Chapter 5 argued that policies often play a symbolic rather than a practical role. They can be intended as symbols of a government's value-set and cultural identification rather than commitments to be implemented faithfully. Voters often interpret them in this light as well, and react to political leaders’ policy promises accordingly. If this reading of the role of policy is even partly right, then policy makers need to take the symbolic role of policy seriously. This means that they need to apply professional skill and understanding to this aspect of policy as much as to any other.

Should we care about symbols?

In my experience the policy-making system is some way from this level of seriousness about policies as symbols. I have on several occasions heard a policy called ‘symbolic’ in a way that is meant as an insult: implying that it is somehow not a real or serious policy but a short-term gimmick. When I was responsible for coordinating the UK government's legislative programme I spent a lot of time working with the Parliamentary Counsel. These are the specialist lawyers who literally write the law: crafting the words that Parliament considers to put the intention of ministers into statute. I remember conversations with members of the Office of Parliamentary Counsel becoming very pained when ministers wanted to include symbolic elements in legislation. The political logic in play here was that including in a law a statement of what the government wanted to be the case was a way of sending a message, especially if political opponents could be made to vote against it because of their disagreements with other substantive elements of the draft law. However, the Counsel frequently couldn't get their heads around this. Their job was to convey policy into clear and precise language with unambiguous legal effect. If the only effect intended was to send a message, then that was in their eyes not a legal concept and should be left to the communications department.

I had, and still have, considerable sympathy with this view from the Parliamentary Counsel. Legal text that would only ever be seen by Members of Parliament and a few external specialists always seemed to me to be a pretty strange vehicle for trying to send a message about a government's intentions.