The astute election strategy of Peterborough Public Health
Health unit is offering an opportunity for candidates to learn about their work
On the face of it, government departments and agencies that deliver public services, such as Peterborough Public Health, (PPH) are not actively involved in electoral politics. We require of them a neutrality that avoids political partisanship, and for good reason. A public-sector agency that chooses to support one candidate over another runs the risk of retribution from a winning or losing candidate that it did not support. Political partisanship creates electoral winners and losers, all of whom want to believe that public services will be distributed fairly after an election without regard to political stripe. Public sector agencies must always be perceived as objective, professional and evidence-based service providers to all.
At the same time, agencies such as PPH want candidates to understand and appreciate them. It is axiomatic that politicians find it easier to attack from afar than they do from up close. Seasoned public servants know that the better the understanding of their agency by politicians, the better the chances of political support. They also know that the deeper you can pull politicians into the details and complexities of your operation, the more difficult it becomes for them to oppose it.
It is in this context that PPH is about to prove its political smarts. On May 23, its executive committee approved an astute municipal election strategy that is designed to inject its purposes and preferences into the municipal election campaign while still maintaining its professional neutrality. The strategy, which was first put in place during the 2014 election, involves some communications – materials provided to all municipal candidates on the good works of PPH, as well as an editorial distributed to local media outlets. By far the most intriguing part of the strategy, however, is a series of information sessions for candidates.
Candidates will be invited to one of three 90-minute information sessions – or “conversation cafes” – to engage with the medical officer of health and PPH managers; to receive a “public health primer;” and to take part in table discussions on topics determined in part by candidate surveys. PPH will receive immediate feedback from the candidates at the event via Poll Everywhere – an online audience response service.
In a phrase, this is a genuinely brilliant strategy. Candidates will benefit from a briefing on issues as varied as diseases and infections; food and water safety; drugs and harm reduction; smoking and vaping; and sexual health. PPH will benefit even more. While the initiative presents itself as a briefing, it is equally an exercise in public health advocacy. PPH will have presented its agenda to a captive audience of influencers and potential decision makers. It will have told that audience a positive PPH story, increasing its profile and status. It will have acted to prevent misinformation and temper opposition. It will have engaged candidates as conduits for its messaging to a wider public audience. It will have prepared the ground for councillors who will more likely be disposed to support its programs and budgets. It will have conducted polling to discover candidate priorities and areas for its own improvement. And it will have done all this without the presence of opposing viewpoints.
PPH has proven itself to be both strategic and ingenious. It has shown commendable leadership in developing an initiative that is likely well beyond the facility of most of its peers in local government. In the end, it will have played an important role in helping to create better candidates.