticism' (29/9/87) - and S盯vey findings - 'Majority 也ink poll tax unfair' (29/9/8η.S山盟訂lyin Birmingham, the Bvening Mail reported that 也e'M垣ister denies poll 組x chaos' (23/9/87) , only marginally softened the next day in切 'Poll tax fears rejected'. In Plymouth 也e rurallobby was at work. The Westem Morning News reported 'Rural revolt feared over poll tax on farming staff吩 (12/9/87).

We have described how in September 1987 two Government ministersMichael Howard and Chrlstopher Chope - embarked on a 'whistle stop' 的肘。f regional news roo血s

and conference halls to whip up local support for the policy prior to the introduction of the legislation for England and Wales. Even the most c盯sory of readings of the local press in 也e 缸eas visited shows the limited effectiveness of this agenda幽building by visitation. Although the Kent Messenger reported the Minister's 'evangelical 血ission to explain and persuade' 旭 some detail ('Howard's way: crusading MP spells out the rates revolution' , 18/9/87: 4) , it gave equal prominence to a detailed cri位que ofthe proposals by Maidstone Council's Chief Executive jwew systemis s的 not fair' , 18/9/87). In Bristol the m啦啦可 was Michael Howard's refusal to meet councillors 一“‘Busy" tax supremo slammed' (加stoI Bvening Post, 16/9/87) leading to '岫凶ster' s poll tax snub for councilleaders' (Westem Daily Pr，帥， 17/9/87)~益甜的cipationof the Minister's arrival , the BristoIBvening Post also ran a 可 ecial report' on 'Thepolltaxnightmare' (16/9/87: 6).Simil缸句， although the Nottingham Bvening Post prominently recorded one ofthe Minister's opt旭istic projections about the new system (甘ot的 firms' 16 per cent rate cut. Th的'swhat

These examples reveal ~ pro叫 andco甜甜ab坦幽幽組mlJ ~s about the polic~型企控gjtLearly_stages. Furthermore，血泊 suspicion starkly 竺哩的叫出血e 對誼琵否再旦旦控世路~ncy displayed by many equivalent sec位onsof 也ena位。nal m~dia during 也esame ~erÏ.od. When ~e Îook more closely'ãn:副司已鼠忌即組 coverage during the policy's implementation in England and Wales , the evaluative distinctiveness of local coverage becomes even more app缸ent.

。f

jh

LocaI merua and the introduction ofthe Community Charge v<"

μ-

ting during the tax' s iI加odu伽ry period was in whose views空扭扭EES \迎β現阻Q盟章明間!ltly.reported. F缸 more atten位onw臼 given 旭 the local media to local poli位cians and authorities (see Table 5 .4). Furthermore, although party politicians still predominated , local media accessed a

:::、

、、一，一一一一__--

140

什

The 趾st and most basic disp缸ity between local and national news repor- 有_. j 于 1 幻

141

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli位cal Communication and the Poll Tax

Chapter 5: Policy-Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Charge

greater diversity ofnews so盯ces， with representa位ves from the voluntary

new policy be坦nd central government decision-making (with the exception ofthe tabloids) , the local and regional media paid far more attention to local government administration. They also attended to a greater diver-

一-一一一

一一一一九~--

----

聶ctor了ou品已ss sector ;-frades union movement, and 也e an位 poll t臨

federations being consis臼ntly more prominent. Particularly significant, was the far greater presence of local government fmance oflìcers in local report垣g， which as we discuss later, exerted a considerable influence over the generation of local news agendas.

均 ofissl時 concernin品叫她nini沖胸n， S1叫削hewor 耐叫 r仕k恤 rebate sysrem, data protection matters and enforcement procedures. Table 5.5. Themes in na位onal Community Charge ωverage (1 M:缸'ch - 5 May 1990)

Table 5.4. Poli位問1 actor軍區 10間1 Community Ch缸gecoverage (1 March - 5 May 1990) Disposltlon 設的enωin

CI划，cal

Supportlve

1.

臼11

%

Col. 2 %

臼1. 3

%

2.

Local government adm扭扭仕a位。n

nunJq3ny

10

9

17

22

24 74

Labourp缸tyr，的ponses

0.5

77

2

Other actor responses 4.

InequltL臼lanomolles

94 耐634 命 165

1

0.5 1674

Notes: Figures relate to news 祖d feature poll 臨 lte凶。凶y(focused 臨drelated). Column 1: percentages = proportion ofltems which featured atleast one actor in category. Columns 2 & 3: percentage = disposition displayed of each actor/f扭扭ency of appearance. Percentages are sep位ate and do not add up to 100. /'

There were also clear thematic dilIerences between national and local news agen帥， and ac迋志說訂五而已ectors (see Table 5.5). 如此， whereas national media relegated atten位on 切 local ad血inistration of the

5.

8

9

7

是

呵，“令， r“ o

Government Winners and Losers Negative impact on local services Other negative e∞nomic effects αllpabillty for high poll tax leveIs Inefficiency ofnew system Eq叫大'f of new system Other effects

0.5

3

ofnew system

間ectoral detriment ofthe

264964-89 66317142 2 1

)0叮nal泊ts)

且ffiω臼 ofpollcy

正M 吟，這 JqJ?a 弓， 2J

83 58 51 55 22

rop393q3

2

8422

融

Localgovernmentasωciations/press肘e

Responsesωthe pollcy Publlc responses Conservative P訂tyrespons的

可-A

3.

Nonp訂ty politlcal actors

142

1

A由 唔，

島，i

••

P位typo但也al actor (party not stated)

/ /

2

4534

actor

AlI otherp訂ty polltical actors

0.5 39 10

q街， Aqa

Local Labo叮 politlc岫/authority

30604*07

吋，“i 可 可斗可斗勻，樹，

Other Conserva御ep訂tyactor Labour shadow cabinet Other Labour natlonal polltlcl個

4禹。"，

L∞al Co nserva位vepoll位:clanlauthority

Total of Lo cal TV and Press ltems

%

dec隘的n-ma扭扭g

Government Other natlonal 臼nservatlve polltlcian

groups General publlc An位 poll tax groups Other voluntary organizatlons Loc al government profes祖lonals Trades unlons Research Agencles Business & business federatlons Other actors (other professlonals,

Loc alTV

%

Implementation ofpollcy go郁ernmentaIlp紅'liament訂Y

Party polltlcal actors

Other Labo叮 p訂ty

Origins ofpollcy of ratlng syste姐姐dother

hiq凶ty

ltem

Local Press

。也erthem的

Explanations about aspec尬。fthe

reforms Alternatives to the reforms

Total themes coded

Z

Z

3022

l l

689

FI飢rresrelateωm帥， feature 阻dediωrial lte阻(poll tax focused 阻d related). Up to four themes couId be ∞ded for each item. Percentages = frequency of appearance/aggregate of

themes coded. AlI Iì訊rr臼 arerounded.X2 = 53.23:df= 16:P< 0.0 1.

叫 m晶的o paid a此en伽的心咖 range of e些豆豆伽ewas more coverage ofthe inequitable and anomalous impact ofthe policy (for example , in eroding the link between ‘ability to pay' and local taxation

143

T阻a位onandRepr棚8個tion:The~eWa， Pollfi個1 Communicafion and the Poll T缸

Chapter 5: Pollcy ~ade Publlc: ~edia Coverage ofthe Community Charge Class War is blamed for spearheading the violence' (BBC South-east ,

levels) , actual redistributional implications ('winn)lrs and losers') and the de甘imen凶 e詬t on local servi叫rovi如1.conhmly，也eimpactof 伽 tax on the electoralfortunes ofthe ConservativeParty didn't Co血mandthe same prominence.

2/4/90 ，。盯 emphasis).

Despite examples such as this , local coverage more 句quentlyemphasized . Jhe politic刮到但過C阻ce of the 金艷扭扭蟬，也de扭扭扭g_ç_oncern - that the violence would obscure the essential political issues at the heart of the poll t缸 debate. After the frrst s旭rmishes， the Northern Echo editor凶ized 'What is the poll tax about? Anybody looking at the events ofthe last f于? week co叫d be forgiven for 也扭扭n~w卸的ou哇哇扭住的~erx. versusla'll'{盟d o_r..dez:..-or militant subversion versus democracy. It is none 0l11ï函函恤gs. It is about the 些扭扭捏旦旦4阻詛四:gjtaþJ甜甜hich the V倒t majority of people do not want' (剖itorial， 12/3/90: 8). Similarly, the ./ Bradford Telegraph and Argus warned 'The poll tax is a bad and unfair tax … It would be a disaster if the violence of a few hundred rent-a-mob demonstrators across the countrywere to obscure that' (Editorial, 9/3/90: 10) ，由 did the Oxford 抽il (‘Violent Protest' , Editorial, 8/3/90). Immediately after the Trafalgar Square Ri ot, the Tyne Tees eveningprog閃閃me gave greatest prominence to a local Anti Poll Tax Federation spokesperson in explaining the course of the days events (2/4/90) , and a Yorkshire Post editorial castigated 也e Home Secretary as ‘patronising and 缸roga帥， for drawing simplistic parallels between non-payment and violent disorder (3/妥/90: 10).

咄伽 er叫ere 伽G 郎a位伽蝴蝴帥 s“t位呱耐i泌C吻 恥叫 s剖i站甸崢蝴 g缸岫恥n俱伽叫fferen 缸 e吋 n1 削 s 郎 e ct枷 位rs O 閥 旭血伽 吋扯 reporting，咐th 1型躍輕型。np甸甸盟監控墊底 e v

to

些~惶惶哩哇控~旦旦巒onmdhi且全世lect~.impl~ns of

the change. The variation in local medià coverage probably ref1ected the geographic range of these media sector~ Local television in B時 " fàin operates on a regional basis and 也erefore extends over many local authority areas , whose activities 也ey routinely report. The local press , by comparison , tend to cover far more lim.ited areas , an9, are therefore directly involved with a more lim.ited range of councilS._Therefore, in reporting charge levels alone. regional television would have a far greater number to cover 也an tfieir press counterp缸ts. The re部ons for the difference in emphasis on the impact ofthe tax on the electoral fortunes ofthe Government are less easy to trace (not least because they contradict the trend in national coverage).

am前通t

~司戶d

demonstrations. On occasio泣， local reporting deferred to the conspiracy theories that abounded in the na位onal media. One remarkable example of this was the BBC's South East evening programme immedia臼ly after the 社afalg訂 Squ缸eriot(2/4月 0). In a lengthypost-mortem about the causes of the riot, a pre-recorded studio intβrview was presented with a representative from an An archist group , who described the protesters as ‘working class heroes'. Being mindful of the sensibilities of the progra血血e's audience , as well as the political contentiousness ofthe group's views, the interviewer displayed an overt aggressiveness and prefaced the item with the explicit disclai血er:

However , if the relative weighting oflocal news concerns differed from the national news agenda - and suggests an even more critical evaluative stance 也曲也at of the n~tional media 一 local and regional repo的旭gdid not noticeably expand the p前ameters of national disco盯se about the ~一. policy. Indeed , ifmedia com血.ent about the Commu到你的盯ge 空軍soften 旭tensive and highly critical, there were many important issue反Qlatcon­ cerned participants in the b,roàder policy debate which only rarely surfaced 姐 mediarepo的祖g. It is to~ards these significant absences in coverage of

e/

'[Class War] are dedicated to the downfall ofParliamentary de血ocracy and attacking the police , as well as advocating non-payment ofthe poll tax. Earlier today , I talked to their spokesperson， λndy Murphy. Many of you may find his views repugna肘， but they do give an insight into why Saturda. y's march turned to violence. I pl泌的 him first the allegation that 144

theComm叫句 Ch時 thafour discus也渴而品于~了一 法

Hidden poll tax agendas 、

附 W h叫叩叫滋叫她 由 d e叫e inf1岫 … u 削叩… en 凹C n 閃 帥… eωO 叭 心 仇t油 f 伯岫 hem 伽 間叫 吋也叫a e 叫 副岫叫 m i油 呵 n 洶 g 仰州州 恤位圳捌 H

wha 前 ti診 ，sn 叫 o，t“sa 剖idi泌s

as si站gn 叫ific空哩耳ta 部swha 叫ti泌 ss 扭 ai，吋 d.Th 加 efi 缸 rs 呼t 血a 吋.j 肘 o ra 曲 bs甜 er郎 1昀 cei旭 n( 乍令立 2j

M

v

me品伽 a 、f 話6 品 母 P疏茁玄of 血 the 刊 E函血阻ity Ch缸ge related ~q~單位吧:立世旦!iv..e.-毒 prom哇哇ce_fompared

with other important fmancial reforms enacted by . V

~I 1位5

rc{

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli拉開l 臼mmunica的onand 也ePollT缸 / / t h e 1987and 1988localananceAcp-AlthoughthepolltaxwaHEEEEir 話。mponent in a general restructuring of local government finance , it \d空空空扭扭歸路e21接岱組組組搗亂。凶y 10 per cent of focused j 叫花 ocal finance iteIl1s 姐 thendqn#pressbeween1986md1991concea" \之 JU 仕a紀d on eithe可 bus泊ess ratφ心中tral granfs or...gûety n;e1包 S凶益缸ly， ~、 during the most 恤fensive phase ofthe media debate, the Uñiform Business Ratβwas mentioned anywhere in only 5 per cent of local finance related coverage in the national media , and the new grants and transitional 缸rangements in a mere 11 per cent. This pa位ern was replicatβd in local coverage , with the UBR men位oned 旭 only 5 per cent of items , and the grant system and safetý nets in 9 per cent. Any assessment ofthe media's performance in informing public debate by providing a comprehensive overview of 也is policy 恆nova位on， needs to take this gl盯ing， s仗uctural distortion into account.

/

_ße于ondιhis

/

basic imbalance - where less than a qu缸ter of the revenue base oflocal government commanded over 90 per cent ofmedia coverage

----戶

玄

…也迦蚣盟喂tc ∞ o郎闢叫 t岫M 叫加 位ona 叫 a

alø...tørl

‘吋.-句每搗鞠凶伸m枷-曙-啥個-凶"副F

、岫叫 ψ楠‘-崎‘崗‘耐‘吋啥愉.憫"緝h晦‘甸輛'血包也 ι悍--曲-

of the new process might have on the elec切ral rolls and the franchi間， and the constitutional impact of 也et磁 on local/central government relations , only r缸ely s叮" faced in the news agenda (see Table 5.6). Furthermore , our longitudinal analy仰fpress 帥的ge 伽ws 伽削ssues 在camemorem呵inalized 油 出e media agenda as the policy proceeded. 1//hble

h'n，.品V口TY'I nl 且

rløh 且 tp C! "， hnnt 晶晶 nrl甘盟戶U lrrl T\li 戶口“ ons

5.q這GK胸郎妞poll恤coverage 、___/

'<'Privacy issuω v Disenfranc祕sement V

National press

All national media

All local med旭

(1/198 6-9/1991)

( 113/90 的 515/90)

{1/3/90 - 5/5/90)

Col.1 %

Co1. 2

Co1. 3

%

%

0.4 0.3

0.5 0.2 1.3

1

0.6 Loc allcentral government 0.3 可-

flmy 93-

0.7 r。

relatlons

F3

r2604

辛基17

Number ofitems Column1

= proportlon ofpoll tax focused items with these issues as main theme. Co lumns 2

&3 =propor位onofpoll t租 focωed and related items with these issues as a m滋nor

subsidiary theme. Pigures for Column 1 relate to news , fea他re 個dediωrial items. Pigur的 for columns 2 & 3 relate to news, feature , editorial items and readers letters. 146

Chapter 5: Policy Made Public: Media Coverage ofthe Community Charge When these issues iÍid appe叮峙 ma垣stream me鈍， the廿 appe盯祖ce \一一 / i盯gely depended upÕïi three 鼠.ttors. Either the issues touched on pet concerns ofparticular media commentators ,' or they could be tagged on to a more proInÏl1ent issue in t þ.e m平ins佐eam news agenda. For example , the impact ofthe(tax on the fran(:h i.S b由fly surfaced before the 1992 Gener誼 Election, following claims that the 個x would seriously undermine Labour's chances in many key marginals ('The Lost VotβofM缸位nThow' ， WorldinAction , 23/3/92).

e

Summary and conclusions In this chapter we have traced and compared local and national media discourses about the Community Charge and its related reforms. This analysis has iden磁ed several important f扭扭res to that coverage.

V' First media attention to 叫心…叫，也做」

,

f

many key periods in the policy cycle. Prior to the in仕odúction to P訂lla­ ment of the legisla位on for England and Wales , national media attention wasm坦出祉， and the issue was almost completely neglected before the 1987 General Election. After the legislative phase, attention wavered aga妞， only 的 drama位cally re-emerge 旭 early 1990，的 the first bills were set in England and Wales. Over the following year, there were two further 扭扭肘e periods of media debate - during the Co nservative leadershlp contest and the announcement of the tax' s repeal- and 血閃出e issue disappe缸ed almost completely from the national news agenda , despitβthefact thatthet位 still had a two year period to run , and the many technical 祖d proceduralquestionsthatre血訟的d about its replacement.

ν~. 缸 S e∞必 心起丸心 4 !.l叫叫叫ona 帥 a J哩!慢咐吧圳 p叮肘控控E蟬肆， bei峙 呵 n 1培 g馴 eit 訛th 伽 叮r þ'悔扭且必旦E e 班扭d 鈕立挫 控E盟恆 E 金控點旦且主 μtωot也 he lessons of

I

t伽 he，

much 問 vaunt吋空唔吟吟 ~ιEγ ， /Sco 咐咄s油 h 'e 呵 茍 xp 抖e 叮 闕例 ri 剖迦 m削'. The passage of the Scot位sh / Legislation in e訂ly 1987 went unremarked, as did the tax's introduction a year before its arrival in Britain. \.../Third,media e叫uations。噁feasib胸叫prob的f伽 policy changed throughout the policy' s cycle and across different media. At the outset,

* For example , the Sunday Ti mes' early localist critique of the poll 偽xwassi但ificantly 組fluenced

by one of its most pre-eminent columnists, Simon Jen站間， who had for many ye訂s argued ag訟nst any further extension of W坦tehall control of local government. 147

心一

, Political Commnnication and the Poll T，缸

T祖祖on and Repr的個個tion: The Media

national press op旭ionswerem誼ed， with several Conservative orientated papers broadly endorsing the Government's plans. However, as the prospect of the 個x's introduction in England and Wales approached , these evaluations became almostunanimously negative , and by 也e 位methet也 W扭扭仕oduced this opposition was widespread and en仕enched. Interes說ng旬， the local media appear to have been amongst the most cri位calofthe Governme瓜's plans , bo也 during the early stages and at the moment of introduction .

Journalists and the Poll T位

.ì/ FOurt，~:， the ~~me，~凹kofl叫 covera叫呵叫他的叫削仰恤，

was still contained by the structure of national debate. That is to say, it was evaluatively autonomous but interpretαtively dependent. Many altemative agendas about the Com也unity Charge which have preoccupied campaigners concerned about the poll 個x went virtually unreported，由 did the very important associated financial reforms. If the Government's ideological offensive foundere li_under media scrutiny，的 it manifestly did , it did so on its own terms. Further，叫 longitudi叫 analy血 of national pr的 coverage suggests that ~五e interpretative features of media agendas both shifted during different 8tages ofthe policy cycle , and became 旭cre部ingly constricted. For example , from the legislative period onwards , concems about the civilliberties implications ofthe new tax were usurped by concemwi也 public and parliamentary disputes and decision咽a站時﹒

In therem血ing 伽pters of this boo心re 叫lore more directly the origins \

of media discourses on t姐s subject, to èxplain why the coverage displayed the features identified in this chapter. We begin this task by examining the views and news gathering activi位es ofthose journalists who reported the t臨 and its implications.

In叩 F…p…… tured in the main 閻 c 氯mpa 凶igns仕at，e 臼斟 g ie 臼s oft 血 he

protagani泌 stωsi恤 n thepoll

扭x

debate, and how different media reported the issue. No doubt, to the perceptive reader, parallels 缸e already evident between the two discussions. However, to fully understand the origins ofmedia discourses on 也eCommu凶旬的盯醉， we must also address the views and ac位討位es of 也e key intermediaries in the news production process - the joum剖ists and editors who commissioned and authored these accounts. For news is f叮 more 也an 也e su血 of opinions and information received by news organiza位ons. News professionals necessarily exercise value judgements inselecti時間d filtering the information they receive and in directing 也eir news 伊thering. As such they 缸'e active p缸ticipants in the encoding process , who have a 'licensed autonomy' (Curr妞， 1990)anda 'discretion“ 盯y power' (Semetko et ι ， 1991) to reframe and reinterpret the information they process and the occurrences they witness. ，九/

In this chapter we focus on three main themes: the different structural

relationship of news orga凶za位ons to political 訂閱a~; jg.urnalists' estimations of source credibility; and戶eiraw前eness oftheiJYaudience and public sensibilities more generallvÚnless otherwise stated, all quota位ons 扭曲is chapter 缸e based on interviews with the authors..

News organizations and news sources Herbert Gans has likened the relationship between joumali你也d their sources tQ 'a dance , for so盯'ces seek access to jo自nali呦， and joumalis的 -i seek access-io 自由而. Although it takes two to tango , ei血er sources or r jo叮nalists can lead , but more often th阻泣的， sources do the leading' )

* 148

See the appendix on methods for more details about these interviews.

149

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli位cal Communication and 也ePolI T;缸

Chapter 6: Journalists and 也ePolI T揖 The distinc位ve structural orientation of 也e local and national media in their news 扭曲ering reveals th甜 different audience , prestige and adv缸" 位sing goals (Tunsta虹， 1971). In Britain, the local and national media 前e to some extent 姐姐笠臨的;.addr間ing and infor帥gthesameauι ences but in different ways. Just as the credib也可 and revenue base of all national media is tièd up in their ab班句 ωarticulate and address national concerns , so local media depend upon local specificity to ensure 血eir distinctiveness from national media , and thereby secure a share of the advertising and circulation market. ---

(Gans , 197年 116). Our research sugge~t;S this metaphor requires fur也er 、人 (J elaborati如何or， although the dance step耳血ay be well defmed and broadly \ rehearsedt:~t all j ournalists pursue (or ar而Ursued by) the same partners, 代 and not all news organizations c姐甜ord (or want) to enter 血e same ballroom. J

尬加叫 e吋j…list 扭恤紛rv吋i…訶 叫吋枷 m bora 帥叫 a帥蚓紀叫d 油伽伽叫 ω∞ e叫 con凶t切帥咖 … en 岫n 品ifii d 能 er 凹 ent 此t 句 type 昀s

ofnews

叮 0 rg 伊 a剖Z 扭 at伽 i切 on 肘s

and journalists produced

曲 the 耐 ira 郎 c酬

ζC~∞ ountωs of 出 the 吋 poll t扭扭 V叮街叫 P枷alenvir…n?四e most

fundamental difference was between national and local mediá. Colin SeymOl甘心're (1987) suggests there exists ahiβrarchy of 'poli位calleadβ~ ~恆盟豆豆豆:Jnt前msofna位onal news medici c。而rage. At its apex are the Government and the parliamentary opposition , who 盯e 部1盯anteed media atten位on and coverage , and ne缸 its base 缸e regionalleaders and auth。ri位郎， whose media presence is more uncertain and intermittent. Although presented as a 'notional ran蚵ng' , this typology neatly captures the legislature orientated na扭扭 of national repor位ng of the Community Charge.

However，恆的knowledg句 th~益也些空空空削a空中ofthe national and local media , it is also important to rec。但izetherewa哇些堅堅俊生些豆豆 between media sectors on this issue. News org~蟬ons always keep-a /õ. j weather eye on other media when reporting events己aíld this practice w船 高誼只而ent 姐也erepor出gofthe 臼mmunityCh前ge. Inevitably, news rooms paid greatest attention to 也e output of their closest competitors , but editorial surveillance also extended to other forms of news media. However, whereas the national media only consistently surveyed national outlets , local media perused both i血血ediate and national media so盯'ces. In this way local media were far 血ore conscious ofnational media agendas than vice versa , where the na位onal media relied on an idi。可ncratic and uneven feedback provided by 'stringers' and local news agencies.

However:_, this ranking needs to be completely_inverted to dβscribe the principalleadersrnp arenas for ~豆豆蛀虫接住~Local government towers over the newsbeats oflocaljo盯nalis血， r冒出er than being confi.ned 的 the per拙eries. Simil訂峙， local voluntary agencies , press盯e groups and con咐他ency MPs have a f，缸 greater news value , whereas national poli位cal 、--、、

-冉一一-~

切地--“"帽，神曲-軒-阻，、-

ν a 帥 rena 岫 1祖 閏sh a 伽 研ve a 帥 叫 a 叫她 e咿 抖討帥 g e吋州 ds 叭s組a 血 叫 lie 抬en 帥 1犯 昀 C e. In 恤 in 叫t紀 帥ervie 削 ws ，哇壘空叫山 new 削s 仰州 prm 叫 ofì枷 帥s部 e 帥s枷 i岫 凹叫 o na l間 臨 a Is 似叫 /

//J

.

