Key Takeaways
- Tony Blair’s 2000 speech to the Women’s Institute (WI) was heavily criticized by his advisers, who felt it was too complacent and lacked energy.
- The speech was rewritten several times, with Blair’s aides urging him to inject more policy and address topics such as drugs and university access.
- The final speech was met with heckles, jeers, and slow-hand clapping from the WI audience, with many comparing it to a party political broadcast.
- Blair’s advisers felt that the speech was a mistake, with one describing it as a "huge propaganda victory" for the Tories.
- The speech was seen as an attempt to appeal to "Middle England," but ultimately failed to connect with the audience.
Introduction to the Speech
The speech given by Tony Blair to the Women’s Institute (WI) in 2000 is widely regarded as one of the most ill-judged speeches of his career. The speech was met with heckles, jeers, and slow-hand clapping from the 10,000-strong audience, with many comparing it to a party political broadcast. Despite the WI explicitly warning that they were "wary of anything that smacked of capital P politics," Blair’s aides were critical of his first draft and bombarded him with additions to inject more policy. In this article, we will explore the background to the speech, the concerns of Blair’s advisers, and the ultimate failure of the speech to connect with its audience.
The First Draft
Blair’s first draft of the speech was met with criticism from his aides, who felt that it lacked energy and was too complacent. Alastair Campbell, Blair’s communications chief, wrote that the speech "comes across as rather desperate" and that Blair sounded "like a commentator rather than a political leader." Campbell urged Blair to address topics such as drugs, Sure Start, university access, and small business startups, rather than focusing on the "pomp and pageantry of the queen’s speech in parliament." Philip Gould, the strategy and polling adviser, felt that the speech "leaves the wrong taste" and tried to be "conversational but instead feels condescending." He also felt that the speech lacked "energy, verve, dynamism and change."
The Rewrites
The speech was rewritten several times, with Blair’s aides urging him to inject more policy and address the concerns of the WI audience. Peter Hyman, Blair’s special adviser, felt that the speech "hands the Tories a huge propaganda victory" and that it could be interpreted as a "back to basics" speech. He also felt that the speech could be seen as an attempt to appeal to "fuddy duddy Britain" rather than the more modern and meritocratic values of the Labour Party. Sally Morgan, the political adviser, was "deeply uncomfortable with the concept of ‘old-fashioned values’" and felt that it would be "very alien to most of our under-40 voters." She advised Blair not to say "’women tied to the kitchen’ as many of your audience stay at home."
The Final Speech
The final speech was met with heckles, jeers, and slow-hand clapping from the WI audience, with many comparing it to a party political broadcast. The speech was seen as an attempt to appeal to "Middle England," but ultimately failed to connect with the audience. The media dubbed the speech as "an extraordinary error of political judgment," and it is widely regarded as one of the most ill-judged speeches of Blair’s career. Looking back years later, Blair recalled: "I gave them a lecture, they gave me a raspberry." The speech was a mistake, and it highlighted the challenges of appealing to a wide audience while also staying true to one’s values and policies.
Conclusion
The speech given by Tony Blair to the Women’s Institute in 2000 was a failure, and it highlights the challenges of communicating with a wide audience. The speech was rewritten several times, but ultimately failed to connect with the audience. The concerns of Blair’s advisers were well-founded, and the speech is widely regarded as one of the most ill-judged speeches of Blair’s career. The speech serves as a reminder of the importance of understanding one’s audience and staying true to one’s values and policies. It also highlights the challenges of appealing to "Middle England" and the need to stay connected with the values and concerns of the wider population.
