Tonight's televised debate

[Charlie-Brown]

I posted weeks ago that any sensible political strategist would be wanting their party to LOSE this election because what they / any new government is facing in terms of financial restrictions and spending cuts that WILL be necessary and imposed either voluntarily or compulsorily via the markets will be tantamount to receiving a 'hospital pass' and the next government of whatever colour or persuasion wins the election is in line to be seen as one of the most unpopular in modern history and probably won't be re-electable at the next election.

[Boris]

I posted weeks ago that any sensible political strategist would be wanting their party to LOSE this election because what they / any new government is facing in terms of financial restrictions and spending cuts that WILL be necessary and imposed either voluntarily or compulsorily via the markets will be tantamount to receiving a 'hospital pass' and the next government of whatever colour or persuasion wins the election is in line to be seen as one of the most unpopular in modern history and probably won't be re-electable at the next election.

 

 

I don't disagree with your analysis, however I would add that given the rise of the Lib Dems and the likelihood of a hung parliament, it is imperitive for the Tories to win outright so they can stall the move to electoral reform. Otherwise the Tories will fail to ever rule on their own again. Labour and the LD's are slightly more enlightened when it comes to electoral reform though.

[Ossory_Jambo]

and on........

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article7108994.ece

[The Mighty Thor]

and on........

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article7108994.ece

 

Surely the question remains........which Westminster seat is Mr Salmond standing for?

[Ossory_Jambo]

Surely the question remains........which Westminster seat is Mr Salmond standing for?

 

Thats a nice simple one for the start of the day, none of course and maybe the Court of Session will reject the legal action on that basis.

 

However, whether the legal action is won or lost is not really whats at stake here. Broadcasting integrity has been sacrificed during an election period in a neat little package put together by 'The Leaders', Sky, ITV and the BBC, with the flimsy premise that one of these leaders will be the next PM.

 

Surely the question that people should be asking is: Has the election coverage been fair, balanced and democratic to all parts of the UK and Northern Ireland?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Thats a nice simple one for the start of the day, none of course and maybe the Court of Session will reject the legal action on that basis.

 

However, whether the legal action is won or lost is not really whats at stake here. Broadcasting integrity has been sacrificed during an election period in a neat little package put together by 'The Leaders', Sky, ITV and the BBC, with the flimsy premise that one of these leaders will be the next PM.

 

Surely the question that people should be asking is: Has the election coverage been fair, balanced and democratic to all parts of the UK and Northern Ireland?

 

 

Can I be a pedant and point out that the UK is only the UK when it includes Northern Ireland?

 

Anyway, I agree - all parties should have been represented in the debates. For one thing, it would have been interesting to see how many X Factor voters tuning in in England would have went for Peter Robinson or Alex Salmond!

[leginten]

Surely the question that people should be asking is: Has the election coverage been fair, balanced and democratic to all parts of the UK and Northern Ireland?

 

And the answer to that question is a resounding "no". It is an election which has been televisually gerrymandered from the outset in respect of both the smaller parties which stand UK-wide and the devolved nations of the UK, all of which are having the message drummed into them day in, day out that there are three choices in this poll. The body most implicated in this scandal - more so than the three parties which are gleefully taking advantage of "Strictly Come Electioneering" - is the BBC, and it would be nice to think that this election sounded the death-knell for this sad old dinosaur in its current form. It has lost the way completely.

 

As for the Lib Dems, there were times when their attitude to inappropriate political broadcasts in the middle of an election period was rather different. But back in 1995, the boot was on the other foot.

 

http://www.independe...ew-1614120.html

 

http://www.independe...ef-1614858.html

[Gorgiewave]

And the answer to that question is a resounding "no". It is an election which has been televisually gerrymandered from the outset in respect of both the smaller parties which stand UK-wide and the devolved nations of the UK, all of which are having the message drummed into them day in, day out that there are three choices in this poll. The body most implicated in this scandal - more so than the three parties which are gleefully taking advantage of "Strictly Come Electioneering" - is the BBC, and it would be nice to think that this election sounded the death-knell for this sad old dinosaur in its current form. It has lost the way completely.

 

As for the Lib Dems, there were times when their attitude to inappropriate political broadcasts in the middle of an election period was rather different. But back in 1995, the boot was on the other foot.

 

http://www.independe...ew-1614120.html

 

http://www.independe...ef-1614858.html

 

 

Good post and a good poster.

[The Mighty Thor]

Thats a nice simple one for the start of the day, none of course and maybe the Court of Session will reject the legal action on that basis.

 

However, whether the legal action is won or lost is not really whats at stake here. Broadcasting integrity has been sacrificed during an election period in a neat little package put together by 'The Leaders', Sky, ITV and the BBC, with the flimsy premise that one of these leaders will be the next PM.

