Developing Policy Positions

What a policy position is

A policy position is a clear statement of what a candidate or party believes should be done about an issue. It is more than saying “this issue is important”. It explains what should change and why.

For example, a candidate may say that youth unemployment is a serious problem. That is a concern, but it is not yet a policy position. A policy position would explain what the candidate supports, such as expanding skills training, improving job placement services, supporting small business development, strengthening apprenticeships or improving access to transport so young people can reach work.

A policy position does not have to be long. It should be clear, realistic and connected to people’s lives.

Why candidates need policy positions

Candidates need policy positions because voters deserve more than personality, slogans and criticism of opponents. Voters need to understand what a candidate would support if given public responsibility.

Policy positions also help candidates communicate consistently. Without policy positions, a candidate may give different answers in different places. This can create confusion and damage trust. With clear positions, the candidate can adjust examples for different audiences while keeping the main message consistent.

Policy positions also help candidates prepare for debates, interviews, community questions and party discussions. A candidate who has thought through issues is less likely to panic when asked a difficult question. They can answer calmly, even when they do not have every detail.

From issue to policy

A useful policy position usually begins with a real issue.

Start by describing the problem in plain language. Who is affected? What is happening? Why does it matter? Then ask what change is needed. Does the law need to change? Does the budget need to change? Does a service need better management? Does a ministry need to coordinate better with another institution? Does the public need clearer information?

Next, ask what role the candidate can realistically play. If elected to Parliament, an MP may raise questions, contribute to debates, serve on committees, support legislation, scrutinise budgets and advocate for constituents. An individual MP does not personally control every ministry or budget line. Candidates should therefore avoid promising that they alone will “fix” a problem.

Instead, candidates can say what they will advocate for, what they will support, what they will raise in Parliament, what information they will seek, and how they will remain accountable to the people affected.

Making a position clear

A clear policy position can often be explained in four parts:

• The issue: what problem are we talking about?
• The people affected: who is experiencing the problem?
• The change needed: what should be done differently?
• The reason: why is this fair, necessary or practical?

For example:

“Many rural young people struggle to access training and work because opportunities are far from home and transport is costly. I support stronger local skills programmes, better information about jobs and closer links between training providers and employers, so young people have a fairer chance to move into work.”

This statement is simple. It identifies the issue, the people affected, the change needed and the reason. It does not pretend that one candidate can solve everything alone.

Understanding tradeoffs

Public policy involves choices. Candidates should understand this early.

A tradeoff happens when choosing one option affects another. If government spends more in one area, it may need to reduce spending elsewhere, raise revenue, borrow, or delay another priority. If a law is made stricter, it may protect one interest but create a burden for another group. If a service is centralised, it may become more efficient but less accessible for rural communities. If a service is decentralised, it may become more accessible but more expensive to manage.

Candidates do not need to become technical experts in every field. But they should learn to ask basic questions. How much might this cost? Who would implement it? What law or policy would need to change? Who might oppose it and why? Could there be unintended consequences? How will we know whether it worked?

Voters can handle honest explanations. In fact, many voters are tired of promises that sound good but disappear after elections. A candidate who explains tradeoffs respectfully can build credibility.

Avoiding empty promises

An empty promise is a promise that sounds attractive but has no clear path to delivery. It may be too broad, too expensive, outside the candidate’s power, or based on information that has not been checked.

Examples of risky promises include saying that all roads will be fixed immediately, all prices will be lowered, all jobs will be created, or every local problem will be solved by the candidate personally. These promises may please people for a moment, but they create disappointment later.

Candidates can avoid empty promises by using careful language. Instead of saying “I will fix this immediately”, say “I will raise this issue, seek information, push for a practical response and report back to the community.” Instead of saying “I will create jobs for everyone”, say “I will support policies that improve training, investment and small business opportunities.”

Careful language is not weak. It is honest. It helps candidates remain credible after the election.

Explaining policy to voters

Policy should not sound like a technical paper when speaking to voters. It should sound like a clear explanation of a real problem and a practical response.

Use everyday language. Avoid long bureaucratic phrases. Give examples. Connect the issue to people’s daily lives. If you are speaking about the cost of living, explain how it affects food, transport, school expenses and household pressure. If you are speaking about health, explain how medicine shortages, waiting times or travel costs affect families. If you are speaking about women’s safety, explain why lighting, transport, policing, community attitudes and support services all matter.

A good candidate should be able to give three versions of the same policy position:

• A one sentence version for a poster or social media graphic.
• A one minute version for a community meeting.
• A longer version for an interview, debate or party policy discussion.

This helps candidates stay clear without oversimplifying the issue.

A simple policy worksheet

For each policy issue, write short answers to these questions:

• What is the problem?
• Who is affected?
• What evidence do I have?
• What do people say they need?
• What change do I support?
• What institution has responsibility?
• What would it cost or require?
• What are the risks or tradeoffs?
• How will I explain it in simple language?
• What will I do if elected?

This worksheet can help candidates prepare for campaign messages, speeches, interviews and voter questions.