A better approach to volunteers would be essential to winning a second referendum
This is the second in a series of reflections on the 2016 referendum campaign from former Field Director of Britain Stronger in Europe for Yorkshire, Oliver Coppard. You can read the first installmenthere.
On the day of the referendum, 23rd June 2016, Britain Stronger in Europe had around 700 people volunteer for our campaign across the whole of Yorkshire and the Humber; the 5th biggest region in the country, with a population of around 5 million people. Facing an electorate of 3.9 million, we had 1 volunteer for every 5,500 voters.
To put that into
context, on the day of the 2015 general election, the Labour Party had over 250
volunteers active across the single constituency of Sheffield Hallam (1 volunteer
for every 340 voters).
In Wales, Scotland
and Northern Ireland the problems we had in Yorkshire were compounded by
national elections that took up most of the time and energy of experienced
activists.
Admittedly it
wasn’t the same everywhere. We had a significant number of volunteers in
London, but across the UK the official Remain campaign had too few people, in
the wrong places, all too often doing the wrong things.
No effective
volunteer strategy
The truth is that across
the country there wasn’t an effective strategy in place for maximising our
volunteers’ impact on voter behaviour. From January 2016 until at least April
we mainly asked volunteers to run street stalls and hand out leaflets; the
placebos of political campaigning.
The logic was at
least understandable. For most of the campaign our field teams had little more
than a broad, focus-group based segmentation of our voter pool to work with.
Without any data
to build a more targeted or personalised campaign on the ground, across the
country we took a reductive approach that simply put activists in high
visibility locations, in places where we hoped there would be undecided,
persuadable voters.
In focusing most
of our efforts in city centres, we failed to mount a serious volunteer led
effort in all too many Leave voting communities. In those places, we often had
a strong story to tell about the benefits of being in the EU but didn’t have
anyone local or authentic to tell it.
In places like
South Yorkshire, EU investment was fundamental to the regeneration of those communities
dismantled by Thatcher, but time and again we failed to recruit – and in some
instances turned away – people willing and able to tell that story to their
friends and neighbours.
Rather than
recruit, train or mobilise those activists, Britain Stronger in Europe put its
faith in a combination of low turnout, a Labour Party campaign and an effective
media and digital strategy – ‘project fear’ – holding down the vote for Brexit in
likely Leave voting communities.
While we therefore
failed to mount a serious volunteer led ground campaign in places like Grimsby,
Barnsley and Doncaster, even in those places where we did have more volunteers,
we didn’t put them to use doing those things we know make a difference to
turnout and vote share.
In places like
Harrogate, York and Sheffield, we only attempted a late and somewhat patchy
transition to more targeted door to door voter contact, because it wasn’t until
the last couple of months that we had the household level data you need to
effectively target, find and speak to the voters who were genuinely undecided. Even
then the data was less than reliable.
Door to door,
personalised contact is clearly not the only way to change voter behaviour, but
it is arguably the most cost-effective way for volunteers to have an impact on
the result of an election. Experts in GOTV will tell you that an in-person
doorstep conversation can increase turnout by 8%. Francois Hollande’s 2012
campaign have said that their army of volunteer canvassers grew his share of
the vote by 3%.
As campaigns rely
more and more on digital data rather than the information we would otherwise
get from doorstep conversations, perhaps the most important impact that
personal contact plays isn’t on turnout or vote share, but as a powerful,
visible demonstration of ‘social proof’.
Almost by
definition, ‘we’ are stronger in Europe is a much more effective and persuasive
message coming from your neighbour than coming from someone outside of your
community or group.
Leave’s accusation
that we were a campaign dominated by the Westminster elite was all too powerful
when our best antidote in both Leave and Remain communities – an army of
community led volunteers – were either not invested in, not trusted, or in our
case were simply not there.
There’s no doubt
that Britain Stronger In Europe faced a huge challenge in mobilising an
activist base in just six months, but I do think it’s fair to say that in 2016
we neglected our ground game and the volunteers needed to deliver it. Let’s not
do that again.
If we are in the
preliminary stages of a second referendum, there are at least five lessons that
the People’s Vote Campaign should learn from Britain Stronger in Europe.
Recruit and mobilise
now
Any second
referendum campaign is likely to be as short or shorter than its 2016
predecessor. We had 6 months, which was never going to be enough time to
replicate the local infrastructure that has taken political parties years of
work to build. Start recruiting and mobilising people now. Once spending
restrictions apply, it’s too late.
