It's time for a better frame (Patreon)

A few weeks back, more than 50 charities wrote an open letter to the government pleading with it to increase benefits ahead of Christmas. You see there were tens of thousands newly jobless, food banks were seeing record demand and youth homelessness had seen a massive increase.
Stuff reporter Henry Cooke asked the PM at a post-cabinet press conference whether she would raise benefits before Christmas.
She said no. And was rightly criticised for it.
"Increase benefits" has become somewhat of a catch-cry to prove your lefty credentials, especially since Labour got in over the last three years. There was a $25 increase to benefits that happened back in April, but the Welfare Expert Advisory Group - that was commissioned by the Government - said benefits needed to go up by much more.
Except it's not actually increased benefits that is the end game. What we want is for people to have enough money to live with dignity. At the moment they do not.
So, what if, instead of calling for increased benefits, we asked for people to receive enough money to live a decent life. Not just those receiving benefits, but everyone. Low-income earners should still earn enough money that they can afford to feed themselves and their family, pay the rent and other bills and still have enough left over to do something nice.
What if, instead of Henry Cooke asking the Prime Minister if she'd lift benefits before Christmas, he asked if she was prepared to make sure that Kiwi kids received presents, and enough food over the Christmas period? I expect she would have found that question harder to say no to.
In this country we struggle in terms of talking about political levers. We're very good at talking policy - and politicians especially - but we're much worse at talking about outcomes. And it's outcomes that actually matter.
We need to reorient our language. These aren't left or right-wing policies, these are ways of making people's lives better. These are things we do so that parents don't have to choose whether they eat, or their children have shoes.
We set it up so that if you lose your job, you'll be covered instantly so that the necessities of life are not something you need to stress over.
We make it so that getting healthcare, and dentistry, is something we can all access no matter how much money we have or where we live in the country.
We send kids to school with full tummies so they can learn to their potential. We make sure that there are books at home and a loving person to read to them.
We create a country where there are jobs for everyone, and safe jobs too. So that everyone can get home at the end of the day and see their loved ones.
We focus on a New Zealand that has environmentalism at its heart so that the New Zealand we leave behind for our kids and grandkids is the beautiful 100% pure country we like to think of it as.
All the above have obvious policies that work towards providing them, but it's the outcomes we need to call for and talk about instead.
This makes it so much harder to argue with, without sounding like a callous asshole.
In political communications speak we call this "framing". Framing is the language you use to describe something to the public. To give you an example, you'll usually hear left-wing political groups talk about right-wing governments being "asleep at the wheel" of the economy. This is because left wingers believe in interventionist governments that take a firm control of the economy.
At the moment, those of us on the left are stuck at the policy stage of calling out for more, but we must move to the outcomes. It is then that we'll get broader support for our movements, and it is then that we'll make it much harder for the governments of the day to say no.
I teach this a lot in my day job. Talking about outcomes instead of policies. And the way in which you get to the outcome is to ask “why?” of all your policies. You want benefits lifted? Why? So that people have more money. Why? So they can afford to live with dignity.
And when you cannot ask why anymore, you have reached your outcome, and it is your outcome that is emotionally engaging, not your policy.
If we want to truly create a mass movement that is impossible to argue against we need to make it a policy of ours that we focus on calling for outcomes.