JJ r 丸 昀 句 e pe 帥 吋蛤 a t帥 βd 卸 ly 枷s叫 s甜e 吋 叫 dh 枷 州 O wt伽 加 h hei 甜 irnews sel 曲蚓 le

呻 a pplica 油 b血句:于

(，內川‘ τ'Iw叫d份~詠砂枷 b恥eh枷 a呻p即哪棚 叭叭 py 削抓 州 yμ t拍 O叫runs … 叫叫 O咽蚓 me 恤叫 et恤 h陶抽峙g 也制前叫 was 郎 b枷 l旭a叫 枷t恤m 叫 叫 蝴tl 仙 l \冶 缸ndi恤 a nnõwayimpi祖 ng 酹ed

upon the lives of 阱 p eo 呻 ple around here. Even if / it was an issue which was national and would have an impact, 1would want to say “ Well what滾出e special impact around here?" And 血的 test is always applied' (Lo cal radio news editor).

by one of the authors 姐 1970 into the local pr臼s identified the carrying of local 旭formation as one ofthe defi到ng functions oflocal papers (Golding , 1970). 150

v

An other linking mechanism was the information dis缸ibuted to local and national newsrooms 泊的n品也控鹽啞揖~reporting the poll t~"" jo叫nalists from all media identified the Press Association (PA) as beinga P缸ticul盯ly import阻t source of information in their reporting of 也e poll tax - both for editor凶 copy and as a lead for fur血er news gathering. 凶eed， for many 10叫 newspapers with no parliamentary or London stafIv rthe Press Association was the sole source ofimmediate information about / the legislature:

'[Chris] Moncreiff 's [p olitical editor ofthe Press Association] views on it …his interpreta位on and authoritative views 一 would be carried in stacks and stacks of evening papers , almost as holy writ, although not under his by-line' (News editor , regional newspaper).

'The only time we would go to national figures , would be if they happened to be here, visi位ng， or if they also happened to be local people' (political editor, regional TV). * This principle has long applied 包也e local media. For example, rωe訂'Ch undertaken

ν

*

AMO站叮叮 ofn叫ap叫岫 found 伽三~er 叫 ci前副咖尬。也er

newspapers' 的 one ofthe 'most useful sour臼S ofinf()rma位on'ωtheirwork as editors ,

C叫位edwi也叫均可叫 who 叫 a削 E螂蹦份叫間，加州

I I J

151

T臨ation and Representation: The Media, Poli位cal Commn剖開tionand 也ePolI Tax

Most news organiza位ons had also invested 旭 on-line networ坦ng， which pooled informa位on from both intemal and extemal so盯'ces. For example, ..; all regional BBC newsrooms were networked to a computerized message switching sys紀m which gave editors and journalists access 旭to all the 削emal on-line informatiop that the BBC received ce臨a!)y. Through key word searches, news editorscóuld swiftly mo別扭r 叫1 the current agency informa位on on a chosen topic. Regional BBC news editors also regularly received information and guidance from the organization's own P缸" liamentary Research Unit:

Chapter 6: Journalists and the Poll Tax 訂閱 (Gol也ng andEllio仗， 1978) ， andensuresitscont旭世ng news value -

as the prestige correspondents fIle 'e:xp ert' (and e:xp ensive) accounts，血的， by dint oftheir authorship , command editorial priority (Tunstall, op. cit.). The reporting of the Community Charge at nationallev~lwas dominated by two types of specialist newsga也ere￡iocalgovenmeatcorrespondents \.-/ and political specialists (such as po咄咄 correspondents， chief political correspondents and political editors).

..-

Loca1 government correspondents 'They've got everything on fIle in one form or another, a lot of it computerized. Now we can't call it up directly, which is probably just as well. because the complexity of 血的 is so great that we 血ightcallup the wrong things ... If we can't get them on the phone , we get them with姐切n or 缸'teen minutes on a fax machine' 但BC regional TV po詛位cal editor).

Specialist correspondents and news sourc的 The journalist 區terviews also e:xposed how the reporting of different types of joumalists was framed by distinctive political environments. This was most 呻P訂'ent in the reporting of specialist correspondent吃恆 thenation叫 media. By assigning a specialist correspondent to either a subject 缸ea or a physicallocation, a news organization i~~恥t so much casting a news net (Tuchm閉， 1978) , as nailing it to the q由于. The investment 融 a specialist post both reveals a news org祖ization's percep位on of the salience of a subject

152

哇'm always conscious that every time local government comes to the fore , how little we really know about it and the way it works. And that we tend to have to st前t again from squ盯e one. Now that will be addressed ... because in two weeks time we will be appoin說ng a local gove血的orrespondent些些些gwhenourpe吶 appe前 l曲，

bing bricks through windo WSls not actually covering local govem幽 ment. l t's covering Ìlews stories in the time-honourèd fashion' (BBC regional TV news editor). Although several newspapers had had designated local government correspondents for many ye叮s， their increasing proliferation in the national media during the late 198郎， was closely linked to the political furore over the Co mmunity Charge'jFor example , before 1988 , local government issues were covered natii:mally at the BBC by their environment co叮e­ spondents (mirroring the remit of the Depar恤ent of the Environment). '""'However，的 local government 缸ld environmental issues separately，個d coincidentally, rose up the political agenda , it was decided that the post should be split. Furthermore, as these were the days before the advent of bim吋a 的 the BBC 伊rhere radio and TV news gathering have been merge呦， separate localgovernment correspondent posts were established for b6fh television and radio.

By 1991 , under a national BBC initiative entitled 'the enhancement of regional broadcasting' • local government correspondents were also being established in regional BBC newsrooms. The preponderance of bids for local specialists under this scheme reflected bo也 the continued newsworthiness of local govern血e瓜， and a recognition that the poll tax debate had e:xp osed deficiencies in their news gathering. As one regional news editor admitted:

153

Taxa說on and Represen胸前on: The Media, PO加caI Communicaüon 個.d the Poll Tax

i' 1 t\

Chapter 6: Joumalists and 也ePollT阻 be probably the best domestic story ofthis parlia血ent， and it' s turned out to be that'. This pattem is consistent with previous rese叮ch on specialist correspondents (Tunstall , op. 的.; Morrison and Tumber , 1985; Negrine , 1993;Seymo盯-Ure， 1977).

'There was a certain feeling at a network level that the poll tax st。可 sort of crept up on them. And I think that, in part, the arrival ofthe local govemment correspondent can be attributed to that sense thattheBBC hadn't got its e盯包到te so closely to the ground as it might have …It's also a recognitio~ that l~cal~ovemment 皇nance is perceived as being,

Not surprisingly，的 generate specialized knowledge，也ese correspondents

con幽幽gtobe， mM函雨雨“兩崩悴，

devel句ed塑且些空空間會坐s.A 郎蚓 s叫10叫 g 酹 ovemm 即 阻 e 凶tc n ∞ orre 間悶 e旬咖 OI蜘郎 i姐 nI

ofI

,. .

FV-1-1pγt

h( 4 、 d們川J人

i9

15~生

~

.J/J:7 r/ 又

的 ar叫 of 帥 d岫岫einforma伽 netw忱伽屯的pec恤U both 研ticipated

the likely salience of the poll 組x issue earlier than other r哪位ters福特前胸哇哇 interest in the issue for ì'ãi: 10起r.Fur也er­ more , they reveru叮而roader perception of the issues surrounding the implementation of the Community Charge, and were more sensitive to its attendant technicalities. As one specialist explained: 'Its very difficult.宜'ransitional relief I'11 缸Y to explain as a system whereby the Govemment protβcted people who were going from a very low rates bill or a comparatively low rates bill to a very high household poll tax. But SSAsl I mean, transitional relief was easier than SSAs. SSAs - people just glaze over at the very mention of them and you cannot get editors interested in them. I me妞， even now, I w部 onthe phone talking about “this is the great unwritten story about the poll 祖x system" ... The fact is that the Governme帥， civil servants living 姐 Whitehall, make up a formula about what they think councils need to spend, and in most c,ases it relates to nothing near their view of what 也ey need to spend .~ Rebates as well are quite di血cult to put across on television , because , you know, rebates in principal sound simple enough , but when you actually look at how they work, it can get very complex.'

/JJJf7Jf vJ

叮/代 ZJ

not all news media had , or sought to acquire , specialist local govemment correspo~e抖s during this period. For example , both, Chan\,;1\ ~nel.i盟主取p.ews ha1iB~sωh correspondents d盯扭gthemost 鷗nsive stages ofthe political dèJj á富的話盲工夠在~instance their absence reflected the hisωrical (and increasing) financial pressures on independent television news and current affairs and their continued com血itment to generalist news gathering, in spite of the Birtian revolution at the BBC, which saw joumalistic specialism as playing a vital role in rectifying an endemic ‘bias against understanding' in television news (McN尬， 1994).

一

the national media were excluded from the parliamentary lobby, their governmental contacts mainly focused on its executive branches at the Department of the Environment. Beyond W趾teha11， their m副n re訊ù缸 sources included politicians and 0血cers of the national local authori句 associations , local authority research units , a sma11 number of local govemment acaqemics , specialist press盯e groups and na位onal volunt缸y organizations~ Interestingly, despite their designatio口，也eir direct contact with local au也orities was 些企eque帥， and tended 切 be facilitated via the national offices of the various local authority associations. Certainly, whilst their newsbeat was fi前 broader than those of the political specialists at Westminster , it still centred around the capital.

子

(如 emerge間 ofthe 10叫 governm叫咖伽list during this peri was 冶金80 evident in the national broadsheet press. Although sever aYnewspapers had had designated local govemment correspondents well before the advent of the Community Charge , the political furore over its implementation saw greater emphasis placed on the pos t. For example çme local government specialist wo蜘g for a nation叫 broadsheet note仙at J斗的也his appo姐回ent in 1989 there had been 'a 向耳聽蛙型豆豆Lof 吧~erage' of local government, due to the varying status of the local govemment corre恥ndmt-Et啞巴us correspondent had been 恥 ployed on,_'a part 位me specialist basis and for a short period. And then before thafffi豆苗 was a 滔滔d when we had nobody at all covering local govemment' . Ofco世凹，

L-

可

I I ! 155

Taxation and Representation: The Media, PO恤間l Commu別扭位onand 也ePolI T但 These journali船昌平o hadqmFfnmmmffh也咎由REEHgxIto

i the introduction oì'the new t路;--more readily lin坦ngittoe缸lier attempted ! / and actual reforms of the local financial syste學

Chapter 6:

Journ祉ists

and the Poll T:但

politicians (Tuns tall , 1970; 1971). Nowadays , theJnost prestigious politi- .; cal correspondents are the lobby corresponden郎， whoare: 一一一一

‘... specialists in the public face of central government power, assessors ‘ 8ixmon也s

ago 1 actually met the man who wrote 血e 1981 Green Paper ... And it had two interesting appendices. One was an appendix on why the poll tax wouldn't work alone ... and the second one was an appendix on financing the education service cen仕ally which , both of which became absolutely key in debates later on. 80 1 me妞， soIhad quite a large background in local government and perhaps was unusual in terms ofthin坦ng “ oh this is an important issue" as opposed to simply on the basis of “howis 也isgo姐g 切 affect my readers?" full stop. “Well we don't know so what's the point in writing about it at the moment?" , (Local government correspondent).

ofreputations, students ofp缸ty dynamics , cri泣的 of ministerial perforCabinet and 也e wider 缸enas' (Henessey and W剖ker， 1987: 112). mance 旭 Parliament，

e耳>eriences

oflobby correspondents 祖 reporting the Community Charge, among political specialists.

becauseof 血eir élite status

Political specialists: 'The big issues, local government wise' 'Good Lo rdl 1 don't really get 姐volved in local government, p缸位cu­ not terribly much. 1 do the big issues , local government wise …My function around here is to report what the government of the day does , what 也eopposi位on say, and that sort ofthing' (Political editor, na位onal newspaper).

l缸ly.lme凹，

(叭叭… pondents in th心 flected contemporaneous domestic po加cal developments, t區區石l出己吋 崢訴五再示 M d 恤s切伽E叮 yof 句p s 伊 恥 eci 叫stp 仰 oli 岫位叫 C ∞ 仰叫 O rres 叮間 昀呻 spo 叫 nd 伽 削 m 蚓tp 仰叫 s咐 ts 間的 t聖賢些型壁壘堅堅堅!!J>f

the Bri位sh mass media with the le到slatureyD凹的 Britain's highly cen----:函區區后示tlcâlsy正正正函國聶哥示:戶口dents are first and foremost ( parliamentary correspondents) (This principle generally applies even where -local media have their own specialist designated political correspondent, or where a political correspondent is 'pooled' amongst a collective group on local newspapers.) The first political correspondents were gallery reporters , who observed and recorded parliamentary debates and governmental decisio研making. However , over time , interest increased in generating a 'b~坦dthe:哩星空nes' understanding ofparlia血βntary processes and decision削making that could ----oIiIy "beprovided by journalists having more direct and informal acce單 to 156

Lobby correspondents' .reporting of the Community Ch前ge was informed by a very different range of sources from those used by local government correspondents. Their privileged but cloistered e油tence meant they were princ句ally dependent on governme1!t al and p訂ty poli位Cal sources 恤 repor出g the tãi, and苗苗苗只CCãslûri8.ï兩制論日ther茄滔alnews so叮ces， such as the local站在õritÿãssôè1漏斗~The'ñ滔滔丘吉已這首面証 ~五百lI1益主c newsbeat was not exceptional , but ra也er indicative of the 仕a祉， tional parochialism of the parliamentary specialists (Tunstall, 1970). When their contacts were broadened, it was generally because a nonP缸liamentary political source had brought their argument to Parliame肘， often with the support of an MP: """'--心自由-一切叫“--明自悟--

'[The Anti Poll Tax Federation] had good solid links with Dave Nellist and a couple of Merseyside MPs and 8cot M恥， so they got the opportunity of getting in …People like [8teve] Nally and Tommy 8heridan came in and gave press conferences in the House to 郎， to the likes of 郎， (Political correspondent). One particularly important element 姐 their repor位ng was their opportaw onc些也坐史性些世控迦單如 inform their pol出ca1r analyses. Not surprising旬，。也er specialis的 werevecy:且即以lS ofthe privi- \v leged access lobby correspondents had to the legislature , reω函血gthat \ it providec( unique insight)into the evolving political debate: / ，~ 阻MWto

a

\ /

157

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli位cal Commnnication and the Poll Tax

Chapter 6:

'There 缸e

difIerences between my posi位on and the more privileged of a lobby correspondent oJ. a political correspondent, who is f actually 扭曲e lobby, has access td 囚ep盯ties at closer hand, who can get ofI the rec叫叫哥凶叫at. 1 mean , 1 feel 1 ought 帥的血的 in '\ asense , because I'mmissing out. Ihave 切 go ofI the back of something coming from the lobby, ra也erthange組ng it myself. But that' s just the way the system works' 扎ocal government correspondent).

‘One could never persuade them to explain the problems of 也ea叫個 lect晶晶旬，

for example. They didn't think that was important. Unfairness? They could get a hold of that' (Conservative MP , interview with authors).

,0)

As explained in Chapter 丸 thelo空空y briefings were 0叫yr缸elyused to ease the introduction of the 個玖姐d when1n茍 were itwas m訟nly_使主空空空一

8econd， becaus~t恆地sreg叫 forth~空空姐到些世血~_!gpic. poli位c叫九 correspondent(!已wtheissue 嬰 far less problematic and complex to report 戶 than the local government specialists:jAs one poli位cal editor put it: \

、_b~~J~瞎想β伽. Howev訊 dudRF峙的ERZEfpm空空~ry:悍的alua­ ~些竺些Eiofs， thesebrie1月s assume~)l c楞住吧， role，坡 all叫臂，聽ÏI!!Sters

reform op ti,dns for their

bro時r poli做些些學t-

'The thing about Mrs Thatch缸， she did explain things , extremely succinctly. 8he could actually say the poll tax is about ma姐ngs肘e 也at everyone who can pays towards the services that 也ey use. That ./ W由 how she would se盟 iç. Which is a fairly simple concept. And Labour's concept, the oppósi位on's concept w路 verÿ much it is unfair and is unworkable. 80 once you've got those tw姐 sort of concepts it's actually quite straigh旺orward.'

的也可.

6

Q

The main significance of the 'behind the scenes' access of lobby co甘心 spondents prior to 血et紹's introduc位on 坦 England and Wales was in ( sensi位sing news organ崗位ons tb the extent of dissent wi也in Conservative 'r anks. Many l!?ck_þ~Il，ch Co~ervat!y:e MPs gply ‘went public' with the廿 criticism安 once the political crisis had escalated out ofthe Government's ld been_[rivately co甲醇unicating_!:~空空空旦旦虫91 onsiderahlÿïõñg叮perio誼通亟區也~all~ dents who were

戶/

4九』扭扭q扭扭扭---司"呵呵--由聊_'----且-'

Oαfωa 剋 all 也伽蚓 e叫j抖oumali 枷 s呦 t俗s，〈品彷拘(白￡仰仰已豆沁均凶!♂叩咖枷 耐址i枷t位恤iβ閒叫空叫l♂主空哩哩空哩哩些哩哩空堅愕咖空 4 咖p仰咖 9 o旺仰E叫

proc臼es吋srat晶 he叮rt也 ha 阻 nt出 h汪 hs叫 ubs 岫 s“t飢 :anc凹eoft血 he(臼 p缸句助) po 必 lit伽 ica 叫ld 由ebat臼ea 曲 bou 叫 1必tloca 剋1

3.boutthe臨宜宜否i

ed wisdom in th( 自『巴剖-一-巴巴-一~、-一一一~

1、

This narrow but pr!JQl eged news gathering had a direct efIect on th耐 / J L" j ~βport旭g of the taxi First旬， they experienced greater difficulties in dealing /仙JHcryμwith the more arca占 a恥cts oflocal 缸lance. Ir的ed，叫e叫 ofthemost ":fN' r _~音 。-一一~，. 汁\ι>:r ~'V ;", ~7 prominent parliamentary figures involved in the debate were highly criti\,_' )快" calofhow、sinformed several senior political correspondents were about some of its-most crucial aspects: 二 Jl;

'Local govemment fmance is a minefield. It's such a technical area that many people shy away ... 1 understand that. But the media ob討ously take that view as well. We've had great êlimculties with people like [NationalτV Political Correspondent] who s凶plycan些少derstand anything to do with local government finance …Because üyou've got to spend an hour eve可位me explaining the most minute point 個 a journali仗. you actually lose the ability to respond qUickly , to get across

and the Poll T;盟

a wider message , and that has been a genuine problem' (Oþposition local govemment spokesperson , interview with authors).

posi位on

向全二巨型向電 various

Journ叫ists

0

ß 叮叮/

finance. One implication of this , was that their a仗en位on to the issue w部 V

Ö'a r more tr豆豆豆i凹的han the local government speciaUsts. They discovered the issue 扭捏些~its legi如ive timetable , and bec堅堅h空空 withitfi盯 sooner, once the Conservative leadership issue had been resolved, and the Tory rebellions assuaged. Finally, the percep位ons and newsgathering activi位，es of 也盟的扭扭捏~\

一兵也型叫:s exerted a powerful 哩些豆豆豆 over the 里暫且豆豆豆堅但也~l

(their news organizations towards the issu,è . The fact that allnational media had specialist political corresponden鉤， even üthey had few other designations , reveals the higher status of this specialist field compared with others (Tunstall, 1970). And whereas severallocal govern血ent correspondents complained about the dissonance between their interest in the tax and the 1 general news agenda oftheir organizations - particularly during early and later stages of the policy~cycle - political correspondents experienced no equivalent frustrations(Indeed，切 a large extent, it was their reading ofthe political salience of thè issue that determined the broader newsroom

~

/

158

/

159

hxation and Representation: The Media, Political 臼mmunication and the Poll Tax

Chapter 6:

p

agenda. In other words , the, po姐說cal specialists 也主he 旭terpretative framew叫 wi恤 which local government corresponden的 had 切 W叮叮

的ted

in recording p訂ty poli位cal responses 切 the policy. Furthermore, although both types of correspondents revealed a similar degree ofinterest 恆 the effects of the policy , for the political specialists these were almost exclusively construed in electoral termJo whereas local government co虹b spondents presented them in broader terms (e.g. 'w旭ners and losers' and service provision).

vReporting 蝴叫ons It is important to consider whether the manifest differences between specialists 姐 their newsgathering on this issue had any impact on their report旭g. As Negrine notes, one ofthe most neglected aspects in a dearth of research into journalistic specialization is ‘the relationship between the designa的onandtheendproduct' (1993: 3).

Table 6.2. Themes in specialist correspondent coverage on TV and radio news (1 March - 5 May 1990)

Table 6.1(Actors feature,din specialist corr吻。ndent authorized items in national TV & radio news (1 M位ch 也 5 May1990)

Politlcal

~.

Parliamentary/government actors

"----'印曲曲。路一

Local government officers Local government assoclatlo吋ressure

groups Oplnion poJlsoors and 0也.errese訂'ch

specialists

%

%

93 22

71

f、IE

1是

3 22 15

Number ofiOOms

(153)

{住8)

古兩ωrrespo些啟示函可前函海高諾亞函諭函字叫扭扭7(詣的Efe

%

%

Origlns

6

% 6 16 13 13

Number of themes coded

speclalists

11 4 31 「的

_47

2

,

éõì '141

361

Flgures relaOO to news 閥d feature IOOms 旭 pollt阻 IOOms [related and 僻的ed]. Up to four 也emω ∞叫d be coded for each 100m. Percentages 言 frequency of appearance/aggregate of them的 coded (aJl fi訊rres 訂'e rounded). Perceptions ofnews 甜甜'ce credibility 的 ournalist contact with news sources differed locally and nationally，個d betweenp缸ticul訂 types of correspondents, how did journalists generally

view the performance and credibility ofthe ma恤阱。旭ganists in the poli品 cal debate? As Tuchman (1978) observes, the perceived credib也可 of a /news source ~ cru 叫 1 、 This section is divided 祖 intωo 枷 two， and begins by looking at journalistic perceptions of the credibility of key ‘advocates' in the debate. It then identifies who journalists elected as 也V盯biters' ofthis policy debate.

Flgures relate to news 阻d feature iOOms [p oll t阻 related 也d focused]. Percentages 話也e percentage ofiooms authored whlch feature at least one actor under each category. The p仗的ntages 訂'esep訂aOO and do not add up to 100. Our study revealed cle缸 differences in how specialist corr(jspondents reported the poll tax , particularly in television news repor位ng!-Reflβctingthe distinctive news gathering of both specialisms, news stories by poli位cal speciali暫時前例 anarrow叮 rang障。fpolitical viβwsthanlo站滸鼠"

Loc al government

忍ll'ects

4 19

Other voluntary sector groups Unions General public Other (e.g. other professlonals. journ到ists)

Antlpoll 純正 groups

Poli位cal 帶ecl祉ists

vM能rnatlvesωtaxlexplanatlons

~一

10 4 4 2 2 23 23

Buslness 阻.dbus泌的sfederatlo凶

Themes related to:

Governmentlparliament decislon-maklng Lo calgov前2血ent Implementatlon Responses

Lo cal government

speci叫ists

Journalis臼 and the PolI T阻

Advocates v'

的 weoutlined 旭 Chapter 11:.之豆豆到豆豆~are

those news sources who 缸e recognized by 血e news media as having an overt Í1J.~rest in a politic~ vrocess~世gy.tcome. As a controversial policy with far reachiIig ramificatio肘， the Co mmunity Charge excited a diverse range of opinions from a considerable v缸iety of poli位cal sources. However, our content analysis has shown that 也e(main protaganists 垣血edia coverage were the two

‘

。

一一句自由一一一-:--.一一一呵呵自/

6.1). By doing so ，也ey also emphasized different themes in their repo此恤g

local government corr四pondents spent more 位me repor位ng 的pects of central government dβcision-making and local imple血entation of the reforms , politiβal correspondents were more inter(see Table 6.2).

160

Where訟s

161

Taxation and Representation: The Media, PO益的cal Communi闊前on and the Poll Tax

Chapter 6: Journalists and the Poll Tax

main political p前說es (whether nationally or 10cally). In this section we open this point up a litt1e fur也缸， by 100king at how journalists assessed the performance of these key advocates in the political debate, and what fac的rs were seen to have increased or undermïned their salience or credibility. Because ofthe strong 1inks between 'maverick' Labour ac位vistsand externa1 campaign groups , we also comp缸'ejo盯ualis位cpercep位onsofthe credib血ty and significance ofthe an位 poll tax move血ent.

。也er

v
when askedto assess the COIlservativeparty'sperformance inpromo位ng thepollt睬， journalists 祉most exclusive1y referred to fJ overnmental actions , 全')' rather than those of Conservative Central Office. This mirrored the 穹 j preferred promotional stra時y of the Conservative 1eadership, who only -'-/ 1atent1y utilized their party poli位cal resources , when the issue had become poli位cally unavoidab1e.

1k

/乙、

伽 O n 訟昀 p叫叫耐1eve 叫 e

wha 前tt也 he 叮 ypercei卸.ve 叫 da 臼sthei泊 ne 句 p位缸旭ld 由 eoft也 he Governmer 叫 I此t's publicit 句 ywork.

