Comments on: TV leaders debate set to happen: if Sky keeps its nerve

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 19:18:33 +0000

This debate will only be allowed to happen on condition it is not broadcast in Scotland. There is a sound basis for this view – remember when John Major wanted to have an interview with Panorama prior to Scottish council elections and the opposition parties in Scotland went to court over the matter? – the court ruled that Panorama could not be broadcast in Scotland, and even viewers in Newcastle were deprived of the programme to ensure that people in the south of Scotland could not pick up the signal!

Considering the SNP is the governing party of Scotland, and has one the last two all Scotland elections (2007 and 2009) the SNP has a right to expect representation in any leaders; debate to be broadcast within Scotland.

By: rob irving

rob irving — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 00:17:38 +0000

Helen:
In your election review for August you identify me as an official Liberal Democrat candidate for the Little Gaddesden Parish Council. This is incorrect. We run the PC’s in Dacorum on a non-political basis and I did not stand as a Lib Dem candidate.

I would be obliged if you would not run the result of the election in that way again.

Robert Irving

By: John P Edwards

John P Edwards — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 19:48:53 +0000

Where ever one goes in this world three items dominate. I came to this conclusion in1959 whilst on a WORLD CRUISE aboard H.M.S.Albion. 1 .SEX – 2. MONEY – 3. POWER. That was 50 years ago, so what has
changed ? Absolutly nothing and never will. Democracy what is that ? When we get proportional reresentation !!! and the Politicians keep their noses out of the trough along with civil servants, I could name more but I’m sure you get the drift. Did you know that all CHIEF COSTABLES enjoy complete autonomy and that is a fact told to me when I secretly recorded a STAFF OFFICER to one of her Majesties INSPECTORS OF CONSTABULARY. Want to cure
violence on the streets ? Whilst serving as a Boy Musician in Deal, I and another boy from Chester were called to the Guardroom to my amazement there was my childhood who lived just 6 doors from me. He was going to receive physical punishment for running away. We were then told we had escourt along with a Senior Marine to the place where the punishment would take place. Upon his release his first words to me were John never ever will I run away again,he then related the entire saga. He tansfered to the Royal Navy served 22 years mainly on submarines becoming a Fleet Chief Petty Officer. He also refused to take a commision as an Officer. So punishment does work and change the individual. Change the law and bring back the Birch, cat ,rod etc,etc.

By: iainm

iainm — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 15:39:55 +0000

Yeah, they’ve demanded an invitation to take part.

By: Malcolm Todd

Malcolm Todd — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 15:31:12 +0000

Oh, I don’t know: watching Brown squirm may well be worth losing Scotland…

Incidentally, has Salmond or his party actually made any comment on Sky’s proposal?

By: iainm

iainm — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 15:16:37 +0000

Malcom: I seriously doubt it would be seen that way in Scotland, and certainly not by the SNP. So either they would challenge it and win and prevent the debate from taking place, or they would challenge it and lose and be excluded. In either event they’d get a massive election boost in an election they look pretty likely to do exceptionally well in already. That’s a pretty dangerous price to pay for the sake of watching Brown squirm in a meaningless debate, entertaining as it may well be.

By: Malcolm Todd

Malcolm Todd — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:47:34 +0000

No, it would be far more arbitrary to exclude Clegg than to exclude Salmond: the SNP do not stand in 90% of seats in the UK; they have no interest in participating in the government of the UK; they have fewer than one-tenth as many seats as the LibDems. That’s a clear dividing line.

By: iainm

iainm — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 14:03:22 +0000

I don’t see a problem with having the Scottish leaders debating in Scotland, etc.

You don’t see any problem in having the Scottish version of the GE leaders’ debate held between people who aren’t actually the leaders of the parties that are standing in the general election?

Odd, I can see several glaring problems with that without even really thinking about it.

Forget it. There is no way a 3-way US-style debate is ever going to happen. Like it or not this format is just inherently unsuited to the current UK constitution. I suspect Clegg knows this and is banking on scoring some points when Broon refuses, which he will.

It would be no less arbitrary to exclude Clegg and hold the debate between Brown and Cameron than it would be to exclude Salmond, but you can imagine the howls of protest on here if that were suggested.

By: Malcolm Todd

Malcolm Todd — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 13:22:48 +0000

No, there would be no point in having BCC plus Salmond, BCC plus Jones, and just BCC. I don’t see a problem with having the Scottish leaders debating in Scotland, etc. I expect we’ll see them pretty actively involved in the GE campaign so why not? But I agree the important debate would be between the big three UK leaders, and I doubt it would be difficult to see off any challenge from parties that don’t want to be part of the UK government and don’t stand candidates in most of the UK.

By: iainm

iainm — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 09:46:22 +0000

I still don’t think that works. These are Westminster elections we’re talking about. The leaders of the Scottish Labour, Tory and Lib Dem parties only sit in the Scottish Parliament so they’re completely irrelevant here. What you’d end up with is a Scottish debate between Salmond, Broon, Clegg and Cameron and a UK one between the same minus Salmond, which would be arbitrary and absurd. And you’d get exactly the same issue in Wales.

By: Malcolm Todd

Malcolm Todd — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 09:20:14 +0000

I think DLG’s multi-debate idea is on the right lines, but a bit back-to-front: have an all-Scottish debate that includes the SNP and Scots leaders of the other 3 parties; an all-Welsh debate including Plaid; and a UK debate involving Brown, Cameron and Clegg. (Plus the NI debate, if there’s any appetitie for it.) All of them would have to be on UK issues, not just devolved matters, because it’s a UK election; but the format reflects the reality that there are significant differences in the political landscape and debate in the four parts of the UK.

By: iainm

iainm — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:13:37 +0000

I don’t think there’s any way that you could fairly split it up. For example, how are you going to ensure that the debate between Brown, Clegg and Cameron focuses only on English issues, i.e those that Westminster has devolved to the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh and Northern Irish assemblies, when those constitutional settlements are all different from each other? Should they stray onto reserved matters then they would be debating UK policy, not English policy, and the SNP et al would have grounds for objection. And can you really imagine a debate between Brown, Clegg and Cameron where defense, national security, foreign policy and monatary issues were off-limits? What would be the point?

By: michael w ryan

michael w ryan — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 08:05:13 +0000

Yes it would be good to get all major parties on TV ,not that i like eny of them ,they are all out for them selves . I want to here what each of them has to say before the general election . Keep up the good work SKY thanks . MIKE RYAN

By: David L.G.

David L.G. — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 01:12:34 +0000

If there were 3 debates then there could be one debate could focus on issues affecting the whole of Britain and include Plaid and SNP, another would focus on england and wales and include Plaid and the finale debate would focus on england and just have Brown, Cameron and Clegg. BBC1 NI ought to brocast a seperate debate between the DUP, SDLP and UUP/UCUNF.

I think the critirion for who should take part should be for a party to have a whip and or its leader in the commons. for NI this could be lowered to just having an MP who sits in the comons (Sinn Fein doesn’t take its seats so would be pointless to include in a debate).

By: Nick says yes to Sky’s televised debate

Nick says yes to Sky’s televised debate — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 22:42:38 +0000

[...] As LDV noted this morning Sky News has decided to lay down the gauntlet, and formally invite the major party leaders to particpate in a televised debate during the general election campaign. Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg has formally accepted his invitation, issuing the following statement on his website: Many thanks for your letter of yesterday. It is great to hear that Sky News are taking this important initiative and I would be delighted to accept your invitation. [...]

By: Iainm

Iainm — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 20:00:00 +0000

Salmond must be licking his lips. If he’s invited if gets a platform, and he’s not invited it’ll be seen in Scotland as supreme Westminster arrogance and give his mob a boost without him even having to take part. That’ll be a nice little bonus for the GE.

Of course, that’s nothing compared to the boost they’re going to get after the GE when the tories get in at Westminster, but that’s an inevitability now whatever happens in the run up.

By: James Robertson

James Robertson — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 17:03:19 +0000

Yes, I imagine you’re right Iain. And I wouldn’t blame the SNP – after all, if the Lib Dems were excluded I would expect our party to take similar action.

By: Iainm

Iainm — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 15:59:17 +0000

My prediction: the SNP (and/ or any of the other parties) will challenge the legality of such a debate in court and it’ll never happen.

By: KL

KL — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 12:24:48 +0000

Mark, I thought I remembered something from around that time – I think you’re right, as I do remember Malcolm being in it.

And with the leaders, we got close (but no cigar) last time with the “Question Time” special.

By: Dominic Hannigan

Dominic Hannigan — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 11:51:33 +0000

“Why not the likes of Caroline Lucas or Nigel Farage?”

The problem is where do you draw the line? There are literally hundreds of registered political parties in Britain, so if you go beyond the main parties then when do you stop? I know it probably seems unfair, but you have to draw a line somewhere.

For example, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and Respect currently have more parliamentary influence than either UKIP or the Greens so surely there is an argument that they have as much right to take part as Lucas or Farage. Equally, the BNP are almost as significant electorally as the Greens, so they would have to take part. And by this point it would be pretty hard to argue against a party like the English Democrats who are likely to stand hundreds of candidates, together with JURY Team, the Pirate Party and many others. Before you know it, you have a studio with thirty odd people in it and they each only get a minute to talk. Much more sensible to draw the line with the three main parties, probably not totally fair but it is likely to be the only way.