 

Surely the question that people should be asking is: Has the election coverage been fair, balanced and democratic to all parts of the UK and Northern Ireland?

 

Is the effective tri-party system a new thing? No. The coverage of every election in my lifetime has been the same. It's always been about the three main parties with the only coverage for the others usually being a list of the candidates in a particular seat after the TV article has finished.

 

IMO Alex Salmond has pulled off a fairly impressive trick with his bleating in this Westminster election campaign;

 

he's managed to parochialise his own party even within Scotland, he's rendered the leader of his own Westminster party, Angus Robertson, anonymous and he's taken away any awareness of his party's manifesto with the voting public he feels he's being deprived of.

 

Someone in the SNP hierarchy has called this all wrong and I can see them suffering in the polls because of it. No doubt Mr Salmond will excuse any poor performance in the polls as proof that he should have had his 15 minutes (despite him not standing for Westminster!)

[Rick Grimes]

The body most implicated in this scandal - more so than the three parties which are gleefully taking advantage of "Strictly Come Electioneering" - is the BBC, and it would be nice to think that this election sounded the death-knell for this sad old dinosaur in its current form.

 

 

 

why the BBC and not ITV or Sky, the latter who most aggressively pursued the debate format?

[Boris]

why the BBC and not ITV or Sky, the latter who most aggressively pursued the debate format?

 

 

I think the BBC is singled out due to its charter and responsibility as a publicly funded broadcaster.

 

Sky & ITV are commercial.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

why the BBC and not ITV or Sky, the latter who most aggressively pursued the debate format?

 

 

The cynic in me says it is more to do with the 'bounce' in Lib Dem polling. If there had been no impact then I don't think the Nats would have bothered.

 

Having said that, the SNP have right on their side.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Back on topic - the IFS have tore into all the major parties over their reticence to talk about spending cuts.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/apr/27/thinktank-spending-cuts-election

 

So, bear this in mind when they blether away in the last part of the talent show.

[blairdin]

The cynic in me says it is more to do with the 'bounce' in Lib Dem polling. If there had been no impact then I don't think the Nats would have bothered.

 

Having said that, the SNP have right on their side.

 

 

I'm with Salmond on this one. SNP are likely to be the third biggest party in Scotland (at worst) in the UK election.

 

To digress slightly, I think this is a massive week for the Fib Dems and their bounce. They have seen a surge in popularity, but there's a noticable change in some of Cleggs views in the last few days and it's been enough for me to virtually rule out giving them my vote. If they finish second in the election behind the Conservatives and then go on to form a coalition with a discredited third placed Labour party (with Labour PM) then they're in trouble IMHO. If Labour and Libs get together like this and prove as unpopular as we all expect the next government to be, then look forward to a Tory landslide in 4-5 years from now.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I'm with Salmond on this one. SNP are likely to be the third biggest party in Scotland (at worst) in the UK election.

 

To digress slightly, I think this is a massive week for the Fib Dems and their bounce. They have seen a surge in popularity, but there's a noticable change in some of Cleggs views in the last few days and it's been enough for me to virtually rule out giving them my vote. If they finish second in the election behind the Conservatives and then go on to form a coalition with a discredited third placed Labour party (with Labour PM) then they're in trouble IMHO. If Labour and Libs get together like this and prove as unpopular as we all expect the next government to be, then look forward to a Tory landslide in 4-5 years from now.

 

This is what gets me about this election. It will be an even bigger pyrrhic victory than 1992. We have the Euro imploding and the IMF creating money out of thin air via SDR's to help try and stave the bailout. Meanwhile, the dominoes are slowly starting to fall on the sovereign debt and the UK is quite high up that line. Government spending is still rising by ?5,000 a second and even then there was a Labour candidate on a BBC Town Hall debate today saying he wouldn't cut anything!

[blairdin]

This is what gets me about this election. It will be an even bigger pyrrhic victory than 1992. We have the Euro imploding and the IMF creating money out of thin air via SDR's to help try and stave the bailout. Meanwhile, the dominoes are slowly starting to fall on the sovereign debt and the UK is quite high up that line. Government spending is still rising by ?5,000 a second and even then there was a Labour candidate on a BBC Town Hall debate today saying he wouldn't cut anything!

 

 

This would be funny if it wasn't true. Labour are going to finish 3rd but continue to run the country, with a few senio Fib Dems earning a fancy cabinet job title but no real clout. Frightening.

 

I'm not a Tory, far from it, but Cameron is the only one that seems to have something close to a grasp on what needs to be done/happen.

[Randle P McMurphy]

Back on topic - the IFS have tore into all the major parties over their reticence to talk about spending cuts.

 

http://www.guardian....g-cuts-election

 

So, bear this in mind when they blether away in the last part of the talent show.