In p 缸tt血 恤 h i泌 sr 扭 ef且lecte 缸 吋 d a 10ngstanding c.戶i泌 ci泌sm about the efI蚯ìcie 阻 nc 句 y ofthe Governmen 凶t's information services , which the comp1exities and controversies over the co血munity Charge only served to highlight. P缸位恥cu 岱" M l趾 缸剖1甘 yfru 叫 1

t切 o

civil 臼 se凹a 阻 ntωs 恤 their 恤 inf必 'ormat說ion seeking. As one 10ca1 government 一correspondent comp1ained: 'Throughout the entire period 1 actually felt 1 knew a 10t more about what was go姐g on in the Department of the Environment than the press office did. 1 know that sounds boastful, but 1 mean it was the fact formostofthetime …The press office were only as good as the time 也at the local government fmance division [at the DoE] were prepared to answer queries from the press office ... 1 think their patience especially, basically went - dried up - and the rela位onship between the DoE press office and local government 0血cials was gradually dis姐tegrat迦g.'

k叫 journal愉 we的叫ularly cr枷:♂恥圳手恥圳of 蚓n咖 form 叫 n t位ion 企 fk油 的 O血 t由 h空 rfg 鼠;io ∞ nal 仰 governmen 叫t 呦 0 懿C.9"

On the one h~d， 也is was 必必幽血趾伽 cien 叫枷 t“sp吋 and 叫he because they專制 to release information with su

162

because they were unab1e to provide access to senior po且也ians 'on

thes個血p' 恆 their 盯ea: 咕:

'[Information] comes a day late from regional 0血.ce. Why do 也ey bother ce由oring it? If it is important we've had it faxed direct1y from 也e Department concerned. The regional office get this great wodge of paper in and send it out again the next day, a day 1ate, so it' s been in all 也e nationals that morn恆g， or it's been on the To ifo. y program血ethat morn旭g. I' m not about to c叮叮 something the following morning 臨的's gone everywhere. Complete waste oftime. And they're also no good at ge位ing access to m坦isters. Theoretically you actually go to 也emandsay “please， you know, so and so' s up here 的血orrow， can we have an interview with h旭?" You know you can do 也atbutnobody pays you too much notice. It' s be位er to deal with the Depar祖lent direct旬，扎oca1 radio news editor). However, there were also~specific elements ofthe Governinent' s promotion of the t凹 that created ~. deep and abidingly negative impressio吵旭 the -/ media. Initially this related 區區}函íngcontr函誣指而ëÎÏtli可retensions and slickness of the DoE public relations campaigns 缸ld the unrec侃" structed profùe of the sponsor姐gm姐ister:

‘Nick Ridley famously had~ concept of pres削枷nal 此ills whatsoever …80 1 mean you had the two sides 切 it. On the one hand , you have this immense marketing opera位on … whowere 仕y姐gto sell the Community Charg~n the other hand, you had a 8ecretary of 8tate who had absolutely, was , you know, nilpoint on the question ofm缸ω keting , an社 didn't care about it at all' (Local government correspondent).

.....

Bey叫伽jf也e political furore)over 伽 Government' s nation叫 publi吻 。ffensive in May 1989

offered an important early indication of the political difficulties the tax would encounter. On one level, this w部 because of its 手 farcical and shambolic aspects:

‘When they were distributing the poll tax leaflets ... 1was told, perhaps off the record, that they were seriously thinking of sending John Gu血" mer up to a monastery dressed as a monk to make the point that, of 163

T臨a位on and Representation: The Media, PO岫阻1 Communication and the Poll T，缸

course, monks are exempt from the poll tax. But they never got around to that' (Local government correspondent).

Chapter 6:

Journ祉ists and the Poll Tax

revealed 切 the

journalists by the way the policy 旭 practice appe缸'ed consistently to confound Government predictions. As a tax intended to ex 耳 poωse 曲 th哇吱 1 壘些ispa 盯 ri均 t句 y between Labour pr 叩 ofl 甜ig 伊 ac 句 y and Con 郎 間 s erva 甜討伽 ve p盯s 峙 •i mony in local government, the fact that several Conserva位ve authorities set polI臨 levels well in excess of :t:400 merely旦控哩哇旦控控g ~ti~扭血.in_t~生m~Q.i.J!..that had begun with the repeat冶d revisions upwards of Government projec位ons oflikely Community Charge levels: 、-、~巴、-旬一 F旬}巴峙一-戶咀-一且"一咀-一血』咱-咱-咀一-巴~咱h 吋晶缸扭司-一_-句叮哨~--~向羽也一--叮-句-句-司-戶，白、--句臼-叫向、哼臼耐-一-哺心-

輛

‘I 阻ppose the peak of it was when they produced 也e “You and the Community Charge" leaflets , with the happy smiling toy-town folks on - it was yellow, wasn't it? And they had one black smiling dustman ... 'c' 1 mean it got absurd at some press conferences , where if you asked a question which contained the word “poll tax" , you were 也en delivered al0m垣utelec他reon “how dare you use words like poll tax?" Which was ， youjust 恆ndoffe祉， t坦sistimewas位ng' (Politicalcorrespondent).

i

On 叫herle叫 be叫叫 伽缸阻叫叫叫， 扣抑 j抖Ot 伽叫 rrn波 位on

-戶-白，間恥砂-句叫、切鴨、，旬-心-司晦叮

、“巴“-哺.，

of public funds:

'1 think that people really did feel that they were using public money to promote Co nservative policy. And if there w部 one single issue which triggered it 1 would now ...的臨時 that at!!í.旭dth的 wasth自趾st mistake1th旭k. 1th姐k it could have been handled much more intelligently. Curious旬， probably by making better use of the local media as it removes you , it takes you a step away, so that you're not seen as doing a public promotion of a p前tic叫缸 party political policy. That was the first thing 也可倒 wrong， wasn't it? Well 1 think it was a non starter after that. 1mean it' s like actually having the first eight batsmen knocked out in the first two overs and you're stuffed thereafter' (Local radio news edi切r).

,,__--

/

'The original plan was for :t:l 5 0 , which again is about a ratβs billisn't \--it? 300 quid for a couple , you can just about cover that, people could affordthat …And it stepped up and each stage it became :t:200 , :t:250 , 也en， you know, you thought “Jesus , this is big trouble" ... By the time ，\/也ey had 450 q叫d， or whatever it was , for Windsor, it was too late , 也ere was no going back' (Political correspondent). Furthβrmo間，

having been told that charge levels should be the sole bar亡堅堅扭扭位世豔iency.of a local authority (and be姆 I世gely Ùll姐terest吋 祖 thβbroader fiscal context 恤 which charge levels were set) journalists

起幽凹臨睡哩史坐空空空空tra伽alizati啥也at且也豆益密ëIS 恤 Conservative 的as mreq些且投控空空叮空空eralDemo位at 即興" ←i空空yatcountycoundhveLQEwematmpor盯y consequence of也esafety

netarmgemmu.Fmmmyjounduts， thG 站ghpoll t血 levels 姐 many Conserva位ve 缸eas

↓

drove a且要!1lpiriβalstake 姐to the heart of 也eGovern­

ment' s rhetoric. Another majqr.factor tþ_at seriously compromised the Governmen_t' s credib血旬， was its;;irÍ.ab逝世 tQ command support from its own p缸ty.;At local

V

level , the Government'g 'top down' promo位onal strategy meant that the received Governmental endorsements were drowned out for 'local journalists by the constant criticisms from the Conservative grass roots. At nationallevel , the haemorrhaging of internal support - first from the left ofthe P缸旬， andla前erly from the right and the senior echelons of the Government-served 旭 asimilarw呵， to portray the Pri血e Mi凶terin an isolated posi位凹， and 的 being less interested in rational policy making than in ideologïcal zealotry: 恤金equently

'There was th的 famous time when at a conference , when [Margaret Thatcher] said …“the Minister has failed to get the message across". 1 think Michael Howard was sitt旭g beside her at the time. Now that is just sheer , downright patronising' (Political correspondent). In general , journalis臼叫血的 promotional diffic啥叫~ym哩些也t

c 16~生

thep也些空空空bJ~e Governme 耐恥前TlîìSwas most fundamentally

'It was politics ofthe crassest level. And itwas absolutely, youknow, it was ideology driven... There's a Government Minister, just outside of cabinet. Been with the Department of the Environment. And he said to

165

Ta:xation and Representation: The Media, Poli位cal Communica位.on and the Poll T缸 me , you didn't even raise the subject when she w倒 there. Because he said you' djust get your head blown off. He said it got to 也es個gewhere you didn't even raise the ques位on' (Poli位cal correspondent). For many journalists the vehemence

and 呵些t

of C空空空恤金旦前恥

ν./ diss空gtonthet路 wasoneof 也e most consistently newsworthy 堅pects of__-And 血泊 perceived significance 函而已ly affected how viewed the Government' s proclamations on the Community Charge , but also those of their political opponents.

Chapter 6: Journalists and the Poll Ta:x team. The Liberal Democrats have been , frankly , not that active , at least not 的 my knowledge. And l' d be getting more s仙ff from Labour 血an 1 have from them' (Local government correspondent). 'In political p缸位es， Labour's local government operation 1 always found fairly impressive' (Political correspondent).

---ule wholéâè服te. jo囚nalists

In thelo叫 media， too~些盟監控!但 was seen as hav怯ghad 哩堅堅一 ~主些空空間 on the terms

of political debate about the issue:

-

j

J

(The juxtapg_~ition of -p叮叮- op凶onJ is one of 也e key \,. -/" / -, 甜ategies used by _,..

]ournalist吶。 constructtheirimpartialityandobjectivib-ThereforeJtwas 姐evi個ble

tñat Labour politicians would be perceiveâ 的 one of the most sources of dissenting comment 0學也e tax and its effects. However , as discussed in Chapter 妥， thβpoll t~!s9 split 也e Labour Party oyer

prom旭ent

工10叫Mhd拉伯盟t..QP-posed. 古民蒜苔7雨雨滋晶石崎 jo函函的

appraisals ofLabour's credibili旬， it is important to m剋n姐姐 a distinction between official and maverick Labour so肘ces. v-

'J

.()

0

-1

位、、

、' 、

、/

At the ti血e of the interviews (l ate 1991 to e缸ly 1992) ，。血cial Labour sources were gen叫lyseenasha由超世里坐竺空位空!Lon local government matters than the Conserva位ve leadership. Here ag到泣， we have a me酪盯e of the extent of the Thatcher government' s political failure over the poll tax, for such a situation would have been difficult to foreseen back in the mid廿 80s where Conservative attacks on the ‘loony 1帥'~in local 的福而自ent were being widely amplified by local 也d national media.

仁、If也.e political rehabili扭tionofLabo肘， s reputation in 也is area was largely linked 的 the

Government's political

diffic叫ties，技 was

also

a世ed

by an

a 之 acknowledgement 曲的輕型ty had played its hand q凶型性迪生 For t 、 example，

several national journalists specifically commended the organiz戶 ation and effectiveness of Labol芯's local government team in Parliament in raising key issues:

‘Probably

the most vociferous campaign against [the Commu剖ty Charge] has come from David Blunkett and his office , who have bom/b叫edeve咖1叫than 唾亞運函誣誨的RKM個臨的L the poll t臨. They've been very good …Blunkett has a good research 166

Labo肘 P盯ty were actually much cannier in their PR because had a very simple message and 也ey stuck to that utterly, simple message , and kept on banging on about it ad nauseum. Which is that it' s an unfair tax. And if you were to identify one Tory message l' d be hard put to say “自is was the message". The Labour party, 1 could tell you thatwas 也e message , no question. And 1 think that ifyou go out on the street and ask anybody what w臼 their message …mostpeople in the s仕eet would identify 血的 as the single , very clever, one line. Punchl Punchl Punchl 80 it goes i跤，包ocal radio news edi切r).

'The

恥 Lab叫州

也ey

However, journalists also sh缸ed the view that Labour hadn't had a di盟" cult hand to play - particularly when their criticisms were supported by cri位cs from within 也e Government's own p盯ty. Furthermore , although ;journalists perceived Labour P缸ty views as an important component in 'J ~ï the reporting ofthe political debate , in isolation they were seen 也 be旭g f;缸 ó less newsworthy than Conservative criticisms: ‘ [TheCommu凶ty Charge] became inextricably linked with the politics of the future leadership 一 the post-Thatcher leadership of the ConservativeP缸ty.80 也at was an ingredient which complicated it and took it away from being just a local government issue ... It was no longer just a question of Labour banging th位 heads ag位nst another brick wall , which sort of didn't get anywhere, however much they may have won 出e argument' (Political correspondent). '1 也旭k [Labour]

conducted it well , but 1 think the things that defeated it was the kind of enemy within. The lack of support from within her ownp前紗， and doubts among ministers which finally killed it. 1 mean the Opposition can do as much as they like , but 1 think 也eywageda 167

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Politi間1 臼mmuni個組onand 也ePolI Tax successful,1 would say a broadly successful campaign coupled with the doubtswith旭仰argaret Thatcher' s] own p叮叮， (Political editor). As we discuss in the next chapter, the subordinate news value ofLabour to Conservative dissent had a profound efl'ect on the conduct and 姐tensityof media coverage .

.,/"

Al油ough 伽凹的 werebmaym句tive 切枷似lLabourP叮叮 cam﹒

P句也g志可高尚興阻題空空空ti旦控坐坐EEBehfEE史pwh

supported more radi侃lme也ods. Maverick sources in the Labour P叮叮 wl前古玩研正面站哥哥t而茄茄宙seen as far less cre的世世J ν/ attracted outrig:EïfIïOs組~from many national and 10晶石泣豆豆王五F one 面前回a political editor asserted:

‘Very few people down here have got time for MPs who refuse 的 obey the law which they as a body created'. Their credibi扭ty in the eyes oftþe national media was further compromis~d by their close links with the(All Bri位sh Anti Poll Tax Federation (APTF)';\ which many journalists viewèù with considerable suspicion and antagoQi九 今~.... Ism. nu

x

﹒即

p

可

r加 /

\>

a

m

We previously_!loted that whereas the national media readily subscribed to the view thatJ an位 poll t位 groups were stal坦ng horses for 也eex仕emeleft， such conspiÌ勘y 也eo~s were less evident 旭 local report埋Z﹒ From our 恤rviews it appe:缸ed that the 高品加誼sc1ì茹苦叮Iay 恤 the difl'erent contact each media sector had with the movement. tax movement as a whole was 叩 informal and devolved and unions had a considerable degree of autonomy. As we have seen , attempts to unify groups under one national federation generated con仕oversy within the movement it甜甜瓜though the Militant-dominatβd APTF assumed the nationalleadershiþ mantle 旭 late 1989 , their au也ority to speak on behalf of the movement as a whole was often questioned by Federation membe間， who shared broader concems about the hidden agenda to the ac位vism ofthe Federation's committee (Burns , 1992). rThe

an位 poll

campaign，旭 which local groups

168

Chap伽 6:

Journalists and the Poll Tax

Despi臼 their ，ques位onable status as th~型ionalforum for the movement; 也e

anti poll tax

..l Æn'l"'"Ò、m Militant-dominate d( AP__TI')vere the only regular po區t of

contactna加da前面函忘茲在最æfuhe broader camp到gn. Altho時hthe s仕idency and forcéfulness of com吽e臨 by t 4,e Federation's two 血也 spokespersons often made for good 呻ws copy( all the national journallsts ,J_ - -_ we interviewed were highly scep位c澀 about bòth their political mandate and iniluence. This w部 accenuated by the context in which 也e most iniluential 崗tional correspondents met 也e Federation spokespersons , at news conferences held within the Houses of Parliament. These brought into sharper reliefwhat correspondents perceived as the.扭appropriateness andpresump位on ofthe APTF ‘leaders':

，_""'"由-呵呵呵-一-一，一一-由自岫扭扭-

‘My view of the Anti Poll Tax Federation was 垣nd of moulded somewhat by sitting here at Wes恤inster … Where 也e Anti Poll Tax Federa位on generally meant press conferences chaired by Dave Nellist , with Tommy 8heridan or other members of Mili tant , in a small com血出ee room upsta恤， claiming 切 speak on behalf of seven million, eight million , nine million non payers , anti poll tax campaigners' (Poli位cal correspondent). The parliamentary setting ofthese news conferences both served 切 decon­ textu叫ize and accenuate the j 盯'ring nature ofthe Federation's rhetoric of street politics and community activism. As another political correspondent commented: '1 personally was te叮ibly antipathetic towards their posi位on. 801 found it very diffic叫t to swallow ... My feelings about them was that 也ey were political charlatans. They weren't in there entirely because 也ey wanted to see the back of the poll t紹， they were in there to sort of ferment th旭gs ... [Tommy] Sheridan was , 1 thought, was quite Ïmpressive. But [8teve] Nal旬， 1 thought, yeah , 1 wouldn't 仕ust 恤masf:叮 as 1 could throw 血e gr祖ny (I'll now find out he's your brother or somet姐ng).'

The antipathy ofnational journalists towards the APTF was also framed by a deep disapproval of the non payment tac位c. As one political editor observed:/ '1 went to the odd news conference they threw down here , but once it W部 very patently plain and obvious that they intended 切 break the law, 1 th旭k that a lot of people lost interest 姐 it …And ofco盯se it 169

Ta芷ation and Representation: The Media, PoliticaI Communication and the Poll Tax

mean崢atpe吶 who 帥't 椰叫慨 won't pay - or wh酬er the slogan was - put a burden on other peop1e who sort of obeyed the 1aw and paid up. 品， a 10t ofpeop1e down here - most peop1e - had very little time for the Anti Poll Tax Federa位0咚.because they m l'!de it 訴訟nly obvious that 拉eyi的ndedtpbreaktheLaw-S凶神的 th9-Ì:.'

v{Although 10cal journalists simil缸ly disapproved of non-paym啦，也ey I

had more regular and direct contact wi也 local anti poll t阻 groups ， and were f ;;rr less sceptical ~bout their representative status. This was mainly ( beca正正河而起訴而后 groups' community based a枷ism frrst hand,

I

;也也主寧可可恥于ratì:ïèrthan

decontex:tualized 姐 small parliamentl主ry meeting roo,ms. In these situV/ationsthey found the yentamob'stemtypes less easy to apply.EU呻吟 more，也βy were more regu1arly approached by the groups themse1v吋 As onelo自lradio journalist commented: _~

.c.

V

170

'Perhaps if you were sitting in Broadcasting House in London and you saw a poll tax protestor , that would appe前 to be something threatening and something alien from outside. In Bradford we could see 血的 there were a lot ofpeop1e who were suffering very real hardship , who literally couldn't pay under the proposals as they were initially put forward ... First of all [the local anti poll tax grqups] were co-operative. And secondly, 1 也旭k it is true to say that it was a genuinely mass movement in this area. You 叫ways get the 豆些控恆星;許咐S些~ However, the thing that has been different about the poll ta丸 inmy view, is thatwe've gone along to these protestmeetings, andyes you've had Militant si位垣g 恆 the corner wi曲也eir newspapers , but you've a1so had a lot ofwhat 1 would say 缸eordin盯ypeople … working class in Bradford who have come forward and t ak:en p盯t in the protes t. Which has been great from our point ofview, because we've been able to get some good audio we've people who say: “I' ve never been on a picket line in my 位已 but" or “I' ve never broke the law in my life , I' m now 65 , but". And we have noticed that within the Anti Poll T缸 Federation there has been a wide spread ofpeople who 1 would describe as non-politically active , getting involved in it.'

However , the local media shared with the national media a perception that the salience of the an位 poll tax groups waSJ;_~sentially transiβn卜 thatthey were benefi伽ieλrine-põJffi:cã:f(urore ~-;e口石函盯zmther thm instigators ofi t. An d just as they were largely neglected prior to the poll tax

Chapter 6:

Journ叫尬包租dthePolI T缸

demonstra位ons

ofMarch 1990 , so 也eir importance was seen to recede 部

themedia 說red ofreporting public protests.

J枷悶:叫 thathadn't 叫位似的 g制， 'Does anyone really understand the poll tax? We certainly don't- and we bet most other peop1e 缸e 恆 the dark too. We went to Rita Hale, author of an encyclopaedia on the poll t缸，臼 get a few answ帥， 但verything you wan叫 to know about poll t位- But didn't like to ask incase they gotyour address , Sun , 17/4/90: 9). 'There ought to be a way of ma垣ng the needs assessment underthan just two people in the coun仕y: one official 垣 Whitehall , and the blessed Tony Tr avers of the London School of Economics' (Editorial , Guarruan , 28/2/92: 20). standable 的 more

In o盯恤trod山torydiscu叫on we identifiera specific type of ne削 source whose significant con仕ibu恥的 to the framiììg of media discourse are lost in generalized discussions about the interaction between news gatherers and'ac位咱切d' ， authoritative so山C臼. Thesearet蛇世世s'inp盯位cu- ../ lar 切picareas … pr()fessionalswho 盯官司pproached by journalists 盟會已lu/' , , ate assertions ~d interpretations a_de by advoc臨sinapoli位caldebate:

-咱可-一一一一叫-嗨，""

m.

~一目叫一-----由吋戶戶-一月

.用~\"

----向}可一月血一叫一-一~γ-"

The arbiters for local and

na位onal repor位ng

ofthe

co血munity

Charge

W前e， onceaga恆， very different. The principal 缸bite油 for localjournalists d

were local gqyernment finance officerl), who , even iii those 叮eas where local media and council relations were strained , were 個lsted by journalists both to explain and to adjudicate op.也e performance of the new system: 也崎--戶♂-可_-可一~一一一一~叮叮一一一-

'Therew的 aw泣zy 郎哼，

whose name totally escapes me. In Cambridge City Council. Who was actually an officer rather than a politician …I can't remember his name for the life of me. But he was absolutely stunning at interpreting for us. He was the guy that used to come 妞， because he hadn't got a political 缸e to grind , and we actually wanted somebody who wasn't going 切 jump on any bandwagons , but w剖 go姐g to explain “this is what we collect the Community Charge for , 也is is what it pays for , this is why this council costs more than that council, etc. etc." And he came 垣 and explained it to us. And because we had used him as an on-air consultant we also used him as an 0忍耐

171

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Political 臼nnnunica位on and the Poll Tax

∞n叫mt( 伽er we were baffleþe wöuld phone him l:JJ 叫dsay v'" “help" …I1e心sort of came into thefr咀ne 1 suppose in the vecy, very early

J

fd .---?,.--

chapter 6: Journalists and the PoIl T冶X In this way, the associations had a dual status - as both advocates and

arbiters:

days. During the big political punch ups …That's where we started doing a very public service , information journalism: you know, the “what it means to you" type stuff. And he just stayed with us al1 the way through. But because th旭gs are plainer nowwe've sort oftended not use him very much - which is probably why I've forgotten his name'ιocal radio news edi的r).

'You can use an 0血cer from the AMA and not use the words “ Labourfunded" because he's spea垣時的也 officer.S姐姐缸'ly for the ADC …E weweretal姐ng to politicians from the AMA and the ADC , we would certainly have to do that'ιocal govemment correspondent).

....'j

,fb .

b

/

‘We *ev~r go to politicians for facts , for quite obvious reason~止)

-=--....J間里cials. 旭d

they are 血扭曲紀d to give that生哩哇i.nf
And that is always presented in迦哩扭扭"即叮叮臂'(Lo吋

radio reporter).

Interesting旬，

this dual status w的 not conferred on civil servants at the Department ofEnvironment, despite historical conven位ons of civil service neutrality. This was mainly because the succession ofpolitical rows about theGovem血ent' s use of civil servants in promo說ngthet眩， made national journalis臼扭的ly scep的cal about the objectivity of any information provided from these official so盯ces. As one put it:

All the localjournalists we ‘interviewed' had had some direct contact with these 缸'hite扭扭 their reporting of the tax. “一〉

The arbiterdE哩ion也嘿嘿峙的 tended to be ~_~些TM?"正旦~ signiEcantly Tony Travers from the Lo ndon School of Economics and Rita Hale from the Chartered Institute for Public Finance and Accountancy) , local authority associa位。肘， public rese訂cbf阿拉姆拉ons ，an_，是扭捏壁挂些哇!但~)The inclusiOIioflocal authority associations 站出is list might appe叮 surprising， given the constituents they represent, and the manifest influence that party politics exert on their campaigning stance. Certainly, the issue of political control prevented the Local Government Information Unit from being seen as an arbiter. As one local government specialist explained:

'The poll t a.1C has been so highly political and so fraug þ.t with errors and problems , that you had to be suspicious a l1 the way along that [civil servants] were giving you the best gloss , rather than the unvarnished tru曲， (Lo cal government correspondent).

~且盟的EUmEEtGEEgs(mo$t

'The problem we have with [the LGIU] is political balance , and they know this. They 訂e funded by Trade unions and Labo盯 coun­ cils. That means they are in efl'ect a Labour funded organization, which makes it difficult for us to use them as an independent research body.'

血ust

\/

172

However , these concer的 only tended to apply to local associations when journalists were dealing with their political membership or leadership. Just as local journalists drew a distinction between councillors and local government office詣， so national journalists distinguished between the politicalleaders ofthe associations , and the professional experts in their employ.

(__

._

.J..

..i~-'\(

...... .