People power
matters
Don’t simply rely
on your digital or media campaign. Invest in volunteer recruitment and
mobilisation. If you aren’t prepared to put significant resources into
recruiting, managing and inspiring your activists, if you don’t see them as
anything more than human billboards or disposable extras in a campaign
dominated and dictated by an all-knowing centre, you won’t grow a volunteer
base sizable enough to change the dynamics of a campaign from the ground up. Committed,
visible activists and are an antidote to apathy and cynicism.
As far as I could tell, there was little or no volunteer recruitment taking place at the People’s Vote march in late 2018, and even now the People’s Vote Campaign only have a handful of field organisers currently working in the regions. That doesn’t fill me with confidence.
Go where you need
the votes
Work out where you need to win votes – or stop Leave winning votes – and then actively go and find the pockets of enthusiasm in those places. There’s no shortage of people in Lincoln, Wakefield or Barnsley who will put in hours of work to keep Britain in the EU, but you need to actively look for them, invest in them, and trust them.
Be effective, not just busy
There is a wealth
of empirical data out there showing the relative impact of different campaign
approaches. When you have a volunteer infrastructure in place, don’t waste
their time asking them to do things that might make you look busy but will not
change the result.
Work out how to
most effectively use your volunteers to change the intentions and behaviour of
your target voter pool. Provide your activists with the data and tools that
allow them to do those things efficiently.
For example, we
had no regional phone bank infrastructure in place. That wouldn’t have been
hard to fix.
Respect local knowledge: listen up
Perhaps the most
effective ground operation of recent times – the 2012 Obama field team – used
the mantra ‘Respect. Empower. Include. Win’. In 2016, all too often we did not
respect the knowledge and insight that local people brought to our campaign.
Immigration and
sovereignty were issues that our volunteers knew were driving support for
Leave, but there was no way for local knowledge to shape the direction of the
campaign. Neither our paid field teams or the volunteers themselves were
empowered to effectively respond to the local issues or concerns they were
hearing about every day. Respect the insight of your volunteers.
I’m not as confident as many people that a People’s
Vote would reverse the result of 2016, but I do know that a winning campaign can
only be built on the back of a significant, effective volunteer base. Any
People’s Vote campaign that fails to learn the lessons of the past will be
doomed to repeat it.
The two-child cap is a poor fit for Labour
by Lauren Davison | 23.07.23 | In: CommentLabour members were blindsided by Keir Starmer's recent commitment to keep George Osborne’s two child-cap on benefits. Thanks to Tory austerity, 1 in 4...Read More
A better approach to volunteers would be essential to winning a second referendum
This is the second in a series of reflections on the 2016 referendum campaign from former Field Director of Britain Stronger in Europe for Yorkshire, Oliver Coppard. You can read the firstinstallment here.
On the day of the referendum, 23rd June 2016, Britain Stronger in Europe had around 700 people volunteer for our campaign across the whole of Yorkshire and the Humber; the 5th biggest region in the country, with a population of around 5 million people. Facing an electorate of 3.9 million, we had 1 volunteer for every 5,500 voters.
To put that into context, on the day of the 2015 general election, the Labour Party had over 250 volunteers active across the single constituency of Sheffield Hallam (1 volunteer for every 340 voters).
In Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland the problems we had in Yorkshire were compounded by national elections that took up most of the time and energy of experienced activists.
Admittedly it wasn’t the same everywhere. We had a significant number of volunteers in London, but across the UK the official Remain campaign had too few people, in the wrong places, all too often doing the wrong things.
No effective volunteer strategy
The truth is that across the country there wasn’t an effective strategy in place for maximising our volunteers’ impact on voter behaviour. From January 2016 until at least April we mainly asked volunteers to run street stalls and hand out leaflets; the placebos of political campaigning.
The logic was at least understandable. For most of the campaign our field teams had little more than a broad, focus-group based segmentation of our voter pool to work with.
Without any data to build a more targeted or personalised campaign on the ground, across the country we took a reductive approach that simply put activists in high visibility locations, in places where we hoped there would be undecided, persuadable voters.
In focusing most of our efforts in city centres, we failed to mount a serious volunteer led effort in all too many Leave voting communities. In those places, we often had a strong story to tell about the benefits of being in the EU but didn’t have anyone local or authentic to tell it.
In places like South Yorkshire, EU investment was fundamental to the regeneration of those communities dismantled by Thatcher, but time and again we failed to recruit – and in some instances turned away – people willing and able to tell that story to their friends and neighbours.
