Why leaking can make for good government

Mic-drop moments does not a good government make. Alastair McCapra makes the case for political leaking

In November 1989, cameras were finally allowed into the House of Commons. Just a few months later, in March 1990, John Major delivered the UK’s first televised Budget. Voters at home were not only able to watch the measures unveiled in real time on BBC 2’s Budget 90 Special, but they were treated to expert reaction and analysis immediately after, too.

Though the introduction of cameras remains a totemic moment in the modernisation of parliament, the rules that determine how governments actually communicate with the electorate and business have not kept pace. Outdated rules designed for a different era sit uneasily alongside the speed, scrutiny and public expectations of the digital age. 

Rolling 24-hour news and the rise of social media have made it harder for governments to control the narrative. The risk of leaks as major policies are hammered out has risen significantly, with governments now arguably at the mercy of a press that will catch and amplify the faintest whiff of speculation. The political theatre that surrounded Nigel Lawson’s 1988 Budget, which unveiled a surprise number of tax cuts, is now a thing of the past. 

At a time of economic uncertainty, trialling policy proposals in advance can help with policy-making whilst avoiding the shock that can come when big changes are announced suddenly and all in one go. After all, the dropping of the mooted income tax changes was potentially a response to press reporting, arguably helping the government in the long run.

How leaking helps policy

And here it seems that government could learn from business. No FTSE 100 company would be expected to “mic-drop” a major announcement affecting millions of stakeholders without engagement, testing or advance signalling. Shareholders would revolt and the press would tear them apart. Rachel Reeves may empathise.

Indeed, no major product could be launched without extensive market research or focus group testing; no significant changes to a business’s strategy, especially one that could have serious implications for employees or customers, would be announced to the market before key stakeholders; and no rebrand would suddenly drop from the ether at 12.30pm on a wet Wednesday in November.

Government, by contrast, is essentially bound by procedures that make effective communication near impossible. This tension was exposed during the recent Budget. Deputy speaker Nusrat Ghani raised concerns about the “extensive briefings of the media on the government’s fiscal policy and public finances”, sharing her frustration at the “disappointing trend in relation to Budget briefings [that] has been growing for a number of years under successive governments”.

Indeed, paragraph 9.1 of the government’s ministerial code states that “[w]hen parliament is in session, the most important announcements of government policy should be made in the first instance in parliament”.

With a sizeable majority in the commons and a plummeting position in the polls, you might forgive the government for accepting a talking to from the deputy speaker in favour of managing public expectations and preparing the markets for what was guaranteed to be a tough-to-sell Budget. MPs, meanwhile, also benefit when they have time to consult constituents and prepare considered responses, rather than reacting instantly to announcements designed for a pre-internet age.

The changed media landscape now means speculation and noise surrounding major political events frames the story long before any parliamentary announcement. It might be more sensible to allow the government some level of communication and let our parliamentarians do their job of holding them to account, and have the added bonus of stopping politically-motivated leaks.

Parliamentary tradition matters. But so does public understanding. The challenge now is finding a way for both to coexist because democracy depends on more than process; it depends on people being able to hear, understand and trust the decisions made in their name.

Alastair McCapra is CEO of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations