Britain's Manifesto Destiny
by Louis Cooke

Not so in the United Kingdom. Here "manifesto" has a mellower, more pedestrian ring. The word is part of everyday mainstream political vocabulary. Come an election springtime, everyone is sporting a manifesto, whether they're a full-fledged political party, an interest group looking out for a particular sector or a newly royal son with too much time on his hands.

If you're a political party, a manifesto is a vital cog in the machine geared for election victory. It has to be a slick combination of substance and style. Policies need to be clear and enticing, but they must also be achievable because if you win, at the next election your opponents are going to jab a finger at your manifesto and declare: "It says here you were going to put 10,000 extra police officers on the streets / nurses in the hospitals / teachers in the schools. You haven't. Why not?"

But how your manifesto is packaged is equally as important. It has to stand out (particularly important if you're a mainstream party and your policies are the same as the opposition's), but if it's too gimmicky people will be put off. It must be weighty and comprehensive — you don't want to look like you're skirting around issues that are important to potential voters — but also succinct, because if it's too long, no bugger will read it.

There are so many party manifestoes to choose from, but those belonging to the three main parties (the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats) have received the most media attention and scrutiny.

Conservatives
"Are you thinking what we're thinking? It's time for action."
32 pages

The front cover features the Great 2005 General Election cliché: handwriting. It has been everywhere: in manifestoes, on leaflets and on both Conservative billboards and in Labour TV spots. Presumably handwriting is meant to come across as informal and down-to-earth, but in some cases, such as the front cover of the Tory manifesto, it gives the impression of half-baked ideas — as though they just took a snapshot of the whiteboard after the party's first brainstorming session.

The six scribbled slogans on the front page, which include "More police," "Lower taxes" and "Accountability," are the cornerstones of the Conservative manifesto. The abridged version of the abridged version. Only one of them, "Controlled immigration," is in itself enough to cause anything like a debate — and then only just. Nobody can disagree with the other five.

Inside, readers can glean more details about Tory plans for action in these important areas, and they can learn about party leader Michael Howard's idea of something called "the British Dream." Or they can wonder how the sums add up (Spend more, borrow less and cut taxes? Huh?). Or they can just look at the selection of color photos chosen to represent the variety of British society. On page 5, there's one of a scientist letting a potted-plant listen to his iPod.

Labour
"Britain forward not back."
112 pages

Somebody must have slipped Tony Blair a copy of Typography 101: "Use italics to suggest progress." But nobody whispered "Brevity is the key to wit" in his ear: The 2005 Labour manifesto is far, far longer than its rivals. It was originally released in a Dickens fashion, chapter by chapter. The complete version is a little red paperback book (if that is supposed to be a nod to Chairman Mao, for the old socialist hardliners who are still party members, it's weak, very weak) that is small enough to fit in the back pocket of a pair of Gap jeans. But did the Labour Party expect anyone to read more than a hundred pages of political plans? There aren't even any pictures!

OK, so there is one: a profile of Blair, in black and white, so you can't tell just how gray his hair is. Black, gray and red are the only colors used throughout in a design and layout that is efficient, bordering on austere. The manifesto is organized into nine chapters with titles recognizably linked to election topics. "Economy: Rising prosperity in an opportunity society" comes first, followed by "Education: More children making the grade." Ladies and gentleman, the Labour Party cares about your money, and it cares about your kids.

The sheer length of "Britain forward not back" proves Labour is not short on policies. It has stacks and stacks of them, and you get the feeling that rather than having them all crammed in, its manifesto is just the tip of some looming iceberg of public sector initiatives.

Liberal Democrats
"The REAL alternative"
20 pages

Typography 101: "Use caps for EMPHASIS." The Lib Dem manifesto has a shorter page count than its two rivals but it comes in a different format. It's a newspaper. (Alternative, you see?) There are chunky headlines and columns of text, and sidebars with the views of party spokespersons. Photographs from the salient locations — a hospital, a classroom, an anti-war rally, outside a scruffy apartment block with a police officer — all feature the party's leader, Charles Kennedy.

Unlike the Conservatives and Labour, the economy is not dealt with first. It comes fourth, after health, education and justice. Any damaging effect of this order is lessened by the manifesto's format: It's a natural reaction to skim-read and look for the parts you're interested in when holding something that feels like a newspaper. For those with very short attention spans the back page features a handy feature, "10 Good Reasons to Vote Liberal Democrat," with things they oppose and propose. The last reason is the most stark: "We oppose: Bush & Blair on Iraq. We propose: Never again."

In a documentary for Channel 4 that was screened last week, Spectator editor Peter Oborne carried out an unscientific test on members of the public, asking them to identify which party came up with specific manifesto points and slogans. Most could not; they mixed up Labour policies with Conservative ones, Lib Dem with Labour. Some thought slogans belonged to more than one mainstream party, or even all three.

Oborne used the test as one example in a commanding thesis that the 2005 General Election is the most anti-democratic yet. The main parties offer no distinct choice, he argued — even when it comes to language. Meaning that differences in typeface, image size, paper stock and binding glue will have an effect above their station on Thursday's outcome.

E-mail Louis Cooke at louis at mintcake dot com.