'\

\_National journali'st had\lesß\contact with arbiters)than those working at

f 郎吋.加t叫， a 旦旦控血型的1乙型Hwas 吧蚣， in wh岫

Sþ ecialis't nationallocal government correspondents played a pivotal role. - These correspondents , having far greater experience ofthe tβchnical issues involved and more diverse and regul缸 contact with sources of experti間， 也記d as both opìnion leaders and as a residual source of恥.-house expertise for other journalis略 This was particularly evident among many of the political correspondents in the lobby , who knew and c缸ed little for the technicalities oflocal finance , but enjoyed enormously the political dramas that 也eysp盯ked. During the later stages ofthe policy cycle , two ex-local government specialists joined the parliamentary press corps , and their knowledge anQ. expçrience in locql finance made them animportant source Cofinterpretati6n!@clevaluation ðfthe comp]e叫x 叫 叫i蚓 r. 、 these specialists became jokingly known (as 'Professor Pol1 Tax) by his 叫leagues and comp蜘

./ ,

../

'There were 位血的[恤 the press gal1ery of the House of Com血ons] during the re技1 crisis within the Tory party - when they were revamp-

173

Ta:xation and Reprωentation: The Media, Political Communi開tion and the Poll T阻 姐g

it every three months and bringing 姐 new systems - where 1 was

holding more popul盯 briefmgs up here th 1ill the DoE werel' ~

Although journalists valued arbitrative soùrces as e耳ert and impartial f(J evaluators of the pol旬，即可 of 些笠坐也s were a迎世扭扭蛀虫 」 也epdPMK梅te. Furthermore. th學迎亞且也I盟軍極組些竺惶惶空空 ~吋sre血， whether publicly or privatély. For example，姐 e缸Iy 1990. the nb℃捌ered Insti愉 ofP曲技c Finance and Accoun蝴切間的 took 伽 ( 徊局usual step of writing 如 allM鈍， attacking the tfu研alistic nature ofthe 的vernmer的 í278 ave間ge poll t叫arget， which proved a evastating political intervention that 'added substantial weight to ma坦白g the Government appe缸 unreasonable' (Gibson , 1990: 239). At locallevel. althoughma叮 of the local government fmance ofiìcers acknowledged the ιJdmgers 叫 impr咿i吻。fbe當See胸悶r publicly into p吋沁吋 [I;一-debate， they admitted 也ey sa~ 叫~ reason to conceal the administrative ( I 晶晶.cul泣的 and anomalies of thenew sys臼òl In the words of one senior local finance 0血cer:

g.

'Ihave said offthe record to a lot of也ese reporters that tOO is the daftest tax anybody ever thought of in their lives. But 血eyknow 出ey can't print that' (In terview with authors).

,f

i

jInter叫ngly. the journali馳 sahj\CORMdictionb伽een the percei叫

i /'impartlality'

of arbi臼rs and those occasions when they offered critical jJ judgements about the new system Rather. their expertise and professionalism added resonance to th你 evaluations， and their views became the hard truths against which all other claims were assessedσ ,,,

J

Journalists and their imagined public: ‘We're simply reßecting what people th恤k' Journalists 盯e

always mindful of their audience when deciding what issues should be reported. Indeed，拖拉 sense ot~啤扭扭且世蟬啤rity is bound up in the assumption 也cffthey are talking both to, and for, a broad public. However, as mass co世ìnunicators ， jo肘nalists 缸e also isolated bm the public and often hamd!昆主e~ee_..~E_U哩巨型~about the ac叫“ composition，垣terests and needs of their constituent audiences (McQu~益， 1969; An derson and Meyer, 1988; Ellio仗， 1972; Golding, 1974){To resolve this tension , journalists rely onprofessionaljudgements,

17~生

\

Chapter 6: Joumalists and the Poll Ta:x establishβd

practice and idealistic or cynical images of th甜 guide their editorial dβcision-making.

audience

to

Thes~ut恆e姆e叫dpout 伽 a咄ence，叫伽 acc呵呵姐g compensatory strategi白， weÍ'e clearly evidβnt in journalist芯， report恤gof the Community Charge. However. there was one public mβssagethat 也可至.:?~/ '自ceived loud and clear. andfrom very early on in the policy's introduction. ~ '-主守空 οK That 拋出前 the public hated the id~a.T4竺larity空dn哩旦旦旦旦f 也is~ 向 U message were deduced from fo叮 feed-båck mecli涵泊ms:Jl:Udience corre- i c.? 志高站凹，少inion polls. p吵ic demonstrat岫祖de沙toral 叫com.j Several journalists commented on th哇控哩哇旦旦控白血阻世 cQ~es­ pondence towards 由tlI)_Qll主ax. As one news editor observed: ?何』也~、~一____，.--一一戶

'The feedback we were getting from 0盯 readers w也 that they just ~出dn't 旦控!.it. When it originally came 祖 we had a hugemail bag about it. A lot of readers writing in saying they didn't want it, they couldn't understand why the Government was 缸咧地臼 replace the rates.' However , journalists were also acutely conscious ofthe limitations of 血is channel of communication. Either because p缸ticul缸 mediahad，的 forum for such correspondence ('We don't have a letters spot... Although we're pleased 切 receive letters , there's no outlet for us to encourage it. News“ papers do that' [regional news editor]) , or because of concerns about its representativeness:

,

旬的 oftheth姐gs we're in d anger ofis pandering too much to 凶nority ",JI groups. .t\nd its a big dangennthat they're very “pestiferous" and 也可 know hów to manipulate the media and they do it quite successfully really. And we're ignoring the vast majority ofthe public' (News edi個r， local newspaper).

l v瓜剖…rer祕 Opinionpo隘. however , were seen 切 to 仰阿 prrov 仰 叫 elili枷 gu帥 1

「干起雨苛1百豆.em吋O耐 ri~句y仇吼， andc∞onfì伽 1絃rmeda 叫d 如 e臼sp 仰 r凹ea吋 d 妞d 仕回enc 昀ch 恤a缸 恤凶 E1此t public

hostility to the t也﹒ Throughout the policy cycle the polls were used as a barometer of the Government' s failure to win the political ar伊mentover the t扭扭dits 血eri臼 ('Nol Big poll t臨 Survey shock for Tories' , News on Sunday. 4/10/87; 'Most voters believe poll t aí- Iess fair than rating systβ血'， 175

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli位個l Communi個位onand 也ePolI T紹

Chap伽 6:

The Times, 11/1188; ‘Public shift against poll tax' , Sunday Telegraph, 17/9/89).

thing that peop1e 缸'e feeling passionate about , 1 think we would be failing in our job if we wer穹的 tes仗時祉，個.d asking the sorts of questions possib1y that peop1e ask in private'.

However, it was q空空 wh哇啦的空軍接到控g 阻旦旦桂林旬即1哇哇into i/'pubHclhEPEf空空空?9 ， that mmy news professionals gained 也eir 如此 一-_寄自êi譜曲 e

depths of public hostility tow缸ds the tax. Many journalists remembered 也e outbreak ofpublic demonstrations in ear1y 1990 as marking a watershed in their reporting:

~

‘It wasn't something 也athappened 扭曲is region that actually made me perhaps think more serious1y about [the poll tax] ... It was a meeting at Nottingham, at the Nottingham City Councilwhere there was themosta加ighty b100dy row and hoo-ha going on and，凹的 of， to叫 chaos' (Regiona1 TV news editor).

'If nothing had happened and everybody had accepted the poll tax, it wouldn't have got much space and 也e poll tax wou1d presumab1y s叫i be there. It really on1y became an issue for the media and the Govern幽 ment when the opposi位on against became so patently obvïous' (Regiona1 TV news editor).

.,ç

When op凶on poll data and ges個res of public outrage trans1ated 姐to by-e1ection defeats for the Govemmβnt， the circle w的 comp1ete ('Tory 可証語句話語pts poll tax re-tlifuk';甜eTim帥， 24/3/90; 'Ashdown tempers glory with realism - Poll Tax key to shock Ribb1e VaI1ey resu1t', Guardian , 9/3/91). As one political correspondent put it

』

However , if the evidence of public antipathy exerted a powerful fram旭g

Mue空空eov甜甜po吋峙， journ也ts stillrem恥.eda:且也要品:區兩J

三函主ortant --、、」土也

aspects of public;_@Qwl~_qg!?，_élllcl91>Ï!!!盟JThis confusion cen._-

一---立一-一一-_.~-戶戶戶一~._..__..-

._----_一一

忱站前E已通堅泣的 susta些逆且個叫旭 the iss帥，也.dt~企空空 to ，..;-...'ν

cope with the mo忌 complex aspects of the debate. In bo也旭stanc白， journalists relied on the尬。wn professiona1 judgements about when the issue had become bori峙， and whether it would go over 也eheads of 也eir audience. As one news editor put it: ‘M缸ch is when the bills had gone 0肘， demonstra位onswere st缸位ng， you know, the reality was coming home that the poll tax had arrived at 1ast. But, given a month or so , news erutors and readers were getting a bitfed up with the polI tax and so they were 100垣ngfor.somet坦nge1seto encourage the readers 切 buy the newspaper again. It' s as simp1e 部 that 1 think ... As a news editor 1 have 切 try andput myselfin the shoes of the reader. And tha t' s difficult, obvious旬， because 1 don't know really what νthe readers are thinking or saying. But you just have to use your professiona1 judgement. You know, at this stage readers 缸e ge位姐g bored with the poll tax and, you know, we'll ease up on coverage ofthat. You 加ve to make your judgements 1 suppose and you assume that that's how the readers are feeling at the same time. But you may be right, you may be wrong' (0囚 emphas泊).

go because ofthe poll tax …It's got 的 be one hell of a bad policy to have done 血的. It' s got to have been something that was going 切 turfTory MPs out of what were regarded as safe seats ... That w帥， if you like , a barometer ofhow bad the policy was. Because ifit was capab1e of doing that it must have been fucking awful. It re aI1y mus t.'

The crucia1 point here is that , a1thoug!!_:蝕l!豆豆空空空空str~ns p1ayed 氣 crucia1 ro1e in pus挫ng the poll tax to the forefront of the media agenda in March 1990 , they cQ!!l立not s且也証馳車ap但qEpnp竺旦旦旦~s~ing months. Once it became cle缸 that ，~he vio1~股坐點豔且也扭曲't 豆豆矗單位y eroded support fprj:he Labol!i.Party, jo叮nalists 組dnews editors戶已id1yi屆甜品1豆豆eth句“面d nowhere e1se to go:

Collective旬， these feedback mechanisms not on1y made joumalists acute1y sensitive to the depth of public antago剖smtow訂dsthet紹， but 剋so very wary ofbeing implicated as apo10gists for such an unpopular policy. As one BBC 10ca1 radio editor acknow1edged , the Community Ch訂gehadhad ‘a very rough ride [in the media] ... And right1y so; 1 mean , ifthere's some-

‘When the riots started, peop1e began to take notice a bit more ... The peaks re aI1y are determined by 血e nove1ty ofthe issue. 1 mean the first poll tax protester to be imprisoned was a story but 也e second，也ird， fo肘惚， fìfth and hundredth isn't un1ess someone suddenly sits up and say , says “Hang on a minu泊， there's been so many i血prisoned we

'Let' s just acceptthe premise for a second, that [Margaret Thatcher] did

176

Journalists and the Poll T阻

\"_

~

~

y

.J

177

Taxation and Representation: The Media, Poli位cal Communi聞組onand 也ePollTax

Underwriting 也ese professional judgements we甲嗜血的。y叫calcon-

‘1 would hate to know what the readership ofthat sort of explanation was. 1think a lot ofpeople just skipped it. All they were bothered about was the bloody “ Where?" ,“Howmuch?'" (Newsedi如r， regional newspaper).

structions ottheir audience and their probable iIÌ話rests andCo站站品已s. heiñ1ìUenée 0γ區is 'c孟晶石ièal audience' (Anderson and Me闕， 1988) W個 very significant in determining which issues related 的 reform of local govem血ent received most attention , par位cularly in 也e more populist media. As a senior correspondent for a local radio station explained:

However , despi切 these examples of how professional jU9.gements and assumptions about audience 旭terests andcompetemELShapedwhat got reported-many jo盯nalists were highly resistant to any 8ÛggestioIl.t hat they may have framed the terms of reference of political debate: _

ought to do an 前位cle summarizing the posi位on'" correspondent).

(Loc祉 government

/、

c

Chapter 6: Jonrnalists and the Poll Tax

'We are not Radio 4. This station is aimed at a C2/DI且， tabloid reading, tabloid mentali旬， audience …We don't have a great deal oftime to go into the complexities of the more ob扭扭扭pects of local government fmance …All the time, we try and personalize everything. I t' s always how much are you going to have to pay …not “ratepayers" or “chargepayers in Bradford" 一 it's “you". So it's always focusing down to the individual, and our perceived audience. That was a conscious editorial decision.' One regional newsroom actually had a name for 也eir protypical audience memb缸， and constantly worried about how she might grapple with the information they provided: 'V"'. '0叮叮chetypallistener is

called “ Edna". Wecallher “Edna弋Andshe is a 45-plus housewife , living on any large estate you can c盯e to mention anywhere 姐 Cambridgeshire ... Stand缸dized Spending Assessment, 1th垣k， that caused us more problems 也an anything. Try姐g to explain that in “Ednaspeak" 一 ag訟nitcomesdownto “EdnaSpeak" 一 how do you explain to Edna , that the Government says 也at we should only spend X when the County Council 叮e saying we should spendX+Y?' 札ocal news editor).

'We're simply , youknow, transporting 也e news: reporting it, reflecting 祉， reflecting what people think and tr拆ng to convey the issues' 明ditor， regionalnews programme).

Summary and conclusions Several key points emerge from 0囚 analysis of joum叫isfs' and their news gathering on 也e Co mmunity Charge.

t\ Fir州ifferent joumalist and news organiz珈山，即世伽g of the tax emergèd from distinct environmen時 Whereas 也e national media were 尸 passage of events arid dramas viewed from且也監控握住e， V local media focused on the direct experience of the local 堅 tate. As we see / --,--_-' .• • . • :v "later , these di~ct orientations-weré-'cfiiêiãl 旭 creating the evaluative difl'erences noted between local ~d national coverage. However，也elocal γnews agenda was influencfcl at 面蔽站起E區的e level by the national media , whether 也rough daily expos盯e to national coverage or on-line

」盟主~~ into the

」一~一一一一一..._._.._._.......... .~.''_-

Y

--一且一白白白一

newsagency 旭formation.

2- S"econd, specialist correspondents 坦 the national media intera你必盤E ~entl早到ith news sources in reporting the tax and had difl'e rènt perspectives

一~一戶一~一一一一------一--

oniLP0個c剖 correspondents focused their news gathering around Parliame剖，

Within this remit 也e media' s explana臼ry work concen仕atedon 也eprag­ matics rather than the principles of local fmance: on what people had to P呵， rather than how underlying components affected poll tax levels. Even when news media ran explanat。可 pieces about the broader fiscal context ofpoll t阻 levels ，也ey were scep位cal about whether their audience were really interested: 178

had only a transient interest in t地 issue， and largely disregarded the more technical aspects of the debate(By comparison, local government correspondents engaged in more diverSe and specialized news gathering on the issue , had a more thorough grasp of its deta挂 and gave more consistβnt attention to it. This had a clear impact on how these corresponι ents reported the policy.

了 Third， in c叫恤 179

,

T阻ation and Representation: The Media Politi阻l Commnni個組on and the polI T缸

4.aw

句J

h anr eVA

FU

The Politics ofPoliticaI Communication: The Determinants antl Impact of Poll Tax News

remaining tasks. The first is to IEIEnM 吋 t伽…恤 、、-

se盯ch institutes , and local authority associa位ons ， and contact was mainly conduc紀d via specialist local government correspondents. In this

respect, these reporters were the principal mechanism by which national news organizatiollSbecame sensi位zed to the often ex仕emelycri位cal judgements delivered publicly or privately by these so凹ces. _,

C 何i旺f食暐t也恤h， 阱 p曲 u1油b恥 li趾 i泌CωO呻p戶戶iI旭趾 n趾1泣io恤 岫ne帥r叫 ac叫吋

. /,

!阻de也伽t伽 O叮rs盯reported the 包sue~News professionals recognized 曲的 the public disliked the t臨的m verý early in the policy cycle. and the consistencyof區is antipathy both sustained and legitimized their own scepticism about the policy. In March 1990. 也eo叫加堅k ofpublic dβmonstrations -...____Wj!S_Jl_Çrucial element 包 driv垣g the issue to the forefront 占百e .Q.~S !

這三個d正面可而正誣叫“區訪前苗。“前面取呀，百何sp時 f的帥的 were 叫。他certa旭 about many other 的pec尬。fpublic opinion and knowledge. 叫宜去elied heavily on their own judgements about what their audiences fmd interesting and would understand. These assump位ons ~ were crucial 旭 determining which issues were reporteq_ and which were neglected. and in legitimating a reduc位ÐJ!恆 media atten位OIFto the issue durinElater stages ofthe policy cyc--In thismspectjournd泌的 actively /1 J哩聽凹阱. rather than reflected. public concerns. \ )了~一--~ ν

draw 切gether the threads of the content analysis and journ展ist and news source interviews spec岱' callý10 explain 出e factorsrthat conkibuted to thhCOIlstuc位on of 丸， media dis函Urses on the Community Charge. The second is to explore whether these discoursesJiad any impact on the formation of public opi“ nion. Jt is widely assumed that the poll tax failed because it never secured v public support. Yet commentators have been generally incurious about exploring how its credibility was so empha位cally eroded. In this chapter we present evidence that suggests 血e media. whilst being influenced by public m位pathy， also exerted a considerable influence in shaping public op恆ion - both in providing information about the 個x and drawing public attention towards some features of 仗. and away from 0出ers.

'"

The origins of poll 組xnews The media repor位ng of the Community Charge begs a range of questions. were several important aspects Qfthe broader political deb~eignor吋\/t by the 志而a? What 高re t區五函。一伽伽 4哩叫做s in local and national report姐g? How can we explain 也e broad consensus of media Y derision 曲的 had established itselfby 1990? Why did certain media evalu- i

r

副onsof 血epolicys凶tovertime? 旭dwhywasth~ 主堅數也哩哇during 敬的哩祖B!-S組g的?In血泊 sec泣。nweaddress 也e閻明的位ons under three

broad discussions that explore thβreasons behin函hes扭扭ng intensity of

í

)

帥的∞V前略加 i于1rFdaMMa伽nsan仔細品泛hos組前 180

181

Taxation and Represen個tion: The Media, PO加阻1 Communication and the Poll T位

Chapter 7: The PolitiωofPolitical Communication .1

'Wh at about the issues which are aroundìmt which the parties do not push and telev出on does not spot? And the classic example of 曲的 seemsto血仇妞 '87， the poll tax …Looking back on it, it' s quite clear now 血atw~且如l~些空些且空空空r and been able to fìnd 也epoll t眩， because Í [was around therejfwe had looked at it and looked for it hard enough' (Michael Brunso底， Political Editor, ITN, quoted in Democracy in Danger , Channel4 , 18/3/92).

'The Poll Tax? That's old hatl' (Regional TV news editor obse凹edata morningedi的rial meeting, May 1990).

sugg即 tthat 姐 this instanc~~些堅堅豆 ofdemo叮acywas 阿生些山些

內 t-LJ!

inglymyopic and easily dis仕acted， we need to consider the reasons for t函5 /旭itialina前ention and subsequent disinteres t.

Î

The fluctuation in national media coverage was the product of two inter仍 related fl部tm.Thamtwaq坐盟血型， or otherwise" of key news ~ d空空空姐 public discussion about the policY.!_血型恆生且扭扭亟亟莎孟 切W缸ds it. The second was 也e newsæ~ofessionals' p的話而忌。fthe intrinsic newsωworthiness of the issue. \注-5)

Î

I玟ti站s cle缸血a 前tnationalmβdiac ∞ overag 酹 ewa 卸s'.no~ fundamen 肘tall句 ydriven

by \血凹竺吱叮cl 伽 leβ' 坦t rather by political events片肘， to be more precise, the J到控艷艷y_process. I!:_盟主亟百豆豆訕訕ized by the main po旭cal J缸胸， it is highlÿ亨通lJ!kely 1.0 批示后可祉nG區函正志在古話a. Therefore , because 也 e Government a函~頭再EE祖tlc主1 opposition avoided the issue\before the 1987 General Election .f for reasons discussed e缸lier - it is not sûIprising th前 the 阻x only started 切 attract attention after the electoral diβhad been cast. Fur也ermore ，

because the media we時 never I2rim也咀y 旭terested in local per se , but rather 祖屆五謹哩哇空監控空空予 the 鼠忌J generated , the nature and composition of debate within the parliamentary 的nahada 伽ect bea啦?nthe momt ofa伽ntion the media gave to

__fìnan也policy

182

I

However, just as 也e rise of the poll t缸垃也e national media arena was .directly influenced by transformations in the parliamentary arena , so its ldecline was 叫e附加en by alterations 扭曲e configuration of p吋 political d伽te.)Vhile public demonstrations were momentarily influe軒 tial in attracting mediil coverage, the投 news value dècreased as 也eir novelty declined (although public demonstrations and non-payment campaigns continued into 1992). Jo盯nalists refocused their attention on the p叮叮 political 訂閱a. However , the assuaging of Conservative dissent meant 也e issue lost its most reportable political 'spin' , and reduced the controversy over the Council Tax to just one more inter-p缸ty dispute amongst many. As the wider cacophony increased in the lead up to the General Election, the poll t也 became inaudible, despite the persistent efforts of the Labour P盯ty to revive its spec仕e during the legisla位.ve passage ofthe Council Tax and the 1992 Election campaign.

\/ ， W枷e have 間 s een 也a 前tt伽 h 恤旦堅挫搓旦扭 甜位郎 a 1月1冉 煦 咽空吐1 哩唾9ι q 一C呵 凹 g控空伊 酹 g e oft伽 加 h βCom­ ν mun 削it句 yC 由 ha 呵 r嗨耶莒酹 e often 岫 bo 叮re 啥旦些些哩!昱 H 主盟豆也 la 豆且世旦且 nt坦史些些空叩旦盟空哇堅蟑空壁 E 由 d .ee 吋 d， manyi血portant periods 姐 the implemen個位。n and abolition of the policy passed with only a modicum of mβdia coverage. 立也.ese res叫ts h

f

the issue. When 旭te刊吋包虹的m必rmedinto愷扭扭韌'dissent， the issue gained a far greater news wor也iness; when these divisions disap“ pe缸ed， media interest waned. During the earliest stages , p缸ty political debate w部 S仕ictly divided along p訂ty lines: Conserva位ve dissent hadn't mobilized, and many of the 個x's latβr critics supported the policy. It was only with the legislative period for En gland and Wales , and the first Conservative rebellions , that the issue started to attract su懿cient parliament叮y status and p缸ty political 'spin' to g訟n sustained media attention. ~ Once these p缸ty divisions gaped open , and coincided wi也 open rebellion in 'little En gland' and 也e inner cities，恤 March 1990 , the components were all in place t~♂ns盯e an intensive , if transient , period of media concern.

Th e shifting intensity ofnational mema coverage

，.、

However, in emphasizing the heavy reliance ofthe media on key political sources 的 identify the issue during the early _s tages of the policy's implementation, it is also important to appreciatt that this d堅強~二 _ ened during later stages of 也e cycle. Whereas in 也e early stages many 3元nali晶晶晶函石油t about the policy 叫 its likely effects and hi堅堅/~ 一 source晶pende成 by the most intense phase ofmedia coverage in 1990 C亨/ '-tlrey- weæm:ore informed and sensitive 的 the issue , and consequently less reactive - often raising the issue in spite ofthe damage limitation strategies ;j-仁 of the party news manage此In d伽g 風 they 也plified and influence哇 i 弋 developments wit恤 the poli位叫的也 T凶竺竺型性盟扭扭~s.. also I meant that the profes也pal judgements of exerted a fàr"g諾諾~ in&辰ÏÏden( influe 183

T也a位on and Representation: The Media, Political Communi間位on and the Poll T臨

仰 p 'roI血恤且凶血 i詛 ne 叩 恥 n 1昀C 臼 帥 間 eof 蚓悶 over … 仗E e 甜蜘 啪恤e a 吋 dp 阱缸m咐rs

jo盯nalists ~_

of news coverage 訕。 produced a repeti堅堅笠食品 and news 副tors soon 空間主扭扭臂， and a叩ele1'ID做生þ'e

issue's de學 inn胸且越 cove叫叫s anews 咄切ronal呵呵onal newspaper put it fo盯 months after the repeal of the t也 had been announced: 'There's a story today: “Britain' s oldest po11 tax prisoner w的 released from jail today". Oh that it should come 切 thisl ... It' s ge前ing 切 the stage of a freak-show: he's the oldest so therefore that makes it unusual. 1 don't know whether we 叫做ally did , bl!t_:r_m~J叮~Jh~t~現耽.----" 」 possible avenue hasbpeIMXRkpzed uJSPoU t路" is now a narcolep缸， wo祖lõüsêiñã-ñ'-I品市lpab叮 o誼此 Yousay “poll tax" anèíïnostjourD:正 ~豆ts st缸t 切 nod off. It's a bit difficult 個 get excitβd about for me I'm afraid. 1 know it' s a serious and abiding issue but, er ...'

/、工

Interpretations: absences inpoll tax coverage

/

'For most people , po11 t也 b血s were_!l 't_ap.jgvasion of privacy , they A~;V而晶晶asion of their were an invasion of their bank函lances. •. wealth' (political correspondent).