 

Thats the problem, the budget deficit will need to be addressed in some way and in fact this should be the most important issue of the election. However to properly address this deficit it will need some increases in either or all of PAYE/NI/VAT. Cuts in public spending will not be enough unless they slash so severely that they will jeopardise front line services. The only party that have come close to even partially addressing this are Labour with the delayed implementation of the NI increase. However for any party to actually admit that they will increase taxes will be election suicide. Therefore what you have are partial manifestos without any substance and the real future will be dtermined by the post election budget.

[JamboAl]

This is what gets me about this election. It will be an even bigger pyrrhic victory than 1992. We have the Euro imploding and the IMF creating money out of thin air via SDR's to help try and stave the bailout. Meanwhile, the dominoes are slowly starting to fall on the sovereign debt and the UK is quite high up that line. Government spending is still rising by ?5,000 a second and even then there was a Labour candidate on a BBC Town Hall debate today saying he wouldn't cut anything!

 

I'm amazed you don't get more involved in Aussie politics.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

I'll not watch the third debate if Salmond's involved. I live in England so have no interest in what he says or thinks

 

 

[leginten]

why the BBC and not ITV or Sky, the latter who most aggressively pursued the debate format?

 

Boris beat me to it. I don't need to subscribe to Sky and I expect them to do what commercial broadcasters do. If I want to watch TV in this country, I am obliged to pay a licence fee for the provision of the BBC.

[Ossory_Jambo]

I'll not watch the third debate if Salmond's involved. I live in England so have no interest in what he says or thinks

 

Thats a bit of a narrow view if you don't mind me saying so, given that the last debate is on the economy. First Minister Alex Salmond was an economist by profession, before he got into the murky business of politics, he might just have some meaningful input to the debate. Also, in the event that an Independent Scotland became a reality, don't you think that there would be economic implications for what remains of the Untied Kingdom?

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Thats a bit of a narrow view if you don't mind me saying so, given that the last debate is on the economy. First Minister Alex Salmond was an economist by profession, before he got into the murky business of politics, he might just have some meaningful input to the debate. Also, in the event that an Independent Scotland became a reality, don't you think that there would be economic implications for what remains of the Untied Kingdom?

 

Not at all.

 

In the grand scheme of things, an independent scotland would have implications but it's not relevant to this specific election (not in my eyes anyway). More to the point, I wouldn't have a vote in a future referendum on independence so what I know about it is neither here nor there. As for Salmond being an economist, I guess he might contribute something to the debate in that respect but so could anyone with an understanding of politics and finance.

[leginten]

I'm with Salmond on this one. SNP are likely to be the third biggest party in Scotland (at worst) in the UK election.

 

They may or may not be. The only certainty is that votes from all of the parties in Scotland not represented in the Prime Ministerial (sic) debates will heamorrhage to the winner of the Election TV show and his party. At the moment, that looks like being Clegg.

[leginten]

They may or may not be. The only certainty is that votes from all of the parties in Scotland not represented in the Prime Ministerial (sic) debates will heamorrhage to the winner of the Election TV show and his party. At the moment, that looks like being Clegg.

 

That should have said "haemorrhage votes". There will be no literal bloodbath!

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I'm amazed you don't get more involved in Aussie politics.

 

 

I'm not an Aussie citizen. I can't vote here.

[Boris]

I'm not an Aussie citizen. I can't vote here.

 

I assume you pay Aussie tax though?

 

No taxation without representation as someone once said...

[davemclaren]

And the answer to that question is a resounding "no". It is an election which has been televisually gerrymandered from the outset in respect of both the smaller parties which stand UK-wide and the devolved nations of the UK, all of which are having the message drummed into them day in, day out that there are three choices in this poll. The body most implicated in this scandal - more so than the three parties which are gleefully taking advantage of "Strictly Come Electioneering" - is the BBC, and it would be nice to think that this election sounded the death-knell for this sad old dinosaur in its current form. It has lost the way completely.

 

As for the Lib Dems, there were times when their attitude to inappropriate political broadcasts in the middle of an election period was rather different. But back in 1995, the boot was on the other foot.

 

http://www.independe...ew-1614120.html

 

http://www.independe...ef-1614858.html

 

Great post.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I assume you pay Aussie tax though?

 

No taxation without representation as someone once said...

 

 

Yep. Off to start my own St Kilda Tea Party.

 

Or maybe not...!

[Glamorgan Jambo]

Good summary of the situation by Iain Martin in the Journal and interesting point at the end about what's still to play for

 

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471204575210432628556338.html?mod=WSJEUROPE_hpp_MIDDLETopStories

[H2]

Hypothetical question.

 

Nick Clegg - Gordon if David called a senior citizen a bigot for no apperent reason, would you call for his resignation?

 

Gordon's reply?