Rather than recruit, train or mobilise those activists, Britain Stronger in Europe put its faith in a combination of low turnout, a Labour Party campaign and an effective media and digital strategy – ‘project fear’ – holding down the vote for Brexit in likely Leave voting communities.
While we therefore failed to mount a serious volunteer led ground campaign in places like Grimsby, Barnsley and Doncaster, even in those places where we did have more volunteers, we didn’t put them to use doing those things we know make a difference to turnout and vote share.
In places like Harrogate, York and Sheffield, we only attempted a late and somewhat patchy transition to more targeted door to door voter contact, because it wasn’t until the last couple of months that we had the household level data you need to effectively target, find and speak to the voters who were genuinely undecided. Even then the data was less than reliable.
Door to door, personalised contact is clearly not the only way to change voter behaviour, but it is arguably the most cost-effective way for volunteers to have an impact on the result of an election. Experts in GOTV will tell you that an in-person doorstep conversation can increase turnout by 8%. Francois Hollande’s 2012 campaign have said that their army of volunteer canvassers grew his share of the vote by 3%.
As campaigns rely more and more on digital data rather than the information we would otherwise get from doorstep conversations, perhaps the most important impact that personal contact plays isn’t on turnout or vote share, but as a powerful, visible demonstration of ‘social proof’.
Almost by definition, ‘we’ are stronger in Europe is a much more effective and persuasive message coming from your neighbour than coming from someone outside of your community or group.
Leave’s accusation that we were a campaign dominated by the Westminster elite was all too powerful when our best antidote in both Leave and Remain communities – an army of community led volunteers – were either not invested in, not trusted, or in our case were simply not there.
There’s no doubt that Britain Stronger In Europe faced a huge challenge in mobilising an activist base in just six months, but I do think it’s fair to say that in 2016 we neglected our ground game and the volunteers needed to deliver it. Let’s not do that again.
If we are in the preliminary stages of a second referendum, there are at least five lessons that the People’s Vote Campaign should learn from Britain Stronger in Europe.
Recruit and mobilise now
Any second referendum campaign is likely to be as short or shorter than its 2016 predecessor. We had 6 months, which was never going to be enough time to replicate the local infrastructure that has taken political parties years of work to build. Start recruiting and mobilising people now. Once spending restrictions apply, it’s too late.
People power matters
Don’t simply rely on your digital or media campaign. Invest in volunteer recruitment and mobilisation. If you aren’t prepared to put significant resources into recruiting, managing and inspiring your activists, if you don’t see them as anything more than human billboards or disposable extras in a campaign dominated and dictated by an all-knowing centre, you won’t grow a volunteer base sizable enough to change the dynamics of a campaign from the ground up. Committed, visible activists and are an antidote to apathy and cynicism.
As far as I could tell, there was little or no volunteer recruitment taking place at the People’s Vote march in late 2018, and even now the People’s Vote Campaign only have a handful of field organisers currently working in the regions. That doesn’t fill me with confidence.
Go where you need the votes
Work out where you need to win votes – or stop Leave winning votes – and then actively go and find the pockets of enthusiasm in those places. There’s no shortage of people in Lincoln, Wakefield or Barnsley who will put in hours of work to keep Britain in the EU, but you need to actively look for them, invest in them, and trust them.
Be effective, not just busy
There is a wealth of empirical data out there showing the relative impact of different campaign approaches. When you have a volunteer infrastructure in place, don’t waste their time asking them to do things that might make you look busy but will not change the result.
Work out how to most effectively use your volunteers to change the intentions and behaviour of your target voter pool. Provide your activists with the data and tools that allow them to do those things efficiently.
For example, we had no regional phone bank infrastructure in place. That wouldn’t have been hard to fix.
Respect local knowledge: listen up
Perhaps the most effective ground operation of recent times – the 2012 Obama field team – used the mantra ‘Respect. Empower. Include. Win’. In 2016, all too often we did not respect the knowledge and insight that local people brought to our campaign.
Immigration and sovereignty were issues that our volunteers knew were driving support for Leave, but there was no way for local knowledge to shape the direction of the campaign. Neither our paid field teams or the volunteers themselves were empowered to effectively respond to the local issues or concerns they were hearing about every day. Respect the insight of your volunteers. I’m not as confident as many people that a People’s Vote would reverse the result of 2016, but I do know that a winning campaign can only be built on the back of a significant, effective volunteer base. Any People’s Vote campaign that fails to learn the lessons of the past will be doomed to repeat it.
You may also like