Chapter 7: The Po加ωofpo加阻l Communi聞組on determining which events 缸e most likely to be selected and repo成“自 ‘news' (Galtung and Ru悍， 1969; Golding and Ellio仗， 1979; Ericsonet a1.， P1987;Chibml1， 1977LThesev叫ues are a product of th勾起控ures of the -_ tpews production procesSjand embody professional ~ssumptions 、boutthe interes臼 and needs ofthe mass audience. 臨 Ess闊 ent位i站a a划凶 剖 lly，c州 吋t也 γ helessc ∞ o血ple 眩 :xa 血 n ambi訊伊1油 ou 凶s 阻 issue 旭 i s， 也e more readily it c祖 be personali即 d and d!'él:.....i ma伽d， shown to have cle訂 and immediate 加plica崗位古胡志高帥_-_， "'----n組twiHí previous news frameworks , the more likely it is to be reported. It h豆豆 coincidence cthat all the absences inωverage of the Community Ch缸ge contraven晶 ~ÍÌe or more of these criteria. Standardized Spending Assessments may havê-been of pivotal import組ce to po11 tax levels …祖d thereby the system' s political viab血抄一 but 也eir complexity 血adethem appe缸 dryand 哩~ane to many jo叮且越ists (who , indeed，你uggled to understand themJ.， E~也BEqqi(1世impact ofth~JJ.ew tax on vo切rre斟strationtooks哩主些學三度空間帥， anlwhen it was present甜， proved diflìcult to isolate from the influence of other factors , such 的 the long term decline in vo記r registration and changes in the registration p Qlicy of electoì:al officers in certain 訂eas (Butler and Kavanagh , 1992). The cen扯到ization of control of non-domestic rate revenue may have significantly eröded local governme凶 autOI間ny， but it la.哩i the Pe!'哩!lM_!Þ:旦旦旦thatch缸" acterized previous clashes between the Thatcher Government and the demons of the municipalleft.

-司-、--凋-可函、司，明-恥，....~-他...~，;;:-的."'...."，_ 、心，可叩開..........、“可~妒""....，.會"

We have notβd how several issues that concerned]1.011 t臨 campaigners

V went virtua11y旦旦reported by the mainstream medi也 such as the cons做“ tional implications ofthe new system, privacy issues , the impact ofthe t缸 on voter registr甜凹， and general information about the related restructuring of grant allocation 扭曲ondome恥恤ation抖 wediscu叫喲， these cumulative absences r啦se serious ques位ons aboutJhe media's per3叫吵面叫平的城 debate 咖utthet位 and its broadë~iíñplica幽 位ons.

/::1__,-,l'_

f

_L___ ___

L

HoweJer , it is o~e thing to'~en時 absences旭 media coverage and anotheJt to explain;their exclusion. It is clear that the neglect ofthese issues refle耐叫喇啥叫到 the professional and politi叫叫ues 。但叫/ gatherers arid pr仰ssors ，jW.d 暫且暫且Finfomationp空空空gies and \/ capabilities of several key protagonists in the broader political debate.

ç Vq)./ 仁丘之 九C.-\;V l ,-Numerous 叫i叫aveiden值edthecru伽1 role that news values pl叮 ip ""

.r ,

184

By recognizing that news values sys能matically diver臼djournalists from the long term and techmcal 臼pe翩。f the debate, we can also understand (why many journalists viewed the po11 tax as a J? easy issue to report.-Ì'f~ws -hlues both sustainedandlegitimized a disreg玄汪古正面1面前豆豆ondite 又竺spects õfi區已油站 deba函;…♂~一

商 h

一一一~…一…一…一一

The exclusion of these issues from mainstream media discourses was also compounded by the political antagonism of many journalists_towards some ofthe broader issues面eH峙的孟晶晶lpll已祉而沾沾已Wapologwv 恤 for local government among the journalists we intervieweÎfat either local or nationallevel. As one parliamentary correspondent put it: JYodmnot gohg to getmy decmt stodesh{也e pap,er] which say CPoor old local government, it's had its power stripped'/People would say “ we11 Hooray for thatl That daft old bugger down the Town Halll'" Simil訂ly，

the i血pact of the new 個X on voter registration and the prospect -7

-

185

,

Ch呻ter

T個a說.on and Represen組組on: The Media P.ollti臼l Communi闊的on and the Poll Tax

were subsumed by the

about the tax.. However, Once the media were able to place 也e issue within

仰 p o恤ca 巫1 胡個g 伊 o巫凶 s血 o 州 f叮jo 叫 urnalis 泌 sι切w缸d 也sthosead 御 vo ∞ ca 甜 t位in 呵 gt也 henon-p 伊 ay 予 "

themorefam血缸 context of inter (and intra) p叮ty dispute, their interpre-

ments個t耶抖。ne national jo

帥e focus constri悅。 恥, 鯽m 叫I 仙hema 血iI旭 nn哩哩吵 sμ501 叩 帥 u1

of increased

恤 int仕r1肘 1芯si知 .veness 句 b y loca 祉!_ governmen 叫 l此t

創吋ained:

theirc 侃 a血pa 剖ign agendas，恤 a waythatbo也 reflected and accelerated 也is 而聶哥五百局面豆豆íõ"ÏÇIn other words , a 'vocabulary of precede帥， (如cSOn et ι ， 1987, 1989) q凶ckly developed between journalists and news sources in the repor位ng of this issue , which exerted a powerful ,framing influence over subsequent cov，前ageand 旭formation provision. -一一一-

‘守 Yo侃 use叫h負物惺哼哲哩b加e伽泌凶岫 s帥 u ec祖eωC ∞o曲咖s叫 ed 叫t血 h 也仙!吵吶 f咕h 阿 吶r坦P糊竄旦 _j issue. There was ailiIëiñ孟晶n deciding whe血er thes己 were people

'\vliose civilliberties were being infringed or these were people who were breaking the law and should face the consequences?'. v

pffdf三t冬、 ."弓..lt!/吟，

'"

fhem缸ginali叫On of these)various 包sues from media discourses was

c

fõ抽er

compounded by the éhan斟nginform胡OnS加te蟬es of several of / 也e main participants in the broader deba峙. For example , whereas the Labour P缸ty and certain local authority associa位OnS frequently drew a悅en位On to the constitutional and privacy implica位ons ofthe 個xd田姐g 也e ea如tages of the policy deb帥， they mentioned 伽叫ssmsphLJ frequently during the latter stages. Away 仕om thep訂ty political arena , (the civilliberties pressure grouPl/Ube旬， who initially played a pivotal role 區highlighting the privacy issúes raised by the new system, latterly shifted judicial abuses in the prosecu位On its campaign work towardß~challenging J ofnon-payees.

U

扭iteg 'carrying capacitie~(I丑19ar個er and Bosk, 1988) of sev叫 key politi~source吼叫d theiI(聳b也可怕 campaign On more than one front. For example, once the civil 誼berty group, Liberty, became increasingly embroiled 旭也e debate about the denials of defendants' legal rights , it had seriously to c叮tail its campaignν work On the broader privacy implica位OnS of the tax. As a crucial informa包凶胸 叩 s 帥 u e 迦 血即 e也恤 ad 曲 i泌s 郎 凶胸 Cωo盯叫 叫 s 恥 e

λ/?EV仙atior叫hesourω 0/"叫“o叫ity

r In many respects one of the most fascina位ng aspects to this debate is j

吻她也g

why

the 趾itish

media … collectively 1的吵enowned

for 也e廿

九世旦旦些印閃現自聽了一wemmziapj些 oftheComm哩均必要~ge? And wh的 does'ï:IïI豆 suggest

about the conditi已按苔豆豆直至血itations of state agenda-building? It, is important to emphasize that...,the Government's failurewa聶tàn evaÍuative rather th叩 inÚrpretative levJI, in that there was \ I _",!!-o fundamental ch嗔enge by the media to 伽 ideologicalp平rameters ofthe Govemm忱的 case'~r refo叫ng local govemment fina吋. If the Govemment' s ideological offensive foundered under media scrutiny, it did so On its ownterms.

On another level , these changes revealedl how political sources beciune increasingly adept at recogn姐ng which isstres would play most effectively in themedia 缸ena， andcut 也eir campaign cloth accordingly. During the early stages of the policy cycle the media appe缸ed to have di血c叫你」立 一__jo_cating the issue within pre-e.油ting news frameworks. This had two effects. On tþ'e One level it made coverage highly intermitte帥， but it also . meant 伽me m耐a were more r，ωptive to these al街口凶ve ag叫as

/"

-，/ 旭 An ∞o 叫 叫t伽 加 h 叮 e ri 圳 恤 mp 仰 圳 O 討t 枷 r

J艷控愕些蟬掛!h 主?邱sti 昀 le 切 t ot伽 het恤磁叭 叫 a 凶 n di加俗 O 呦 均Ije b 叫 吋位伽枷 c 附 .ve 郎s，:..-'州刮曲O e 叫 ug 脾 h allof 血伽 ejo 叫 岱' U

nalists we interiri叫Ted claimed 也ey had always rec。但ized the tax to be fatally flawed , One has to wonder about the influe!lce_hindsight may have had in shaping such cri位cal cl叮愕. ItAlI interv;iews 耐高高豆aucted after 之竺竺oli位On of 也e 旭 had been 也ounc吵~ Whilst not de可ing 伽re

• For example , severallocal newspapers had no compunction about printing the names and addresses of local residents who had b的n served with llab也ty orders for not pa:抖ngthet臨 (UK Press Gazette, 24/9/90).

F恤al旬， thβchanges revealed th

t位i<βms 叩 01叮 rrc 臼 eont也 hi泌 s 缸@明 丸， its a 臼ssh 趾if丘't怕 叫lsoacceler a 間 at臼憑吋 dt也 hema 盯 均 r gi站 na 旭 剖li扭 a zat位 10巫 oft 血 he

\

/ The reaSOnS for these changes in the interpretative focus ofnews sources varied. In some cases , their shift reflected political considerations. For example , as the Labour Party came under attack over the issue ofn性阻p ment , i的 leadership became 11肘 more nervous about the disenfranc扭扭， \扭扭tissue.S旭誼缸ly，的 local authorities saw their reven逼 dwindle due to persistently high nOn payment levels , they became less concemed with politicizing the electorate and 血ore concemed about preserving their financial reserves.

186

7: The Polltics ofPolltical Communi開tion

、 J

For example, clvil llberties qu臼位ons were among the most promlnent 也em臼 media coverage durlng the ∞m叫ta位veperiod.

v

ln

187

Chapter 7: The Politiωofpo殼的問l Commu剖開前on

Taxation and Repr自個個位on: The Media, Po制問l Communi個世on an:d 也ePóllTax

tion ofloc斗]overnment opinion in 恤posing the system, proved highly a key role in inform旭gandde扭扭g 已hcal me晶宮接控豆豆 op the po11 t眩， partly through 血e increas姐g，留 variable efficiency of 也eir p甜甜， m缸keting and public relations departments , but also because of their tradi位onal prom旭ence in the routine newsbeats of the provincial media. This secured them a privileged access , and 也ereby an important definitional advantage.

ß

克/相泊icant. 包也lthori低es pl~yed

,

。f 血e

system would have been so absolute, had the same questions been At the very least, the content analysis suggests 也ere was a process involved 誼 thepoli位cal(qeJegi位miza­ 位on ofthe Community Ch缸ge. Somewhere , somehow, an argument was lost. asked 的 the political debate was 品也 active?

Recogni盛ng how the patterns of advocacy at both national and locallevels

altered as 伽 policy process developed，的o helps 呵1恥 ~hy 白的創

sec位ons of the national media initially supported the tax. Even during the

To explain the evaluative hos叫ityofthe 血.edia， we need 的 appreciate the

back bench rebellions that marked the passage of 也e legislation 必r Eng­ land and Wales, the Government could s剖1 depend upon a sign過caì:J.t rump of opinion in the p叮liament缸yp前ty to support the principles ofthe policy. However, once t~e Conservative right crossed the the rubicon, and, openly attacked the tax;過竺 isolation of the Prime Minister was ∞Iílple郎今 The Thatchβrite press ∞uld no longer cons甘uct the debate as p缸t ofa covert, left wing challenge to the P缸ty leadership , and it ls no coincidence that the last ves位ges ofmedia support空空空pg月ted at the s aní.e time as these high level defec位。ns.

Ir) - A ('distinctive roles played by advocates and arbiterß in shaping medía opin-ion. Firstly, the battle lines of advocacy 扭曲e debate were hugel:旦旦nbal­ anced. The policy attractβd a swathe of criticism from both private and public sectors, voluntary agencies and all the opposition par位的﹒ However， par位叫的 si但進cantwe削he 喇 or 些堅堅型"生些竺些竺vat吵 ~E堅堅ranks ， which eventually extended to the most senior echelonSõl1he

Government. Not only were these intemal wranglings 旭釘垣sically耳空空L but the prevalence of Conservative dissent p_!些哩哇血但空dia omQrganizing their analysis along conventiona!_p前控坦坦巨型 lines. As Onev叮i溫前tial broadcast journalist observed: -

FJEQ!虫草，

Public perceptions and popular representation 'By the end it was a bit like Apartheid ... You didn't have to balance the th垣g. Youdidat 也e beginning because everyone was divided on party lines , but by the end most Tories were condemning it 閏 we11and the Government was saying “we11 we're going to review it" ... So you didn't have 切 go 也rough a f，缸ce ofsaying “ but on the 0血er hand they're saying everything's go恆g smoothly".'

'The public have not been persuaded that the [Community] Cha:rge ls (Michael Heseltine , Secretary ofSta如 for the Environme帥， House ofCommons , 21 March 1991).

f眩，

吶eha師v叭 e叫州hema W 酬 a訕 垃in叩 旭lpr ，仰州 削 ro o叫ta咿叫叫e句poli枷馴l 帥帥 ove 叫 e 加 h 州 p 011 恤 ta踮 吋， x presu 叫阻 E血 ne吋 d品 tlìe.em呦 would 抖 p1益命示 a~ 切 何 e y ro 必 Ile) 尚柚 卅炯 )i 缸int 祖伽 he battle 伽 fio 叫rt伽 e

石、 2 、In co吋unction with 也e 旭.bal祖ce in po加cal advocacy , the arbi詢問 of 干 I

news coverage played a crucial part in securing the critical antipathy ofthe_

-

ν

news 血鷗吋呦伽 a.肘 None 叫 of 伽盯吋 b伽sel 伽 l levelcωorr 叮 ro 吋 bo 叮 ra 臨 t切 edtheGωovernme. 閒 ntcla 剖i血s仇， and 旭dee 吋 d 血阻ywe. 缸 rωE 酹 e叫y

tcrit位icaloft血 henewsyst紛em. ℃一---一-

Th e greater hos組ity of the local media towards 也epo誼cy than their national counterpa肘， can also be explained with these factors in mind. If support for the Govemment' s flagship was scant at a nationallevel , it was a1most completely absent locally. In this respect the Government' s aliena-

188

>

hearts an\ i minds of 也e Bri伽h elec切ra臼.T恤s presumption，旭 itse也 constituted a very significant 缸ea ofmβdia influence, as the political --:5 ...l 句八b process itself was con的rted and distorted by 也e pursuit of edi個rial sup- :4.叫 port. However, what evidence is there 切 support these political calculations about the public salience of 伽凹的? Alt!!ough the pr油叮dJ research upon which this book is based contain<<;!dψspeci直.c audi哩個 1 叩 " related ∞mpone肘，也e wealth of opinion po11 data on p吋llë kñowledge of ' f 函函磁而區主tow缸dst區自函函區可高高豆苗豆豆pro討de an opportunity for comparisons that are at least suggestive about the rela位onship between media representa位onsandp的lic perceptions. 189

Taxation and Repr田entation: The Media, PO岫個I 臼mmuni闊的on and the Poll T阻 -2..、f

ch可ter

~bsence of media covera的.~酬， perha阱， ofmedia 岫lence by om-

publicattit帥 andm呦 cOllerage

封面ion?

dC

'The man in charge of the Commu凶ty Charge register in Strathclyde said last week he was surprised 的 discover that there 缸e 1 ,097people _' MS倒也clyde called “Donald Duck'" (To旬， BBC Radío 4 , 4 Apiil

~./':;:G 、

1989).

一

When tracing public 耐itudes 旭England and Wales towards 也e Community Charge over several years , there is盤空空也坦白姐姐~pend~.> ~diainfl堅強~~ee Table 7.1). Any ini位al public equivocation towards 也e policyrapi組ly translated 泊的 acon趾med and consistent hos也句:from 戶j October1987onwa油 opposition to the tax never fell below 60 per cent, 尸崎 and by the time of its introduction consistently exceeded 70 p前 cent. Clearly， once 也e electoré:l,te b.Q gan to understand the policy and its implica-

位。帥， themaj位Wdslikedit站在部植面訴師正自emfrom 血的 oppos← 位on.

一一一一-一一一~一

j只:主哭 T嚇蝴曲蝴1叫.Pu恤恥c 蝴岫 tud郎叫翱伽酹削H 恤恤 h 蝴 d叫阻叫dW ，削叫咖師圳圳 伽 (β 198凹9 -.一

~-

F鼻曲or 企 k

九十泣的187')__， 已 22措晰的 )

2軒30/91 '67

Poll

Sa 咀 mp 戶 Ie

M卿恥伽5 MORIlS;州州間5

MORI旭MAI∞心LA

之 19/10/盆且一_

MORI/Sunday Times 了2藍晉芯足于') MORII品nday Tln叫 17一1873/88-- MO眩/Sunday Time s 25-30/11/88 MO阻/Sunday Time s 16-17/3/89 MORIlSunday Times 22-23/11/89 MORIlSunday Time s 1品12/2/90 NOP/IrulependentIBBC1 19-24/哇/90

MO間/The TJm

es

7: The Politics ofPolitical Communi闊前on

恥r

匈 Ag咖s 成t

1023 __ 43_ 39 / 1502 '-16 穹FJ 1866 30 /58 _j. 109 37."'::-益9

了愉

1075 817 1098 1068 1577 1887

立法叮當)

33 28 23 25 16 23

60 61 69 68 73 73

D阻，屯t 旭o 仰 w

18 31 12 12 18 11 8 7 11 4

./

Further evidence of the resilience of public a討itudes to media detmitioIis emerges from polls conductβd during the political furore over 血e poll 祖x demonstrations ofMarch 1990. As we have seen, the Governmentsuccessfully managed to shift media interpreta位ons of the political si但ificanceof the demonstra御自尊ay from a framework that empha蜘d their negative implications for it，的W缸ds one 缸ated wi血 conspiracy theories and the detrimental consequences ofthe riots for its political opponents. Although the app缸'ent success of this tac位c sent shock waves through the Labour leadership - forcing them into ever more strident denunciations of those advocating nO!!J>ayment - it is clear that the public was very resistent 切 this diversion.\ Popular support for Labour increased to record levels and was sustained 血rough March and April 1990, despi切 the media hysteria over the violence of the Trafalgar Square riot, and the Honi.e Secretary's attempt to unk the civil~bedience of non payment with th生 (ftV:r~、 耐且越叫 of 'bre出ng p伽men' s heads'. Inde糾豆豆 ICM pol1 con': 1 ) ducted a week after the riot, found that t;wo-thir(!s of respondents rejected叫I the Home Secretary's assertion that Labour were 臼 bla血e for the violence , i more than a third directly blamed the Government for the violence , andj d些且堅 s到dth何也缸't t恤ktheLabo肘 leadersh海 should take action aga迦stP缸ty members refusing to pay the tax{,A. si扭過C個t 凶nority 串Iso said 也ey thought the 悅。lence was understan品ble because of 也e.urífair-' nessofthe 個x (Sunday Co rrespondent, 8/4/90). -~ 、阿師叫--恥_..，_...._._

---~-'也門_~_.，.

Hereag到n， th C? c:~:msistency ofpublic opinion exerted a considβrable refrac-

已對坦坦nce 晶石油豆苗甜甜鼠忌石話i(6ëê一“函E巫正面只再 缸oversy over the demonstrations was not easing the electoral pressure ón the Government, journalistic 姐terest 旭 the 'problems for Labour' issue 些appeared and attention redirected on to the Government' s 設avails.

r.

門

事 f{Rρ 心ι

However , if public attitudes appe叮切 have been largely independent of，一 and re.silient to , media evaluations (and indeed may have played a crucial role 扭曲aping 也叫型些更巨型竺世!r fo些吧?tthemeadado 吋y 1/ 詣 』型 ite~ influence over public percep!!四"fthetax.Indeed ， wrestriC ng 叮誦了話正面， edia influence to::.áttitu~al data, we 缸e probably …to our Sei \、---...-_.....-' qu。但 a familiar phrase 一 lookiJ;l g 坦 llle wrong pla臼. Indeed, when we <) <)心 examine t l!e extent Qf public&~owle~ge of也e tax, and its va削ngpublic 0/

saHemt?!eKama的cpièl師hrges

190

191

T臨ation 個dRepn潤ntation: The Med悔， Politi叫“mmuni個組.on and the Poll T也

2 、2

The media and injormation acquisition

Throughout the policy cycle, researç_h consistently highlighted the prir--m前y importance of the mass media ;as a及扭forma位 tion so盯ce aboutthe v...__!蟬﹒In 1988, asurveyin Leedsfound也at_@示泊的f聶哥õÏidents cited 'tele"l[ision and radio' 的 their main source ofinforma位on about the policy, ,/ an4' 7 :t;:;p叫側，注冊sp酬s'. (即 comparison， Government inform甜on j"W描ëí.ted by only( 吵 per cent and council information by;j.)per cent.)

Cbapter 7: Tbe Politics ofPolitical Communication thls hugely signifìcant policy innovation，自 the new era of local account的ilityd…d， 伽 theywere ∞叫 con呻 s帆 p

叫 m d的削t祖d 蚵 i旭n 呵 峙 g of 峙 im 呵 p叫缸 叫 m l泌t(伽 岫剖叫 ba 伽sic principles and mechanisms of 10叫

副局前示:17 :Z, ç - News priorities and public priorities

EMMmomympfJ時想起咖ed ve叩 promine叫做祖 the resp~咕嘟! ~艷艷楞楞轉ilpon(CmpbenetaL ， 1988).LatBrresearchcodmedthis pa悅em -

although by that stage other information sources had gained in importance. For example, a 成udy 恆to the effectiveness of the Welsh Offìce's public information campaign on 也e Community Ch訂ge (National Co nsumer Council, 1989) found television to be 也em剖n information so肘'ce (40 per cent), followed by Welsh Office information (39 per cent); and local authority information (18 per cent). S姐姐訂旬， aMO虹 survey (1989) , commissioned by Leicester City Council, found that 51 per 凹的 of respondents in 也e Leicester area , id，闊的ed television as their most importantso叮凹， followed by the local press (38 per cent) and a generic category of 'leaflets' (37 per cent). The salience of the media as an information so凹ce is further confìrmed when 瞬間amine the extentofpublicknow19d&e about 血is complex policy \./ issue. [rhe Leeds su叮叮 foundthat 叫though:嘻哈er cent ofresponde臨 had heard~of the poll t峙， there was evident comusion among a signifìcant m祖ority of respondents about its linkage with the right to vote and the existence and opera位on ofthe UniformBusiness Rate (Campbell et a1., op. cit.). A survey of s月f!]l business people in England and Wales , in December 1989 ，必mdthatZ吵位剛也迎世吵oftheU凶ormBus旭臨 Ra切;

87 per cent had no idea what ‘UBR' meant; 95 per cent didn't know how it would affect their business; and 92 per cent didn't know what they could do about it (即紹， 1990). In June and July 1990, a survey by the Policy 令 Stù，dies Ins位tute into public at位tudestolocalgovernmentfound 血atonly f :' 15 revenue from the Community Charge .... -percentofrespondentsk那幫也at ‘ àccounted for only around ~ qu arl,è r oflocal authority revenue (Blωhand John , 1991). --~ ，.、、

What is signifìcant about these fmdings is how closely 枷e 帥部 ofpl!hl!.c.----­ 拾。立

型的~on cQÏ!lçid瞌睡血肉空間空空空空悟空間也acoverage-Cie訂句，

一 although the media may have had a ce耐alrole1ìi聶福社益重 the public of

192

If the media may have compounded public ignorance about many important aspects ofthe policy, they 尬。 appe缸 to have played a crucial role in ('dr刺耳 public a位叫。前wards and 凹a~ 仕om the issue. Figure 7.1 由mpares aggregated opiñiòn'poll data on 也e changing public percep恥的 of t愷旦旦旦控旦旦f ~~ i，~s!!e 迦England and Wales. w憊， n~!.t~n~Lpress coveE_~~e， between April1988 and September 1991 , and 誼ghlights a 戶 dramatic correlation between the two.t Just 師也e poll tax dropped down 可草草晶晶屆ñãããfter its legislative passage, so it rec~ded from public attention. However, as 血e prospect of its 恤troduction 姐England and Wales approached, public concem increased, slowly at 趾鈍， and 也en drama位callyinMarch 1990. However , oncein仕oduced， public at 忱tent位ionI

l

tωot也 hei泌ssuefl 缸 ad 由 edi恤 namanne 缸 r 勻ne 諂 .ed 益ia 丸， onl甘.y 切 t oberev 祕 i尬ta 剖li泌 ze 吋 di恤 nNovem 恐be 叮 r1990andM缸c 咄 h1991 ， ∞ c oi站 n犯叫 ci吋 d­

詛ge 惦 :xa 部 ct句 l句 yw 叫i也 thet伽 wo 且 fìna 剋lb盯s 呦 t臼 S ofc ∞ overag 齡 β.