[leginten]

Here's a TV election debate surely everyone will be able to enjoy. The arrogant tosser Paxman and his metropolitan conceits absolutely monstered.

 

[Moriarty]

Here's a TV election debate surely everyone will be able to enjoy. The arrogant tosser Paxman and his metropolitan conceits absolutely monstered.

 

 

that was fantastic viewing.

UP YEA PAXMAN

[The Mighty Thor]

Here we go.

 

Straight onto the Economy but still nobody prepared to tell the truth.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Here we go.

 

Straight onto the Economy but still nobody prepared to tell the truth.

 

 

Yep.

 

Clegg's consensus plea is baws given what the IFS and Bank of England said this week. They know what needs to happen. It's the politicians fudging the issue.

[The Mighty Thor]

Yep.

 

Clegg's consensus plea is baws given what the IFS and Bank of England said this week. They know what needs to happen. It's the politicians fudging the issue.

 

I saw on the Sky ticker that an economist in Australia quoted someone from the Bank of England reckons whoever gets in will be virtually unelectable for a generation.

[Danny Wilde]

Yep.

 

Clegg's consensus plea is baws given what the IFS and Bank of England said this week. They know what needs to happen. It's the politicians fudging the issue.

 

Yup, same old, same old. Much talk about protecting this and that ... the 6 billion blah blah ...

 

Collective cowardice on the eve of the election.

 

And Gordon Brown looks very very tired. Mangled a few words in his opening statement.

[Boris]

Yep.

 

Clegg's consensus plea is baws given what the IFS and Bank of England said this week. They know what needs to happen. It's the politicians fudging the issue.

 

I'd disagree with that Geoff. If at a round table discussion the scenario was painted then everyone would know what to do and it would be public knowledge so to say "let's raise NI" or "let's make ?6bn efficiencies" doesn't (as you rightly say) answer the question. By everyone I mean the public.

 

Not the time for ideological point scoring but for united action.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I saw on the Sky ticker that an economist in Australia quoted someone from the Bank of England reckons whoever gets in will be virtually unelectable for a generation.

 

It was Mervyn King himself who said it!

 

This fecking NI issue is a joke!

[Danny Wilde]

I saw on the Sky ticker that an economist in Australia quoted someone from the Bank of England reckons whoever gets in will be virtually unelectable for a generation.

 

Link here MT:

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100005270/king-election-winner-will-be-out-of-power-for-a-generation/

[The Mighty Thor]

Cameron is already switched into soundbite mode;

 

Jobs tax, jobs tax, jobs tax.

 

He's banging on about efficiency savings. ?6 billion is a lot of paper clips and post it notes.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

I'd disagree with that Geoff. If at a round table discussion the scenario was painted then everyone would know what to do and it would be public knowledge so to say "let's raise NI" or "let's make ?6bn efficiencies" doesn't (as you rightly say) answer the question. By everyone I mean the public.

 

Not the time for ideological point scoring but for united action.

 

 

That's a slightly different tack, Boris. Clegg knows rightly that the politicians are the ones avoiding the issue, all of them. What he's trying to do is to stand aloof politically and be the consensus candidate.

 

A government of national unity might well be needed, and might be a good thing, but it isn't going to happen voluntarily.

[The Mighty Thor]

It was Mervyn King himself who said it!

 

This fecking NI issue is a joke!

 

 

Link here MT:

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/edmundconway/100005270/king-election-winner-will-be-out-of-power-for-a-generation/

 

Thankc chaps. I didn't realise it was Mervyn King

[Boris]

That's a slightly different tack, Boris. Clegg knows rightly that the politicians are the ones avoiding the issue, all of them. What he's trying to do is to stand aloof politically and be the consensus candidate.

 

A government of national unity might well be needed, and might be a good thing, but it isn't going to happen voluntarily.

 

But at least he recognises it, perhaps cynically as he knows he will never have to deliver it on his own!

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

But at least he recognises it, perhaps cynically as he knows he will never have to deliver it on his own!

 

 

Fair point!

[Gigolo-Aunt]

I find these debates a compete head f00k.

 

The boy Clegg defo has that "Average man, likes a pint, not a stick in the mud" aura though.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Oh FFS! We'll be fairer than you, no we're the fairest - grow up all of you!

[The Mighty Thor]

The quality of question this week is far better.

 

So far Cameron is sound-biting, Brown is drowning and Clegg is being incredibly populist.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Crash dodges his light touch regulation on the banks (check the Mansion House 2007 speech)!

 

 

[Danny Wilde]

Brown still managing some anger - synthetic or otherwise - but looks clapped out.

 

Time to go in this (ahem) debate, but no sign of Brown rolling the double-six that he so badly needs.

 

Edit: this is the debate where he's meant to be "the man".

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Clegg's defence of his Euro policy was hilariously bad.

 

Cameron can't afford half of his tax cuts either.