After the Government's

* 'Public salience' is measured bere by a question in monthly public opinion 訊.lrVeys conduc侮d by MORI in En gland and Wales designed to assess which issues were considered to be 'most impo此ant' or 'other important'. The pat包rn revealed here is supported by similar data ∞Uected by NOP over the same period. In re句onseωthe question 'What are the most impo血nt issues which are influencing the way you intendωvote?' . 22 per cent ci記dthepoU 能xinJanu缸y 1990. rising to 50 perωnt inM訂'ch 1990;and falling to 47 per cent 旭 May 1990. InJ阻U位y1991 ， 37percent cited the poll 組軍. rising 幼兒 per cent in March 1991. and then swiftly f;刮起ngω19 per cent in Au學1St 1991. It is impor包ntωappreciate that th臼e figur的 relateω England -and Wales only. Public perceptions 迦 S∞組組.d revl開led a different pattern. rellecting the policy's e缸lier implementation. and the greater intensity of media ∞verage during the policy's early stag的﹒ t Correla伽g public opinion and media content in this manner can be problematic. One of the most serious cri位.cisms is that in doing so one is not comp位ing like with like (Van Liere and Dunl旬. 1980). For examp誨，∞mp位isons of environmenta1 news wi也 the salience of environmental issues in the public agendas are seriously ∞mpromised by 也e broad and diverse r個ge ofissu白白at 訂e included wi也lnsuch an imprecise 個tegory﹒ However. this is not a proble姐姐也is 組成個ce. From April 1988.MO虹的signed a spec逃cca記gory to measure public a位en位.on 切 the 'poll 純正 and the specificity of也is category cle訂Iypermits a close comparison with the ∞ntent analysis data.

193

T阻ati岫 and Representa討on:TheMedi酒， Politi開l Commu凶闊前 on and the Poll T，揖

mm

。但。這)

。gg@ 包)2帥的一道←mot。@話。扭扭

抽。

〉←Eagga 軍〈

翩翩別

的 ES

Media Coverage - Salience ---

。

1'8

2:海

Months

Fig. 7.1. Comparison of nationaI media coverage and public salien，臼 ofpolltax Ap剖 1988 - September 199 1. Co uncil T也 announcement 也e issue was quickly relegated in the public agen缸， and by the 1992 GeneraI Election had almost completely disap-

peared from public atten位on. atten世on and media representation is ~puriousf The most ob悅。由aIternative explanation 也at public concem w品 sólely driven by the material impact of the policy on people' s spending - cannot account for the timing in the shifts in public a的ention. The public in England and W aIes were most concerned aboutthe Co mmunity Charge before they had paid a penny, but as 也e first payments were made, and the controversi aI process of enforcement began, the salience of the issue receded in public importance. It then briefly re吟merged in November 1990 - halfway through the fmancial ye缸 of local auth。ri泣的， and eight months after the 個x had been introduced~ Clearly, some fac切r other than the continued financi aI burden ofthe Cominunity Charge conspired to push it back on to the p油lic agenda at 也isjunc仙詞.The 宜naI， rapid and complete relegation of the issue from May 1991 onwards is also di血cult to account for materially , when one considers that 也e tax still had twoye缸S 切 r恤， and many who had successfully avoided the tax during its first ye缸 were remorselessly tracked down over this period by locaI authorities desperate for revenue and increasingly unsympa也etictononpayers.

Is it possible tha(the relationship between public

194

The Politics ofPolitical Communi個位on

___，壁~ as seems cle缸， mdiaf空空想[~and publi~旦控.~m wereclQ間ly 增鞭~­

切的

800

chap飽r 7:

afur也βr question presents itself: which factors exterted the greater in. fluence over the other? One obvious explana位on is that 血.e media were largely mirroring shifts in public op旭ion， rather than creating them. However , there are two main problems with 血is argument. First, had public con開rns been thft...，_driv祖.g f9rce behind media atten位。丸 th前e_ should have b叫 aCle;!agje:峙e public opinion and media dat~ This is because the op恤iol豆 poll data was collected at the end of each month , whereas the media data quantifi.es the cumulative coverage for each month. The aImost iden位caI c;.QD.時rgence of the two pat臼rns con-

趾郎自at 扭扭堅強自監控J些血 q哩哇型企控旦生R.Y油c'」空些旦旦s

had been empirically estaolished﹒ Sec品已 the journa1ist 姐ter­ views demonstrated how isol帥d 監控監控盤盤雖;were from the public .... theyaddr酬叫 andho吃生生捏捏旦控豆豆住宅pswem空空甘心 byassump­

空間 abmt阻聽;間的S俗一個d cap曲卸的﹒ Rather 也mmemo旬 con叫而g public concerñs.j吾吾面臨宿在關吋 the廿 own judgements about what their audience would find releva風 Evenwþenp的lic actions forced the issue to the forefront of the media agenda, as was the c的ewith the widespread demonstrations ofMarch 1990 ，也is influ個ce was largely tran胸前，的 jo盯nalists quickly tired of 也ese performative gestur帥， and looked for other issues 切 sustain their attention. _

v

Thissug 掰 酹 g 螂 e s

/戶~ 略 age 阻 nd 曲 a.However，旭缸guing this we rec。但ize the dangers ofproposing a

一可且重-tran哩哇空n model of me也a_ influence (即0仗， 1972; Hans~ 1991) … wherq' it is assumed that powerful news sources shape media

agendas , which 旭 turn determine public agendas，旭 a line缸 and non reciprocated manner. Throughout 也is book we have iden恤ed several examples of where policy deba胸， public percep位ons and media representations interacted dynamically 旭 the formation of political discourses on 也e poll tax. However, we would emphasize 曲的也e interaction and d鎧恆gc between these v缸ious aren倒 is s仕ucturaIIy 控個函詞而f cert剖n 盯'enas 'over-ac臼ssing' others. And whereas the public 盯e constantIyexpos吋 to 血ediamβssages 姐 the formation oftheir politicaI opin切肘， the public are 1位gely扭過盤磁盤 presen吋orjournalis訟， whose op凶ions and needs they can only imperfectly know. ;/

195

T臨ation and Representa位on:The M咱也 Politi，閱l Communi個.tion and the Poll T，也

Summary and conclusions In this chapter we have explored the formative

politi叫 dynamics 血的

shaped media reporting of the introduction and abolition of 也e Community Charge, and the impact 血的 media representations may hàve had on public perceptions of the t阻.

Chap臼r7: ThePo加csofpo加cal Communi臼位on

The public never liked the idea ofthe Community Charge and, indeed，也eir J扭曲 entan個gonisIl! fed the media's own scepticisw about the advisab也可 1fd示兩話函叫而兩位站bíìC孤EEea吻 on the media for information about the new t紹， and displayed political blindspots that corresponded very closely to the noted absence再加 media conteiJ.t. On - another level, public perceptions ofthe salience ofthe issue closely tracked 屯 the ebb and flow of media coverag學::rather than the policy timetable it阻宜. 『知Collectively，也ese fmdings provide clear, primafacie support 切也e classic 、 -Ji~到空空e郎郎監控雙: that the media may not tell us what to think, but they are ve可 innuedalf要 telling us what 切也nk about (臼hen， i 1963) , and strongly confir時 thepresump位onof也em也 protaganists in i the debate, that the media woUId be the principal political 缸en學姐 which thep的lic battle for the poll tax would be fought. i

1/

./

196

Second, the limited interpretative parameters of media coverage were partly due to the applica位on of news values and journali呦， political prejudices to this cOl!lplex 叮ea. However，也ey also reflected the changing (informa伽 mtegidofkeynews soumwho alte叫出eir tàc位csand èampaign agendas aS血e policy cycle unfolded.

Con臼m旭g the ，r.ela位onship between the media and public opinio且， the data htghlights [b oth the dependence and independenqe of p的lic perceptions on media 自nresentations. 宣'he media' s influeo:ce does not seem to have operated at an evaluative level , but rather at an interpretative leveI.

197

Chapter 8

Rethinking Political Communication

可r

n this book we have charted the drama位c failure of one of the most promoted and f1缸-reaching Bri位shdomes位.c policy initia“ 單位的 of modern timeSJmd identified the pivot叫 role of the media 恤 ...IL.也e conduct ofthat potítical debate- both in informing public opinion and in shaping the political strategies of the most int1uential protagonists. It is not our intention here 的 repeat the substantive conclusions of 也is 恥缸outrather 的 con的r th耐 broader implications. From the outset we have contended 曲的也e failure of the poll tax is JIlore 也an just of M甘祖sic 恤terest， but rather presents an opportuni杖!o explore broader issues pertinent to the study ofpolitical communication. So what are these wider lessons? 噩 r fòrcefully

、Y

Policy failures 缸e communication failures

L

The 釷st lesson is

the importance of communication fac切rs in explain旭g policy outcom肘， which tend to be only paid lip service in many policy analyses. In this regard , we dep缸t from John Gibson' s assertion that 'the importance ofpresentation , rela位ve to the rea1 effect ofthe flatrate [p oll] tax must not be exaggerated' (1990: 241 , our emphasis). In deed , we propose that it is only possibl~ to explain several crucial aspects to the introduction of the Community Charge by attending to the 'presenta位on' and broader political construction ofthe policy. This is demonstrated by the opinion poll evidence which shows that public concern with the issue co叮esponded only weakly wi也 the material impact of the policy , and by the many specific occasions where the emphasis ofparliament缸y， media andpublic debate had a direct impact on the form and s仕uc阻re of 也e policy, with profound material consequence琴. For example , the Government' s decision to revise the selffinancing safetyñet arrangements had nothing to do with the 'real' effects of the tax (implementa位on was seven months hence) but 電r

199

Taxation and Represen組tion: The Media, Poli討問l Commu凶闊的onand 也ePolI T揖

Chapter 8:

別herittSabiliwto mvizl圳的 own 叫porters and a'Kostile mass media that such arrangements weren't effectively subsidising Labour cOUncils at Conservative councils' expense. Conversely, Conservative Central Office's succ閥fu垃~definition ofthe Party's disa甜ous 1990 local 自ction results 也 a vindication of 血e principle of the tax, not only temporarily stymied Conservative dissent, media comment and public attentio且， but also - as Gibson himself concedes - directly influenced the outcome of the ministerial review then underway;, ensuring 'that the ßat rate principle of the

Loo king beyond elec位or晦之

區 wasretain

am.ong jOur]

一一ecause 堅堅堅旦旦旦也P.2.~y with ~悟空空空去堅吧!!~~~組9.ns many people. Whilst we wouldn't deny that the material inconsistencies andregres御eness of the policy played an important part in its abolition, we would challenge whether they provide a sufficient explanation for its defeat. Ra 叫the叮rwes叫 ugg 酹es“tt血 ha 叫tt血 he 盯血 Enat紛eria 剖ld 副ifficα1叫 11t位ies and polit位ical f;包細 副8.ilt眩ll"e a 郎s 阻d 恤扭錯且蝴哩C 句y_， 咖 0ne e

_....__.，句 咖0\叫 wo ul 址ld 仙 ha 帥 ve 呻e帥 ，御 ctt紀ed 伽 thes缸neGovèrnment 切 haveexp示bmed品 more ,/' .... ---Ã -~-

削O 岫 肘 u 咖l蜘 s i前t討 蚓忱 i泌 伽 叫 c 咖 a l

跆O E 叫 加re 閻 xa 岫 呻n m 呻 吋芷 咧 iψ 抖le p 仰 的， before 也e 198 Os it was unthilikable that a goveI'IlIl'lent cou厄

preside over unemployment levels 而nabove 也ree million - outside of a depression - and sustain any electoral credib過旬， but this was precisely the dubious achievement of the Thatcher adminis仕ation.jYet there was no 呵uivalentmedia or public outrage 枷削he wastefub:Ì已ssand 祖efficien可 of 也is situation, or the regressiveness of a broad economic s仕at句y 也at handed generous tax concessions to the affiuent professional classes, whilst dramatically cutting back benefit entitlements for low income dsoups-The truth is you cmfool q凶te a lot oft]le people for much ofthe /

l

恤e， an 祕dωou 帥叭 1

鈍 s ta 帥紛 delu 呱 1泌s滋ion.

l

To understand the political failure ofthe Community Ch缸醉， youneedto u/understand the process by which bcredibiHty was eroded, and the p缸" tic凶前 cond鼠忌在正函益而函前站泥而已函正泣起anagement and contr,Ql ofthat political debate. One ofthe cen仕al objectives ofthis book has been!卸 explain what it was about the poll tax that led the media to seize on it~unfairness and material failings, rather than gloss over them. 200

The second broad conclusion to be drawn 仕om 也is case study is the converse need for those intereste4 in the role of the media in the political process 'Ío attend more closely to~he comp抬頭出s of that process;).To do so . '; _ properly, there is a need to loosen th函首站當l班前前區前已lêctíê五s缸dies 前也于苛 磁ert on the 旭agination of politi叫 communica位onr鼠忌r~ID 1JHïóugh elections 位'e obviously si那ificant moments in the political calendar，也.eir freneticism makes them unusual,J!_typical poli位Cal periods , which have ! 叫 m 叫re o 咐ω 吋 由 d ow 咐 i尬t血 恤 ht也伽削 加 h e叫f叩n fj 盯rat血he 伽叫a叫咄sta 叩 肘c閃 n 帥eo 句 f加 仰 p olic 峙 c句 ym恤g. As a result of this, elec位ons個dieEE虫虫草 properly explore significant nuances J 旭 the political process that have important implica位ons for the construc位on of public discourses on political issues. For example, we have shown how tensions and dissent wit趾n political p缸ties significantly influenced the 抽血tydfhekleadersh砂純 con紋olthe 敏那 of media disco叮se-yet 由 it is precisely íhese complex intra party affiliatio吶。fthe media that are lost in the rough anâ tumble of a national electi冊， where concerns about inter partya血liations 缸einevi個bly at their most prominent 但illig et a1吋 1992; Lin切旦， 1992; Harrop and Scammel, 1992; 他ller， 1990). S加盟缸ly， a national election ca血paign temporarily obsc凹的 important local and regional differences and negates the important political con出butions ofnon p缸句 p。加cal institutions. To investigate these important matters we need to extend the temporal scope and focus of our enquiry beyond elec位on campaigns and attend more closely to the 'natural histo句'ofissues in the public domain.

I

)t~些血j

芥 i宣2.~ :Jd 必 血 蹈 just 她 ta 缸 xwas 臼呱 s鈴tc 叫 削 a us叫 e吋 d by its intrinsic regressiv

Re也inking Politi凹I 臼mmuni間位on

j Rethinking primary defmition

、

The 也ird lesson to be drawn from this case study involves reassessing some

of the central assump位ons 旭 the influential JP.odel of prim缸y definition (Hall et a1., 1978). In promoting the poll tax(ihe Govemment woulC! seem V' -'. / \、 i , to have had all the advantages and qualities òf a 'prim盯y deftnei). )t had authori旬， unique access to both information and jo叮nalis徊， and"control over timing. The policy was ideologically driven , part ofthe Conservative missionto 旭.j ect a consumer ph咀osophy into public serviceswhilst curbing the perceived excesses of municipal socialism. In the evenf, the fate of the ! poll t位 illustrates how the ideological advantages of prim缸y definitionψ can be eroded by_ political 叭血erab也旬， so that an之accredited' so凹ce .,_

beco~èsrargeïi'di~credited' 一 consiste吋 、/ }

201

子、 v

Taxation and Representation: The Med妞， Po加叫“mmunication and 也.ePoIIT個

ch句ter 8:

ingly unable to con仕01 the direction of public and media debate. This underlines the impo此ance of addressing both evaluative and interpreta位ve dimensions ofpolicy presentation and media coverage when considering the influence of authoritative so叮ces over a particular debate. SuccessfulIy defining the terms of a policy debate during its genera位.ve stages may be an important victory , but there is no 制訂antee that those interpretative p缸ameters will remain constant throughout the policy cycle， or 也at ~ts evaluative aspects will not erode ideological credib由你 的mwit恤n. Therefore(Iì ot only does primary defmition have 臼 bewon， it \ must also be sustained interpretatively and evaluatively through a series ofbattles , in which its political vulnerability may progressively increase.

盯'e treated wi自 greater I屁ference than 也ose of even the most senior

加'her悶 T e臼s扭 帥e缸叫 ch 叫曲咖 so pr削d伽 e郎sa阻no伽 削 e閥 s鈞s削色包qu 叫 ali恤 i

Rethinking Poli結叫“mmuni闊前.on

'advocates' and play a very important p缸t in shaping media evalua泣。那 ofthe issues upon which they are invited 切 comment. The polI tax w部 a curious excursion into the limits of radical statecraft. The power 切 create and dis甘ibu胎 mean垣g still resides with cen仕的 of material and political power, both wi也in the state and amongst 也ehigher reaches of corporate and fmancial authority. But this power is exerci甜d dynamically. It is fought over, chalIenged, and abused , both within and without. The citizen is both wi個ess 扭扭dp缸ticipant 扭曲at process. 0叮 underst曲曲g ofihaco耐butionbo也切 thes個dyofpo隘的叫∞m叫，

cation and to the enlightenment and insight which 缸ethβh祉1m缸'ks of d位zenship.

J

J

伽 dlef恤 ìni制 t位ion 且1 model, regarding the relative importance of teíÍsions within the

powers個cturefor 伽 constrUction ofmedi.a-dlScourses.日品 studywe haveshown 血的血edia scep位cism about the Community Charge did not emerge independently. Rather，坐空空空空旦旦旦輕型 were 哩哇，d 旦旦 tured by 0血er 組te sources - from within the Conservative P訂旬， local 一一一~一一一一-一......___戶戶， government , the voluntary sec個r， public and private sectors and the academic community - which the media subsequently reported. However, /in applying 也甜 own professional and poli位cal values 切 therepo的ingof νthe taxÇ也 e media exerted a highly significant influence on the debate; 旭 、 ampli肺訕缸位.cular issues an也堅空空旦others; in pressurizing c的也 E孤ñc誼了百回 ces on occ船沁ns and a lIowing others to escape with the scantest scrutiny. Despite this influential role, the ul位血ate dependency of the media' s critical disposition on the broader configuration of élite debate , shows the danger oftoo readily assuming a congruence in the interests and 到ms ofthe 'ruling classes'. This study clearly corroborates the conclusions of other recent studies and commentaries which have shown how the I{ frelative openness of media disco肘ses on p缸位cul前 issues is 1缸gely 缸" 。 pendent upon the degree of coherence in the views of authoritative sources -- - --戶戶戶戶~可月一-一一句~一一 半-一一 (HalI妞， 1986; Schlesinger, 1990; Miller, 1993).)Iowever , it also identifies an important dis也ction in the relationship between journalists and 組te so盯ces. This is between ‘advocates' and 'arbiters'. Although all news sources can be thought ofas 'advocates' …who each have a preferred image or message they would li'ke to convey 旭 the media - some 訂'e selected by journa,}ists to act ~s 'arbiters' on p缸位C叫訂 issues. The views and opinions V of the~~ arbiters). provided they are comprehensible 切 journalists and, crucialIy; can be broadly assim.ilated within th甜 inferential framewor'k202

203

Appendixl

Methods

The Content Analysis Criteriafor in c1usion A'poll 個xfi∞used'itemw部 defined 臼 anynewsorfeaturestorythathadanyaspect ofthereformsωlocal finance enacted by the 1987 晶晶位onofRa協 (Scotland etc.) Act and the 198~ L∞al Government Finance Act 帥 its main theme. A '伊沮知Xι rela凶， 1tem wa~ ány news or fea個re sωIry that referred 切也.ese matters in a' I sub峭的 co臨叭J

V

The sampleframe Thequan位 ta位veanaly啦。fmediacoverageofthe CommunityCh訂gecovered 也r個

sample periods. The first wa足~ longitudinal sample of national press 血d television coverage between 1 Janu呵呵官商d3lJS哥哥íñbèr 199 1. The na位onal pr臨 時mple comprised all poll tax focused 祖d related coverage in. every editiOI! of 也e VG叫 rdian， 伽 Sunday Times 祖d Th e Tim es for this period. ltems w証官認晶晶.edviaa I key-wordsearchof也.e 'Prome' data base. fI'he national television sample comprised all poll t缸 focused coverage from BBC1's 9pm News, ITN's News at Ten , Channel Four's 7p11LNewsandBBC2'sNewsn1ghtforthesar睡 period. These were iden位fiedby analysing Ilbrary re∞rds held by ITN and the BBC. 1

戶f

/" O/J. , _-<"_

焉，..

~，..

?

,,/

I

v

」一_J

The second sample period covered the apex ofmedia coverage of the poll tax debate ,

1

9 9 成主，

betw間 n1Marchand5May1990，間dprovid吋在plorede個iledcomp位isonofpoll

tax related coverage across an extende的時eofJo吋 andna位onal media content.) ~ Thena位.onal media sample during 也isperiod w個 expanded 切 include three radio

v affairs programmes (BBC Radio Four's 6pm News and Th e World To n1ght andBBC Radio One's News '90) and 也r甜 tabloid newspapers (the Sì帥，也.e V 恥句 M1rror and 也e Dai1y 她的. The local media sample comprised all poll 他 rela切d coverage in alll∞al newspapers 血d television covering six selected local au也ority regions. newsandcur自nt

The selec位on oflocal sample are個 W品 determined by six criteria: (1) the poll位cal complexion ofthe CouncU 弘abour/ Conservative); (2) the polltical orientation of血e parllamentary cons位.tuency over-arching each authority (Conservative江.abour); (3)howm訂斟nalth帥 p的ament叮 consti個encies were (m盯'ginal/non-m訂gi­ 叫); (4) the geographic locallty of 伽 local authority (no地Isou也); (5) the type of

t)

./

205

,,,-

,

T阻ation and Represen跑前on: The Media Poli位開l 伽mmunica位onand 也ePolI T，缸

Appendix2

訂閱 (urbanlrural);

and (6) the level of Commu到ty Charge levied 坦 relationω Government recommendations (hi晶晶w). The areas selected for the sample were: 。)Eas泌 gton， County 趴rrham(anor也ern，J;:世盛1.abour authority 訂閱 inanonm訂訟nal Labour constituency with a

'low' Commu凶tyCharge);

ν

(2) Liverpool(ano抽間， ur~叫品our authority are咽， covering several non-marginal Labo叫 co即位個encies， witha 'high' Community Charge):

v

(3)

References //

Bradford(ano拙的，略哩晶體阻伽 au也o甜的a[nb:atthe

/

位me ofthe analysis] , covering s叫eral marginal Labour cons怯tuencies， with a 'lo w' Community Ch訂 ge):

v

,V

(4) G凶ldfo吋， Surrey (a sou也ern.f_~al.~竺ryative au也ority 訂eaina non marginal Conservative constituen旬， with a 'high' Co mmunity

Alexander, A. (1990): ‘'Les sons for 也.e locals: poll tax 抽油站'.1'.包r.tlsmTcx旬， 16呵17 April. Anderson ,J.A.andMeyer,T.P. (1988):Medlated CammunlcatlDn: ASocia1ActlonPe呻叫ve.Newbury

Ch倒-ge):

P虹'k:Sage.

(5) OxfordCity 扭曲uthern， urQ閥， Labourau也，orityarea 旭 am位'ginal 臼nserva伽几abourcons位仙也瓦Willi a'扭曲，臼mm叫.tyChargβ):

London: ALA.

ALA

(13).

Baker,1(. (1993): Turbulent y，甜~.London:FaberandF曲er. Barker, R. (1992): 'Legit恤且cy in the United Klngdom: S∞tland and the poll tax'. Britlsh lournal 01 PoI1t釘a1 Sclence l l, 521-533‘ Baum曲， Z. (1987): Leglslaωrs and 1n terpreters. Cambrldge: Polity Press. Berry, S. (1992): ‘F位ty strategy and the media:也.e fallure of Labour's 1992 electlon camp剖醉，

area in a non marginal Conserva位.ve constituency, wi也 a 'low' Com-

l All daily and weekly newspapeç色 in each area were 回amined (p叫枷 and fre e'-sheets) , along wi也 thβm組n， w間kd可 BBC and 叮V regional evening news proS這mmes covering thβsix regions (BBC East，瑟瑟C South East, BBC Nor也 h鈍， BBC Nor也 West， An glia TV, Yorkshire TV, Granada TV, Central TV, Thames TV, London

ParUamen紋，當 Affalrs 咐， 563由58 1.

BlIlig，此， Dea∞口， D. , Golding, P. and Mlddie切n， S. Televlslon, poli位白聞d the 1992 general electlon', in All en). London: Jo加Llbbey.

Weekend TV).

(1992): ‘In the hands of 也.e spin-d∞切m I t's Ll ve But ls lt RealJ (eds. N. Mlller and R.

BI曲， P. (1989): Adm扭扭扭ring 也e 臼mmu且ltyι:har阱， Paper presen侮dωthe Instltu胎。fBritlsh Gωgraphers' Ann ual Conference , Coven缸yPolytech且Ic， 4J，叩U 位y.

一領

The final sample period ∞vers 也efo叫 weekcamp到gnp咄咄 ofthe 1992 General t 1(( J_. μ圓的位on(l1 M阻chω9 April1992) , andassessedtheprom泌en凹 ofpollt磁 foc即ed -~，-I coverage in the main na位onalrevening news programmes (BBCl's 9pm News , News at Ten and News n1ght) and the m也 morningne閑 and current atl'airs programme , (BBC Radio Four's Today programme).

BI∞h， A. 祖dJohn， P. (1991): 'Attltu，必s to Ioca1 govemment', Joseph Rown虹eeFounda位on: Lo叫個d Central Government Relatlons ResearchFinding草， 13 September.

!

Blunk醋， D. andJacks冊，K.

(1987): Democracy 如 C吋sls: The Town 臨I1s Respo nd. London: Hog缸th

pre臼.

Bod旬， M. and Fudge, London: Macm111an.

Boyne , G.A. 42 6-4 37.

J

C. (eds) (1984): Lo OO Soc lalismJ Labour Counclls and New Left Alt ernatlves.

(1986): 'Rate reform

阻.d

the

fuωre

of local dem∞racy'. Th e Pol1tlOO Quarterly 57,

BramI旬， G.

函 《。

i 且ean誌祕 ly 抖苗削 昀誼 01J i 戶 ourn世品恥 闢詣副A L 刷 Ullew :s:>u山 U吟A 晶芯 U恥 c 阻恥‘ u 叫 UllU 且u恥恥;1-1 且 u 叩 ν峙 U 叭 吧 A g三彭

t恥 ure 它吋 d 旭t跆 E凹i抬 ews仇，

which varied 詛 le閒 呵 n gt 也 h Q_etween 15

4

E

mi泌 nu鉛恤 s 胡 豆nl

恤 in 凶t臼 帥 盯耐 β rvi 削i旭 eWI 仰 師 e eswe 帥 昀 r esel 伽 1

local jo 叫 urnal攝s were interviewed，坦cludingl∞al governníent cQm po加cal corre句onde帥， political ediωrs and general news edito叭EF interviews

J

were conducted wi也 nationalpφiticia哩J訂ty political press officers, and representa御的 from the civil service,)oçru authority associations, the academic s間做 and national pr的盯e groups峙jI interviews were conducted with!Q蟬 news .V so\封閉s， including local poli位.cians ， local government finan冊。益問rs and press _ offi田rs ， voluntary organiza位ons and business leaders. Although repea叫lyapproached, no Government minister would agree to be interviewed for the research.

206

01 伽 αmm削句 σzarge， α:caslona1 p，勾Iers

Londo也 Audit 臼mml蚓凹， November.

mu到tyCh紅ge).

ρ

of London Au銜。rl位es) (1988): BIack PeopIe, Bthnlc M仰。叫t起sand 的e PoI1 Tax.

Audit Commlsslon (1990): The AdmlnlstratlD n

(6) Hun也gdons恤'e， Cambs (a southern立堅壁主空間rvative authority ',/

(Ass∞latlon

et aL (1988): HowF訂 ls the Poll Tax a 'Commu到ty Ch位阱'?The Impll開tlons ofService User Evldence, Paper presentedωthe Intemational Semlnar on 'Loc al Goverument Finance in TheoryandαJ.ITent Applied Res倒rch' ，的叮叮a， Italy， 1 6-17 September. Broo鈕， D. (1994): 'Ta到nge寫>erlences'. Search 19, Spring, 11-13. Brown , C. (1984): Black and Whl te. London: PSIIGower. Bru切， B. (1991): How the Image Ma kers Shape Our Leaders. London: Kegan Paul. B山尬， D. (1992): POI1 Tax RebeIll on. S∞t1and: AK Pre鉛. Butler， D. 阻.dKavana阱， D. (1992): TheB吋tlsh GeneralBIe ctlD nol1992. London: Macmlll祖. Campbell, M. , F，給ther 曳，Ka控咽， T. and Le ach , B. (1988): The αmm叫ty Charge (poI1 Tax). The μeds Vlew. Lee ds: Leeds Polytω:hnlc Policy Research Un1 t. αPFA(血紅tered Ins tltute for Public Finance and A，∞000個ncy) (1987): Womenandthe ωmmunlty 晶arge. London: CIPFA. Chibnall, S. (197η: Lawand Order News. London: Ta討stock.

207

,

T坦ation and Represen純位on: The Media PO加開l Commu國問話on and the Pol1 Tax

Cohen.B. (1963): The Press arulPore.旬nPoll句.扭扭mωn: P由.ce包n University Press. Commi鈴lononαtizenshlp (1990): Report: Bncouraglng Cltlzens峙. London: 因在SO. Commit臨 oCPubllcA∞ounts (1990): PubUc1 ty Serv.必es for Government Dq;閣官的lents. 的 thR坦port. 1ondon: HMSO. 臼xall. B. 問dRob恤.

L. (1989):ω帥呵。raryBr.益lshPolltics: A1lIntr，耐ICtlon. 1ondo也 Maα凶II阻­ G間間.J.and Se胸口， J. (1981): Power Wlthout R呻峭的血ty: The Press and BroQt加s的Ig lnBrl岫L London:Fon個na Books.

curr間， J. (1990): ‘αi1turallst pers戶認tives ofnews organisations: a reappraisal and aωse 恥d}'戶，她 PubllcCommw帥位。几﹒ The New tmperatlves - Puture Direc位onsofMe曲 Research (ed. M. F，呵usbn).

London: Sage. D帥. A. (1989): 'Impllca恥的 oC publlc rela位ons in local govemment' , Loca1 Government 恥的wlS3 (2的， 15 ]1旬.54皂白549. Dal棚，R.J. (1988):αtlzenPolltlcsln Westem Dem甜的恥 NewJersey: 由athamHouse. Davls-Smi銜，耳 (1988):'T咽ngthe ∞nununi句'，加oIve， lSep始她er.3.

DeBe凶. E.. Kelly，泓血.dB必拙，泓 (1992): 'Tel叫sion ∞ntent: Dallasification oC culture?' in E枷叫csof馳dla Polltics: Broadcast and BIe ctronIc }，必dla ln Westem Burope (抽.民 SiuneandW. True臨chler). London: Sage.

D悅∞且， D. 四d Golding, P. (1991): 'The volun訟rys臼切r 包“the 恆formation society": a sindy in di叫sion and uncert訟nty'. 的'Iwztas: IntematlonaI loumaI ofNI仰-Prψt Organisations (2) , 67-8 8.

.z

Dea∞n.D. andGo~益時， P. (1993): 'Barri的切的ntral侮m: local governme瓜， localmed扭曲d 也B ch紅geonthe ∞nununity'. LocaI Govemment 8tudies 19(2), 176由189.

Dea∞n.D. 四d Golding, P. (1992): Medla 臼verage ofthe Abo岫on oCthe Conunu凶句也E阱，End of ProJect 恥:port for FSRC Grant ROOO 扭扭扭. Depar恤ent of S∞凶犯ienc嗨.1ou位borough U到versity.

D磁∞n ， D. and Golding, P. (1991): 'Whenldeolog}' FaIls: TheFlagship of啞臨:herlsm 血dtheBritlsh h個landNa位onal Medla'. BuroμanlournaI of Co mmunIcatlon 6(3). 291-314. 卸E 仰伊恤.ent ofthe Environment) (1981): A1tematlv，的 ωDo間stic Ra帥. 1ondon: HMSO , Cmnd.

8449. oCthe Environment) (1983): 加凶: ProposaIs for Rate Llnútatlon arul Rφr.m of伽 恥的19Syste肌London: HMSO. Cmnd. 9008. DoE (Dep位個.ent

DoE (Dep缸出entofthe En叫ronment)

(1986a): p，甸的!gfor LocaI Govemment. 1ondon: HMSO, (油nd.

9714. 。oE 紅地par個entofthe Environment) (1986b):Pay的:gfor LocaI Govemment: 8W11m ary ofRe sponses to the Green Paper ln BngIand. London: Depar個.entofthe En'耽onmenι

Dow叫時， J.

“

(1986): 'Government secrecy 個d 伽 media 姐也.e United Sta岫臨.dBri個恥'in Com­ ( s. P. Goldlng. G. Murd∞:kandP. Schle血ger). Lei個ter: Leicester University 對ess. 趴ml儲哼. P. (1989): 'The end of cla路 polltics?' in Polltics 卸卸的1Sltlon (“扎扎 α>chr叩.e andJ. Anderson). Londo曰:Sage. Dunleavy.P. 個d Rhodes. R. A.W. (1988): 'Government Beyond Whitehall' , inDevelopments lnBrltlsh Polltics 仰 (eds. H. Drucker et aL ). London: Macmill胡. 皂的切n， D. (1965): A 8yste.晒 AnaIysts ofPolltical Llfe. New York: Wiley. 尬。， U. (1979): TheRoIe ofthe Reade r; Bxploratlons 飢伽 Sem10的s ofTexts. Bl∞m凶gωn and 1ondon: Indi扭扭 U凶.versity Pres s. Elliott, P. (1972): The 1\飢k1ng ofa Te Ievlslon 8er.te s. 1ondon: 臼泌帥le. Entez訓，況 (1988): 'The 臼nunu凶ty Ch位ge: its impllcations for the voluntary sec切r'. Volwztary mwz恥的Ig Polltics: 岫ss αmmunIcations and 伽 PolltlcaI Process

VoIce 扭， Febru訂y， 1。可11.

毆騙他孔V..B位'anek， P拭祖dCh間， J.B .L. (198η:V.郎Laltslng De伽1Ce: A8tu句。ifNews OrgQ1帥"

tlons. Milton Keynes: 句en University 對閥. 毆icso且， R几 Baranek， P此 and Ch間. J.B.L.

(1989): Negotlatlng Co ntroI: A Study ofNews Sources. Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Esam , P. and Oppenhe恤， C. (1989): A 品arge on the ωmmwúty: Th e Poll Tax Benejlts arul the Poor. 1ondon: CPAG 阻dLGIU.

208

Appendix 2: References

法阻姐姐，鼠 (1988):

Publlc ReIatlons Actl討tlesln Ll間1 Government. αnydon: 的arles Knight. D. (1991): Wha t News? The 1\伽rke也 PolltIcs. arul the LocaI Press. 1ondon:

Fr姐姐姐， B.andM凶p旬，

Routledge. Gal伽呵.J. andRuge , M. (1969): ‘祖e 甜uct峙。fforeignne閑" Tun成“1). London: Constable.

in Medla Soclo旬'y: A Reader (ed. J.

G阻旬， O. (1982): Beyond Agenda Settlng: Info r.m atlon Subsfd凶 arul Publlc Pol陶. Norwo<祠， New Jersey: Ablex Publlshlng. Gans，且 (1979): Decldlng Wha t's News. NewYork: V旭個.ge. Ga討n， N. (1992): 'Television News 阻d the Econom~月也e Pr冒-Camp凶gn Coverâge'. ParUatnenta ry Affal爪哇5: 597-6 11. Glbson. J. (1990): The Pollt蜘 andBconom卸 ofthe Poll Tax: Mrs That cher's Do朋ifalL α祖dley 臨ath: 訟nas.

Golding, P. (1970): 租車臼ncept of Gatekeep凶g in Mass Conunu凶cation Research: llinstra位.veStudy.D泌ser姐姐on. Essex: Department ofSociolog}', Ess ex u:到V釘sity.

A Critique and

Goldi呵， P.(1974): 恥抽ss Me伽. London: Lon伊an. Golding, P. (1981): ‘扭扭 missing d1men5Ions- news medla 個d the managementofsoc凶 chan阱'in S必ss Medla and 80claI Change (1自ls.E.Ka包 and T. Szecsko). 1ondon: Sage. Golding, P. (1989): The Limltsω Le討晶晶問:the 1o侃l Pre詢問dthePollT眩" Paper for the panel on Local Po加cs and the Local Press, PollticaI S胞也認 Associ品的on Annual Conference, WarwickUniver-

51妙， Aprll. Goldi峙. P. (1990): ‘Pollti叫 conun間i開信on and ci臨的hIp: the m吋la 個ddem∞racy in an 旭eg姐姐ri妞 social order' in Publlc α'mmw也現tlon: 伽 New Imp eratives (ed. M. Fe句U鉤n). London:

Sage. Goldlng. P. (1993): Telling Storles: S∞iology， the Medla and the Blinkertng of Dem∞racy in the Information A齡.In帥部raILec個泊，Lou位horou位:1oug隘的ughUnive甜ty. Goldlng, P. (必前恥oming): 'The mass media and 也.e pubUc sphere' in Debatlng 伽 Fu似reof伽 Publlc 耳phere (eds. S. 剖gell et aL). Ahlershot: Avebury. Golding, P. and 圓liott， P. (1979): 且必抱ng 伽 News. 1ondon: 1on gman. Golding, P. and Middle切也 s. (1982): Images ofWelfare: Press arul Publlc Att1tudes ω Pover句﹒Oxford: BasU BlackwelL Golding, P. 曲dMurd叫ιG. (1991): ﹒αiI仙風臼，mmunica位ons and Polltical Economy' in 1\似S5 她dla arul 80cie句 (eds.J. Curr姐姐d 肌 Gurevitch). 1ondon: Edw叫Arnold. Goldsmi伽'U:凶versity Medla R紛侃rch Group (1987): Medla Coverage of1ondon CouncUs, Interim Report. London: Goldsmiths U:凶verslty. Gol街mi鼠， M. (1979): ‘Thech血g1ng system of Engllsh local government'旭 LocaI Govemment ln 加talnandPra帥 (eds. J. Lagroye 血d V. Wright). London: Gωrge Allen 個dUnwln. Gyford, J. (1985): The PolltIcs of LocaI SocIal1sm. LocaI Govemment Br.tejlngs (3). London: All en and Unwln. Gyford , J. , Leach, S. 個d Game. c. (1989): A H1story of以1CaI Government 卸的e Twentteth αntul羽­ London: Unwin Hym且n. Ha盟， S. , Critcher, C. , Jeffe間鳳， T. 阻dRobe血， B. (1978): Pollclng 伽伽血1ondon: Maα泌llan. 抽血且， D. (1986): The Uncensored War: The Media arul Vle飢ant. Oxford: Oxford Universlty pr臨. Halloran, J.，因110仗， P. andMurd∞缸， G. (1970): Demonstrations and 白'mmwúcatlon: A αse 8tudy. H缸尬。n公worth: Penguin. Hansen, A. (1991): 啞巴 media 阻d 也.e social ∞nstruction ofthe environ血ent'. Medla， αdtureand Socle句 13.443-458.

Hansen. A. and Murd∞k， G. (1985): ‘Cons甘ucting the crowd: popul函tdiscourse 阻dprωspresenta­ tion'，旭 PopuIar αdture and Medla Bvents. The c.吋的aI Commw間tlon Re的wvoL3 (eds. V.Mo詞。四d M.W的ko). New Jersey: Ablex. Harrop. 批 and Scamme ll , M. (1992): ‘A 個.blold war' in The Brlt帥 GeneraI Blectlon of 1992 (，自ls.D. Butler and D. Kav間agh). London: Macmilla且 日前油， R. (1990): Good and Pa1thful Servan t: Th e Unauthorlzed Blography ofBemard In gluun. 1品ndon: Faber and Faber.

209

T臨ation and Represen組組on: The Media, PO油開l Communi伯世.on and the Poll T祖

Hasla訟， C.andBrym間， A.

(1994): SoclaI Sc.卸的tsM甜t the Media. 1ondon: Rou tIedge.

Hefferm妞， R. andMarqusee, M. (1992): Defeatfrom 伽 I叫s ofVlctory: Inslde K1nnock's凶ourParly.

1ondon: Verso. Hennωsey， P. 阻dWalker， D. (198η: 'The lobby' In飢e MedI.且 ln BrltlshPoUt1 cs ~他.J. 必aton 甜dB.

A1dershot: Avebury. Herm妞， E. (1986): ‘G臨keeper versus propaganda models: a

P岫lott).

cri位cal American pers防甜ve' 旭 αmmw伽tlng PoUtlcs: 抽ss Communicatlonand 伽 PoUtlcal Process (eds. P. Goldi呵， G.Murdock 祖d

P. Sc泌eslnger). Lelc臼te口Lelce耐rUI帥的Ity Pr臨.

Herm妞， E. 個d Chomsky, N. (1988): Manufac似的IgConsent; 伽 PoUt1ca1 Bconomy of伽 Mass M.edJJz. NewYork: P朋thωnB∞ks. Hllg紅包er， S. and Bosk, C.1. (1988): ‘TheR恤間的alloC心c1al Problems: A PubUc Arenas Model' in Amer恤nJourna1 ofSociology94 (1)， 53一78. Hll1y前d， P.

andPercySmith. J. (1988): The 白ercille State. London: Pinter.

Hogg帥， P. andBurns , D. (1991/92): ‘四erevengeoC伽伊or: The antl poll tax 個mp叫.gnlnBrit啦'. C吋t伽lSocIaI PoUcy 33 , Wmter, 9 5-110.

D. (1989): ‘Freedom w!ll flourtsh where cltlzens a∞ept responslb血t1es'， In甸endent， 13 September. ILP (Independent Labour P紅ty) (1988): Axe The PoU Tax. 政.P Paper， 2. Ingh恤， B. (1991): KiU 伽 M.essenger. London: F，扭扭曲. Ingleh紅t， R. (197η: Tlt e SI1 ent Rell01ut的几 Prince切n: Prtnce切n Unillersity Pres s. Jen旭凶， J. (1991): 一r也ng L1beriles'. New Statesman & S，阿拉旬'， 31M旬， 6. 1個姐ns， J. (1992): ‘'Misslng M!lUons'. New Statesman & 泌的旬， M旬， 13. Keith-Luc筒， B.and Rich紅包， P.G. (1978): AH尬切ryoC1o仿1 Governnlent In the Twentleth Centu旬， TheNewL∞al Governnlent Seri凶， No.17. 1ondon:λllenandUn叫n. Kni拉t， G. 祖d Curtls, B. (198η:'The pubUcity oC 此ate subJects' In PoUtl，吋自mmun1cation Res earch (ed. D. Paletz). New Jersey: Ablex. Labour Party Young SoclaUsts (1989): F岫t 也e Poll Tax, London: Labour Party Young SocIaUst車， PamphletNo. 1. Lamb ,1. (1989): Sun也e. London: Papermac. Lavale勛，M.個dM∞n旬， G. (1989): 'The 甜uggle ag泌的tthepoll 組x In ScotIand' , Crlt伽1 Social PoU旬， 16， Autun:in, 82-100. Lavale恥，M.血.dM∞n旬， G. (1990): 'Unde扭扭Ingthenor也咽 uth divide? Flgh出g 也.epo豈能xln s∞tIand， England 阻d Wales' , Crlt凶lSoc凶 Po.尬:y 19 ， Autum且， 100-119. Lavalet跑， M. and Mooney, G.(1992/3): 'The poll 個x struggle in Bri包In: areply 切 Hogge悅阻d Burns, (CSP 33)'. Critlca1 Soc.甜的licy 36 , Winter, 9 6-108. Lawson, N. (1992): View from Number B1elle.凡: Memoirs ofa Tory Radica1. 1ondon: B聞組m. Layfield 臼mmit臨 (1976): Loca1 GOllernment F，飢伽e. London: HMSO , Cmnd 6453. Lee, M (1989): 'Poll taxs曲tyne包 :Cactsandti姐姐旬'. Low Pay Review 38: 8-9. 凹的(包侃1 Governnlent Information U叫t) (1989):LGIUGuide ω the PoU Tax. 1ondon: 叩m. L1berty (1989a): Ci低1 Liberty: News，跆 tter ofNCCL 5(4) , Augus t. London: L1berty. L1berty (1989b): P吋lla句 and the PoU Tax: Your Rights and the Law. London: L1berty. L1berty(1989c): Pri附'yandthePoUTax:AGuide 切 GoodPr，叫 iceforL棚1 GOllernment 01伽rs. London: L1bertylAss∞泊位on oC London Authorl世es. L1ber句 (1989d): Prillacy and the PoU Tax: A Gωde ω GoodPrac伽for Cow叫Uors. 1ondon: Llbertyl.缸" soclatlon oC1ondon Authorities. Llberty (1991): M1nutω oC Annual General Mee出g. London: L1berty. LIn切且， M.(1992): 甘冒ss-g凹ged at the polls' , In The Guar曲n Guide to the Ho的eofCommons (ed. M. LIn切n). London: Fourih Estate. 10u拉加，M. (1990): 'Law Idωlogles 阻dthepoU位開ladmini甜甜.vesy前em'， in Tlt帥her's La w (eds. A. Gamble and C. Wells). Kent: Bas UBlackwell. 10w Pay Unit (1987): Lo w Pay Re1l1ew 19, Spring. 巫山述，

210

t\ppen曲x 2: References

McN曲， B. (1994): N帥 andJo urnaUsm ln the t.皮'. London: RoutIedge. McQuaU，必. (1969): 'Unce成位ntyabout 也.eaudienωand 也eorga到satlonoCm郎S ∞mmunl開.tlons' ， In The SocIolo翩。ifA伽ss MedI.a Commw曲曲rs(ed.P. 臨1mos). Tlte S，耐oioglcal Review Mo nograph 13.

Mabbott, N. (1992): Loca1 Authority FundIngfor Voluntary Orgw帥的瓜1ondon: NCVO. MacGregor, S. (1988): The Poll Tax and the En terprise Culture: The ImpUca恥的。C Recent Loc al Governnlent Leglslatlon Cor Demo位acy and the Welf紅e State. London: Centre Cor 10個1 Economic S甘ate風俗.

MacGregor, S. (1991): ‘Poverty，也E 伊Utax 祖.d Thatcherlte welf;帥 poUcyp釘t1:how 也epoll 個z axed 愉s 祖atcher'， The PoUt凶1 Quarterly 61 (4) , 443-4 50. Marsh. D. and 抽od筒， R. (1989): Imp1emen的Ig Tltatche的肌﹒ A PoUcy Perspectllle. Essex U凶vers!cy: 必sex Papers in PoUtlcs and Governnlent, 62. Mason , D. (1985): Re1lisi甸的eR泌的~g System. London: Adam Smith Ins位tute. Miller, D. (1993): 'Offic旭1 sourc臼 and 'prim訂y deflnltlon': 也e case oC Northem Irel阻缸， MediJ哩， αùture and socte句 15(3)， 38金-400.

M!ller, S. (1989): 四且tcherism， cl也enship， and the po祖個耳'In SocIaI PoUcy Review1988-的 (eds.M. Bren切n and C. Ungerson). London: Longman. 關ller， W.， αarke，H.D. ，臨股旬，脫，Led肘， L. and WhItely, P. (1990): How Voters 品ange: 伽 1987 B吋tlsh Genera1 B1eciion α呻蝴n 加 Perspeciill，ι Oxfo吋: OxfOrdUI益versity Press. MORI (1989): Attltudes 切的UTax 卸 Lei阻teι London: Mori. Morrlson, D. and Tumber , H. (1985): ‘TheCorei但∞rrespondent; date-Une Lo ndon'. Med鼠， αd個re andSociety 7 , 44 5-4 70. Murdock, G. (1984): 'Repo別時也e rlots: Images and lmpact' In Scarm且n and After (ed. J.Benyon). London: Per富amon Press.

NFSE (Natlonal Federatlon Cor the SeIf-Employed) (1990): Flrst Vo l.ce: Magazlne for the Se1fBmployed 15(2), Febru訂y/M臨h:5. Negrine, R. (1993): 胡e Organlsatlon oCBritish Journalism and S戶c1aUst Corres伊ndents: A Study oCNewspaper Repo叫ng，Lelc臼ter: Centre Cor Mass 臼mmu凶catlonR自翎rch， Universlty oC Leicester , No. MC93/1 , November. Nort冊， P. (1990): ‘自∞slng a new leader: M紅軍aret Thatcher and the ParUamen恤y 白的ervative F前旬， 198 9-1990' ， Par.加nentary Affa1r富的 (3)， 249叮259.

Nα立，(Na位onal Co uncil Corα叫1 日bertl臼:)(1987): The Privacy InlpU臼tlons oCthePoll Tax. London: NCα句 BriefìngNumber 7, November.

NCVO (National 臼uncU Cor Voluntary Organisatlons) BriefìngCorVolun個ry Organls島的ons. 1ondon: NCVO.

(1987): The Communlty Charge System: A

NCVO (Natlonal CouncU Cor Volun個ry Organisatlons) (1990): 血èctlven間 and S仿紛r: ReportoCaW自由ngp虹ty 忍stabUshed by NCVO. London: N凹O.

the

Vount位Y

Nlmmo， D. 個d Combs ， J.E. (1990): Med1atedPoUt個1 Real1tles, 2nd 錯n.NewYork:1ongnlBn. Nixon,J. (1980): 'The 旭伊拉甜ceoC∞mmunlcatlon In也e implementa口on oC governnlent poUcy at thel叫 level'.的岫 andPoU位s 8 , (2). Oppe咄.eim， C. (198η: A Tax on a11 the p，ωIple: the PoU Tax. London: CPAG. Peck, J. (1987): PoU Tax: How it WillAffeci Yo u. Lo ndon: Commu越St P前ty oC Great BrltaIn. P!mlo訟， B. (1988): ‘ThepoUtI凶。Cthepoll 組x: aωuchoCsp血g In the aIr', New Statesman , 22 Ap r!l:

9. PopuIatlon T時nds (1991):‘In Brler . Pop u1otlon Trends 6壘， 1-3. Q凶盒， B. (1986): 'P~抖ngCori∞al goveniment: beyond 也e llnanclalissues', Loca1 Gòvemment Si似伽S ll，Septemb前IOctober， 3-11. Rab妞， J. (1989): God， 且必凡 and Mrs. Tlta tcher. London: Cha蛇o. Rich缸訟， P.G. (1980): Tlt e RφrmedL帥1 GOllemment System , 4th edn. 1ondon: A1le溢血dUn:叫n. RldI旬， N. (1988): The Local Right: BnabUng Not Providing. 1ondon: Centre Cor PoUcy Studies, PoUcy StudyNo.92. RoyalStat關ωlSoclety(1990): Off1cIaI Statlst l.cs: Coun的Ig Wlth Co nftdence. London: Royal 抽泣stical s∞lety.

211

,

T盟主單位on and Represen給tion: The Media Pollü吋恥mmunica誼on and the Poll T，臨

Saunders, P. (1981): 80血l Th帥，當 and 伽 UrbanQ間tlo叫且.don:Hutc凶nson. Saunders, P. (1982): 'Why study central-I∞alreIa鈍。甜， μ1cal Government 8tudies 8 , 55-6 6. vSch!~slnge丸 P.

Appendix 3

(1990): 'Rethln拯ngthes∞1010gy of Journalls m: source stratégles and 也e llmlts oC

mediacen剖sm'， In Publlc 由mmwúcatlon: The New 的tperatlves 呻 F臨Ire Dlrl叫Ions ofMedJa Research (00. M. Pe培uson). London: Sage.

Schleslnger, P. (1989): ‘Prom Productlon 切Propaganda' ， Med鈕， αdture and 80cle均 11 ， 283由.306. 飢。總sh .AntlPoll T眩Pedera位on(1989):NoPoll TaxHere. Th1s FarandnoFur的er. Don't αR叫.卸的 Pay. ScotIand: “P'I官 pamphlet.

Index

Semetko, H.A., Bluml肘'， J. ， Gurevltch, M., B缸姆n， S. 臨dαeveland wilh呦， G. (1991): The Formatlon of αm伊甸n .dgendas: .d αmμratlve A.naly s1s of Par句 and 馳dIa Ro1e s ln Re cent .ð.mer恤n and British B1ectlons. London: Lawrence Erlbaum. 品we血，R.

(1989): Bat t1e .dgalnst 伽 Poll Tax. London: 岫岫nt.

Seymo伽U間， C. (197η: 'Sc1ence and m必lclne and the p悶s'， Boyd-B訂ret， C.S句mo眩'-Ure 朋dJ. Tun耐1). London: HMSO.

in 8tudies on the Press (eds. O.

Seymour-Ure , C. (198η: Aldersho t: Avebury.

(eds. B.

S啊， L.

'Ú)aders'，包 The Med扭扭 B付t1sh PoUtlcs

P1mIo位祖dJ. Sea切In).

(1973): Reporters and Ofjl伽1s. Le血gtl凹， USA: DC Heath.

Sills, A., Taylor, G. 阻d Goldlng, P. (1988): The PoUtlcs of伽 Urban Crls1s. London: Hutc泌nson. Sllvers切加，孔 (1990): 'Tel叫slon 問d everyday life: 切W紅色扭扭曲ropology oC the téle vls10n audience', in Pub1Ic 臼mmwúcatlo凡﹒恥 NewImperatlves自 Future Dlrectlonsfor她曲 Research (00. M. Pe晦uson). London: Sage.

Smellle, K .B. (1968): .dHl駒，當 ofLoca1 Govemmenι4也 edn. London: Allen and Unwln. Sm1th , J.

間d Maclean, 1. (1992): The UK Poll Tax and the Decllnlng mec切ral RoII: Un1甜甜ed Con鈴哇泌的臼﹒ W前w1ck 必onomlcR自earch Papers. W位wlck: Depar恥.ent oC Econom1cs, Un1vers1tyoCW位wlck.

Solomos, J. (1986):

'Polltl咽 language and VI日le且tpro臨t: 泌的lOgiω1 1981 間d1985rlots' ， YouthandPoUcy18 , 12-24.

sωker，

andpollcy 服:pon捕切 the

G. (1991): The PoUtlcs ofLoca1 Govemment, 2nd edn. London: Macm1llan.

oo.

加帥，J(1993): The De cllne oCPr臨 Repo措ng ofParllament, unpubllsh

Thomton, P. (1989): 必cade ofDecUne﹒ Cl叫 LJber的S 如伽 Thalcher Years. London: Liberty.

Topf,R. (1989): 'Polltlcal Change andPolltlcalαi1ture inBrl扭扭 1959-8 7'， inαnten有porary PoUtIca1 Cu1ture 目 PoU的S 如 apos紡wdem age (e d. J.R.Glbblns). Londo血 Sage Tuchman, G. (1978): 她被ngN腳s: .d 8tudy 飢伽 Construction ofReaU旬.NewYork:Pree Pr臨﹒ Tuns闕， J. (1970): The Wesbninster Lobby ωrr，呵。lruients: Joum叫做n. London: Ro utIedge &Keg個 Pa此 玖姐5個盟， J.

a 8000.切伽18tu句。if Natlo na1 PoUtIca1

(1971): Jou maUs ts at Work. London: Cous能，ble.

V曲Llere， K.D.血d Dunl旬， R.B. (1980): ‘Thes∞lal bases of envlronmen能lconωrn: a 自vlewof hypothe帥， expl阻atlons and emplrl個1 evldence' , Publlc Op1nlon αIilrterly4壘(勻， 181-197.

WeIsh 臼usumer Council (1989): .d 81切dy 伽ω 伽 B.ffectiveness of 伽 PubUc lnformatlon 臼7草1al.gnln Wa1es .dbout 伽 Commwú均由arge.C訂也ff:Welsh 曲的umer Co阻.cllfCyngor Defnyddwyr 句mru. WestI旬， B. and MacLe曲，肌 (195η: ‘A ∞，ncep似al Joum叫做n Quarterly 3壘， 31一38. W泌腳時，

modeI for mass ∞mmu到“.tlon r惱earch' in

C. (1988): 四e Commun1ty Charge: le蜘g Ne\嗨， No.690， Au郎ISt/Septémber: 12令126.

people kn帥'.Mun拉加1 Revtew and .dMð.

W1ne智obe， B. (1992): 'A tax by any othername: the poll t位 and 也.e Community Ch紅軍;e' ， Par11amentary λ1.ffa1rs4S ， 421-427.

Young, H. (198 7): 'The furtlve declslon 切 gofrombadωworse'， Guardian , 23 JuIy.

且 PoUteBnqulry Chaune14

1~!

AdamSmlili Jñstitute 29 a釘∞ates 14-17, 161-171 , 179-180 , 188-9. 196, 202-3 105 Al(e Concem 23 Alexander, A 53 All咽， 0 174, 178 Anderson. J A 206 An拉且 TV 101-4, 125 An ti Poll Tax organlsatious Joum叫Js包 percept10ns of 157, 168-171 125-6, 142 med1aωverageof 位blters

A必down， P

15-口， 171-4， 180，

188-9, 196, 202-3 176 100

A認叩旭tlon of County Coun cUs A路。cla位。nofD姆拉lct

97, 100 ωuncU(曲。 A路∞lat10n of London Au也orlties (組.A) 33 , 9 6-7, 106 A路oclat1onof訕I'e虹'Qpoll個n Author! ties (AMA) 9!i:8~ 10Q，_1~Q Aúdit 臼mmIsslon Baker， K

Bakke. M

Bangkok Post

Bara且也 PM

B前ker， R 單位垃且， S

Bauman, Z BBC East BBCNorth East

BBCNor也 West B部Radio 4 6 pm News B郎 Sou也East

BBC11pmNews BBC16 ï.mtTreWS BBC19pmN，肌vs

Bell , T BenJamIn.R B缸旬， S

BUIlg, M

Blr知如adN，品時

Blrmlngham Bven1ng}，必U Blalr, P

Bloch. A Blumer.J Blunketi, D

Bod旬， M Bos'比 èL Bound師ConunJs&on 路。戶妞.O-A

Boÿson , R

27， 29，駒， 91 凹.115， 127

2

討I

12-4 .185 , 187 73 1是9

16 206 206 206 58 , 205

14也5， 206

133.134 13~

205 , 206 63

~~

79

10-, ).~. _29), 139, 140 53 ， 1是1

27, 35 192 149

21 ，船， 78-9， 166

27 18, 187 43 24.33 9_3:1

BriuIford Te1句raphand Argω145

212

Bramley, 0

33 140 51 105 B討tlsh DeafSoclety Br!tls h Telecom 6, 43 42 Broom.D 33 Brown , C 63 -4 Bruce, B 17 Bryman, A 102, 103, 168 Burus, D , 64 , 185 42 Butler, D 171 Cambr!dge Clty CouncU 50 Campalgn 192 Camp誨 .M cen個1 govemmentpubllc relatlons . growili of the publlc relations 位ate 3-7 formalpubllclty campal那sandneWli management on poll tax Brls如lBv前也IgPost

Br!tlsh De af Ass∞lation

45-62 ， 129， 136幽 7， 140

cr!且CJSmS of Joum叫Jsts per間pt10ns of

65-69 162-6 central TV 206 ω且因1II∞aI govemment 間，lations 21-30 lmpactofpoll 泊xon 31-2 , 35-36 由肌 J B L 12 , 13 , 14, 185, 187 Chanúe147pmNews 114, !~~， ~Q~ ChannelFoür News 114.154 Chamw叩d Borough CouncU 43 臨街tered Instltutifor Publlc F.姐ance and .4∞0阻tancy(ClPFA)

Chlbnall, S ChlldPoverty A惱。n Group Choms旬， N

33 , 114, 172, 174 185 99 , 106.107 13

Chope,C

Cltize血'sAd'叫ceBureaux

33 ，呵， 140

cltizenshlp and 也emedla α盯峙， HD

αassW:位 αeveland Wllholt. 0

13~色， 144-5

Cohen , B

臼mbs.JB

Commlsslon on Cltizenshlp

Comml位自 ofPubllcA∞oUnts

ωmmu凶.tyCh訂單e InIormatlon Bxchange(α泊。 Communlty Ch盯geReglsters Commu凶tyCh前ge Regl甜甜。n

Offi，閃閃

Confederatlon ofBr!tlsh Ind凶缸Y(I曲。 Con揖rva且.ve CentraI offi朋

“

108 1-4, 203 62 149 197 6 4 65 43

35 35

114 46， 63 ，

64.72.75 ， 91 ， 131.135.162.20。

nservatlve CentraI Office camp剖但1ng/ publlc relatlons on poll 切軍 62-5, 91 , 131

213

,

T磁a的on 閥dRepr臼en胸前on: The Media Poli訪問l Communi間組.onand 也.ePolI Tax

Con揖rvat1veP訂ty Manli<臼ω65 Con曲目'at1veP缸ty opposlt1on to the po11 tax 泊 .30.37-41.60.92-3.96:

llnkswlth 也emedla

93-5.158:

jo山nalJs隘. percept1onsof 165-8.180 Conven t1on ofScottlsh Local Authorltles (∞SLA)

Cook. R

co帶orate AlI到rs In包lligence U:凶t

CoÚÍJ.cll Tax - A G叫做 ωthe New Tax for Loc alGovernment

臼unclls for Vo!untacy Servl由

CoxaJJ. B Crltcher. C

αur阻.J cur惱.B

51

105

103 9.13.201 2.149

_

卸l1y B:qlri帥

97.190 124 7

5

39.115.119.121.122.137

DdhHS&H115.116.117.119.120. 121.123.124.127.128.129. 131岫 133.136.13 7.205 Da1迦 Mlrror 98.118.120. 121.122.123.124.127. 130.131.137.138.205 加11y SIßr 118.136.137.138.139 DaJly TeI句呻'h 115.118.119.121.122. 123.128.137.138.139 DaIe.A 88.91 Dal切且.RJ _ _ _~ Data Pro tection Ac t 3岱35 Data Pro能ctlon Reglstrar 38.43 Davls-Snú血.J 105 De B祖也 B

D曲∞且. D

2

10.16.46. 79.10壘.115.201 182

IJemocracy ln Danger ch且nne!4

demonstrat1onslnol:s計1.40

medla coverage of

125.13 0-135.144于145 journalJs個與rcept1onsof 169-170.

177-8.182-4 Depar個entofEnvlronment 27.30.46-7. 48.50.51-58.68.116.153.155. 162.163.165.173-4 缸partment of Trade and Indus仕y 6 Dlspatches 47 DoENewsRe!ea揖

DownIng. J Duni ap.RB

DunI倒旬.P E值1且草包nD泊位ict Councll E自切~D

Eco.U

38.50.51.

52.53.54.55.57 14 193 11.28 90 8

131

喝clencyofpoUtax 3是 e!ectlonS and 也 epo11 個x 36-7.40. 42-3.62-3. 的 .69.72-4.

79-82.92-3.96.116. 118.135-6.139.147.182. 183.190.194.196.206 國.ec切ralReformS∞lety 42 間110仗.P 11.17.131.153.174.185.195 Entezarl.M 105 訟icson. R V 12-4 .185.187 ~am. P 34.39.99.123 E聞自er. T 192 Plnanclal Tlm自 115 Ford 6 franchlse Impllcatlons of po11 個丸 35.42-3.74 毅軍nkI徊.B 7 27 Fudge.C 185 G叫他ng.J 2是 Game.C 21~生

Gandy.O Gans.H

5.12-4.59 12-13.149-50 Ga'吋且.N 16 gen前aI eIectlons and the medla 8.10.201 GeneraI Motors 6 GIb叩n.J 39.41.65.174.199-200 Go!d1且g.P 2.5.7.10.11.16.17.19. 23.26.46.79.104.129. 139.150.153.17~生.185.201

Goldsm1th. M Gold血i曲. Unlverslty MedlaRes給rch Group Gorbachev. M Govemment Informatlon S位就ce Granada TV Gr自nw旭h Cou且C盟

growth oflocalgovemment pubUc relatlo阻

Guardlan

7

Gure悅tch.M

Hans也d

Ha且sen.A 血rare HeraJà. H缸叮峙.R

Harrop.M Haslam.C Hattersley. R Hea也.B

Hefferman. R Hen臨ey.P Henne旬.P Herma且.B

H目eltJ且已 M

S

hls切ryofpol1組x

HM Govemment House of1ords Howard.M Hun t, D Hurd.D l ru!ep erulenl

1壘9

23.24 171-2 9.13.201 202 131 7.37.45.68.118.134 103.131.195 吼i

59 62.201 17 134 37.118.119 76.82 157 59 9.13 37.41.6心1.92. 118. 119. 136.137.138.139.189 18.187 21.25.27 28-30.3 6-4 3 6

100

52.53.1是0.141.16是

55-6 3.4 42.60.63.67.68.75. 116.117.118.119.120. 123.136.138.139.190 In dependent Broadωst!ngAu也orlty 86 In dependent Labo山 P位ty 101-2 l ru!ep erulenl on S間åay 6.42 Ingham. B 6.53.59-61 In glehart, R 3 Inl andRevenue 50 IntematlonalMonetaxy Fun d (IMF) 25 ITVNews 154 Izv閉目:ya

Jackson.K

Jeffe恕。血.T Jen旭間.J Joh且.P jOurnalJs包:natlonall l∞al 也fferenCE沼

就i

21 9.13.201 42.43 192 149-152

Manch師提r Councll for Vo!t混個ry

percept10ns ofkey ne間 sourc自

161-174

∞ntact with audlen間sl

generaI pubUc 174-180 (see alsos開ialJst ∞自由ponden包} 192

K前拍且.T

Kavanagh.D Keith-Luc間.B

位 .6壘.185

22 2 140 82.123.131

Ke11y.M

KentM郎郎nger 訟且且∞k. N

KnIght.G

5

La Republlcca. LabourP虹ty 臨mpal但Ingonpo11 怯泣

悅i

66.68.71-79.134-5 68.85-89

local campal但1且g Intemaldl由lons over camp叫gn stra蛤掛聞 74. 79-83. 101-2 InhIbltlons on 個mpalgnlng 79-85.9 0-91 journal扭包，伊拉'cep位onsof 166-8 LabourP位tyYoungS的1恥個 102 Labour Party: Natlonal Exe cutlve Comm1往自制改~ 73 -4 .79-80.83.86 Labour's Shadow Communlcatlons Agency 76 Lamb .L Lamon t, N Late Show. TheBB凹. Lavale惚.M

Lawson.N

M列a盼“mmlsslon Le具fDrule

Leach.B Leach.S

Ledl詞.L E品.M Lelc咽terCItyCouncll

6

136 134 72.82.101 30.37.115 24-5.27.93 討I

192 24 62

紗 .123.

68.85.87.192 Le缸甜ler Llnk 87 Lelcesler Mercury 53 Llberty 38.43.105.106.107.186.187 Llve句。o!Clty Co阻cll 85-8 Local Au也orlty Ass∞lat10回 切個1 Govemment Ac t(1986)

68

90

切ω1 Govemment Ac t (1988) 時.67.90 local govemme帥的soclatlons'/pr闖闖 groups'ωmp到那旭g

medlacoverageof

jo阻剝削Ists perce 位.ons of

Local Govemm叫做ronicle

96也101.

125-6.142 172-3 66.86

10惚1 Govemment fnformatlon Un!t (LG民1) 34.39.67.69.99-101.123.172 10個1 govemment profe圓lonals 16-17.

medla coverage of jo位n叫Is個. perceptlons of

E且ndon Sch∞ of Econom岫 (LS昀 1ondonW扭扭ndTV

10rd 也.elmsford 10rdH閏ke也 10rd Justice W∞li 1ordRo也鈍:hlld 10u位l妞 .M

1owPayUn!t

Mabbott, N MacGregor. S

岫clean.I MacLe冊.M

品倒IonSi甜甜u

Major.J

Se rvlce Mancheswr Bv目的Ig N.研VS

Mande~on.P 岫rqus間.M M缸泊.D

106 141 76

筒.82

45 30 37.60.92.118.119 92 154 174

Mason.D

Mat甜Amendment

McGregor. S

McNaIi.B

McQu到I. D MeIbourne Age

就i

MBNCAP

107 174.178 133 10.16.23.201 102.131 4.12.201.202 62 151 4

Meyer.TP

MeYnelI. D

nat10nal campal那Ing

68

114.115. 116. 117. 118. 120. 121.122.123.124.128.133. 134.136.137.138.176.205 137 45.52.55.68.163

Gyford.J Hale.R Hall.S Hallln.D Halloran.J

Hllg缸tner.

81 68 6 206

47. 是9.50.53.63. 尉，帥，帥， 73.7'喔.79.80.82.83.84.111.113.

GulfWar Gummer.J

Hlllyard.P

22.23

Appendix 3: Index

125-6.142 171-2 100.171-2

206 38 55

68 28 26 33 105 30. 41 42.43 14 120 41.62.136

Mlddleton. S

泌尬ant

Mllle r.D Mlller. W

Moncrelft C

且必nlreur

72. 妞 .101

Mooney. G MORI

190.192.193 抽rnlngS~ 73 Morrlson.D 155 Murdock. G 2 Murphy.A 144 Murphy.D 7 Nally. S 157.169 Natlonal Assoclat1on ofCltlzen's Advlce Burea阻 66 Na組onalAudltOm間 6 Natlonal Consu血.er Councll 192 Natlonal Councll for CI'叫l Llber世間 {臨Llber句) Nat10nal Councll for Volun怯ry Organlsatlo出仰的0) 1侶.105.106.107

Natlonal Pederat10n for the SeliEmployed (NFSE) Negrlne.R

Ne迦M.D Ne附晶tIe Bv，目的Ig ChronlcIe Ne悶 '90.BBCRadlo On e

NewsatTen.ITV

泌的。ifthe World Ne悶。nSU1IJÙ苟 Ne間呻ht BBC2 NImm血.D

192 155.160 157.169 141 205 131.205.206 131 175

130.132.135.205.206

6

Nlxon.J

non paýment of 血.epoll 個芷 med!a coverage of

journ叫Is旬'a位ltudestow盯ds

(8曲“soan位"po11 能xorganisa位。ns

8 123-4.145 169-170

anddemons崗位。ns/rlots)

North West Tlm es NorthemBcho Nor切且 .P 愉悅且ghamαty Counc臨

11 145 92

的.176

NoUlnghamBvenlng Post 53.140 Observer 72.127.128.130 0值曲。fpop叫at10n Census and Survey8 (OPCS) 42 OglJvyandMather 49-50 Oppeñhe恤.C

33.34. 紗，卵 .106.123

Old'ordAgalnstthePo11Tax

104

Oxfor叫做U 145 Parllamen包ryR間開rchUnIt 152 Pa位e且. C 39.56.100.122 Paylng for Loc al Govemme呱呱eN揖d for Cbange 鉤 .66.11壘. 115. 116

.i'enguln News Percy-sm1th. J

討i

21.25.27

215

,

1 0-11

polltaxl研els

52-3.140 1 .0 7 39-40

the Introduc位onofpolltax PollTaxForum journ叫Isls'perceptlonsof

1~5

Populatlon Trimds PoSt Office

67 86

PRW自 kly

Pravda

民回s Asωclatlon (PA)

prlma.ry defl.凶.t1on-andse∞nd位y

delln1t1on

151

9-1 .0 .1.08.2.0 1-2 .03 3 4- 35. 38.43 6

prlvacy 阻d poll tax

Þroctõr and Gamble

pub~op旭10也 publlcal臨ud回 ω poll 個x

19 0-1.197 sources oflnformatlon for publlc 146.192 DubllcsallenceofDOlltax 193-4 b阻 also rela!ionshlp betw間且 medla coverage and publlc oplulon and

jOurnalls包∞ntactwlth audlen曲s/ge且eralpubllc)

。lirk. B

Raban.J Readlng Borough CouncU

R個dinU Chro n1C1e

redIstrlb utlonallmpact ofpoll tax and eq凶ty

Rhodes.RAW Rlch位ds.PG

Rldl旬..N

Robe呦.B

Roblns.L R∞Iker. J

32-34 28.45 22.25 21.28.37.39.55. 117.121.122.123.163 9.13.2 .01 1 .03 76-8. 82-4

Roya1臼mm凶Iononthe Pr酬

RoyalNatlonal Inst!tute for theBllnd RoyalStatl反lcalS∞lety

Ruge.M Salvatlon Army Saunders. P Scammell.M

21 3 86 141

2.7

鈍 .1 .05

6 185 1 .0 7 10 201

Schl自Inger.P 9. 口 .13.2.02 S∞拉拉Ih AntlPollTaxFederatlon 1.02.1 .03 Seaω~J 2

Semetko.HA Sewell.R

Seymo叮.Ure. C Shellleld CItyCo uncil Sheridan. T Slgal. L

S也~A

SUverstone. R Smellle. K.B

Sml也.J S∞lalJSt Workers P位ty

Solomos. M

216

149 1 .02 13.15 .0 85.87 157 13. 61 U 12 22 42.43 131 131

E

152個3 ζunu

local medIB.

曲的蜘

7-8.17-19.45 192

悶的叫亂叫啊?

polJ.cyrproωssesandthe mea!a PolIcy Stud!目InstItute polltlcal slgn!llcan間 of

叫刷品路品伊

8.0

P!mlott.B

叫阿帥悶

T阻a位.on and Represen詞組.on: The Media P.oliti叫“mmunica位.onand 也eP.ollT阻

LEV

nunM

,

16.0-161 36.85 5

115.116.119.121.122. 129.13 .0.137.138.171.2.05 Sunday Correspon伽zt 191 枷蝴 Te1ψ~h 118.121.122.176 Sunday 知nes 75.94.111. 114.116.117.118.12.0. 131.133.136.19 .0 .2.0 5 Taylor.G 26 Tha區nesTV 2.0 6 Tha1cher.M 24.25.39.59.62. 75.93.95.114.118. 119.121.122.128.131. 135.136.16壘.168.176

Tim es

6.0.64.67.

帥，悶 .83. 蝕.93-4. 111.113.11壘.116.117.

119.12.0.123.129.131. 137.138.139.176.19 .0.2.05 The WorId TOn1ght BBC Radlo Fo山

82.2.0 5

Thorton. P Totlay

43 118.119.12.0.121.122.138 Toik旬.BBCRadloFour 67.163.19 .0.2.0 6 Top!;R 4 Trad閏 Unlon Council (TUC) 114 對祖.vers. T 1.0.0.171-2 Tuchm妞.G 13.15.152.161 Tumber.l至

Tunstall, J Tyler. Watt TyneTI聞單

155

12.151.153.155.157.159 46 145

typologl郎。fnews 鉤ur間 Van Lle間.KD

11-17

193

個lun個ry 扭曲rcamp副部Ing

onpolltax medlacoverageof journ叫!sts' perceptlons of Waddl且gton. D Wakeh缸~J

Walker. D

WashlngtonPost Welsh Offi間Informatlon

W8Stern DaUypress W8Stern Morn1ng News

W紹祖旬.B

Whlte妙.P WUlmo間.C Wlne回誨.B

WorId ln .dction

WorId t，恤 W由加zdB部 Radl04

YorkshlreTV Young.H

1 04- 8 125-6.142 15 .0 134.145 6 59.157 就I

192 1是O

141 1是

62 91 35.112 147 133 2 .0 6 62