Printable version of thread
BuzzJack Music Forum _ News and Politics _ Cameron wimps out of election debates
Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 4 2015, 10:43 PM
Cameron has said that he will only take part in one election debate. He wants it to involve seven leaders and take place before parliament is dissolved on 30 March. Methinks he is scared.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31742155
Posted by: April Mar 4 2015, 10:46 PM
They should just have the three main leaders, Greens and UKIP for an English debate and empty chair anyone who doesn't show up. Then one regionalised debate in each of Wales / Scotland / Northern Ireland.
David Cameron is coming across so badly though.
Posted by: Iz~ Mar 5 2015, 05:15 PM
I am really confused at what Cameron is trying to get out of this. He should not be able to dictate the terms of when and where the debates happen, there's clearly a call for them, and there is no way he's not going to look bad for trying to duck out of them.
The broadcasters need to hold their nerve and go ahead with the original plan (which is also what's confusing me, I thought they'd already laid out a plan for three debates with a different number of leaders at each one, so his statement about it being chaos makes no sense to me).
Posted by: Brett-Butler Mar 5 2015, 05:49 PM
It's David Cameron's right not to take part in the debates if he doesn't want to. And it's everyone else's right to constantly remind him of that fact.
And from someone who doesn't want to get involved in the debate to someone who does, but won't be. The BBC just announced that the DUP, despite being the 4th largest party in Westminster, won't be invited to the debates. Which is a pity, because I was looking forward to the other leaders asking Peter Robinson why he thinks the world is 6000 years old, and why he thinks blood from gay men is so icky.
Posted by: popchartfreak Mar 5 2015, 08:25 PM
Cameron has nothing to gain from appearing and everything to lose, cos he knows his record will be under fire from all-comers, and it gives them credibility to be on the same platform, so unless Labour also has something to lose (from the SNP/Greens appearing) he's taking the logical approach.
Squawk, cluck, cluck, squawk, peck peck peck....
Posted by: April Mar 5 2015, 08:58 PM
Surely it's a mockery of democracy that the current Prime Minister won't appear in a debate to defend the decisions which he and his Government have made of the past five years.
Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 5 2015, 09:03 PM
When the PM tried to say that debates were not needed because they had one every week in the Commons, the leader of the opposition replied
QUOTE
I have to say to the Prime Minister that if he really thinks that these exchanges once a week are a substitute for a proper television debate, then he is even more out of touch than I thought.
We have to be honest with ourselves: not many people watch these exchanges, and not all those who do are hugely impressed with them.
There are parliamentary systems that do have television debates; we have seen them in Italy, Australia and Poland. The Prime Minister has no objection in principle: when he was Shadow Chancellor, he did a television debate against the then Chancellor of the Exchequer.
So I have to ask him: What on earth is he frightened of?
That leader of the opposition was a chap called Cameron in 2008.
Posted by: April Mar 5 2015, 09:04 PM
I wouldn't call PMQs a debate. It's more a screaming match.
Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 5 2015, 09:11 PM
QUOTE(April @ Mar 5 2015, 09:04 PM)
I wouldn't call PMQs a debate. It's more a screaming match.
Precisely. I'm not sure the number of questions from an opposition MP that Cameron has actually answered has yet reached one.
Posted by: popchartfreak Mar 5 2015, 09:51 PM
like a lot of politicking it's soundbites and putdowns and vacuous one-liners....
facts are frequently inconveniences to propaganda. There's a soundbite they can borrow, I think I invented it but I stand to be corrected.
Posted by: Danny Mar 6 2015, 05:02 PM
If the debates don't happen then I honestly see turnout dropping below 50% this time. I somehow can't see an election campaign consisting solely of leaders doing photo-ops in supermarkets catching the public imagination.
Posted by: Silas Mar 6 2015, 05:19 PM
Broadcasters are calling Camorons bluff again and have announced that they will press ahead with their plans.
Posted by: April Mar 6 2015, 05:34 PM
Good on the broadcasters! If he doesn't show up for the head-to-head, I'm sure Clegg would be more than willing to take part. But still empty chair him.
Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 6 2015, 05:41 PM
QUOTE(April @ Mar 6 2015, 05:34 PM)
Good on the broadcasters! If he doesn't show up for the head-to-head, I'm sure Clegg would be more than willing to take part. But still empty chair him.
Clegg has already offered to do so.
Posted by: Qassändra Mar 6 2015, 05:41 PM
QUOTE(Danny @ Mar 6 2015, 06:02 PM)
If the debates don't happen then I honestly see turnout dropping below 50% this time. I somehow can't see an election campaign consisting solely of leaders doing photo-ops in supermarkets catching the public imagination.
Really? I think UKIP's rise if nothing else ensures we won't dip below 60% now there's something to vote for for traditionally disenchanted (well, in the last twenty years) voters.
Posted by: Harve Mar 6 2015, 07:48 PM
Does anyone actually care about these debates? I'd rather we were talking about policies. When the (admittedly limited amount of) UK news I read is about whether someone wants to participate in a debate, it's not really telling me much.
Posted by: Danny Mar 6 2015, 07:54 PM
QUOTE(Harve @ Mar 6 2015, 07:48 PM)
Does anyone actually care about these debates? I'd rather we were talking about policies. When the (admittedly limited amount of) UK news I read is about whether someone wants to participate in a debate, it's not really telling me much.
But there's going to be even less talk about policies without them, though. The debates are the only thing which stops the leaders from the endless cycle of managed publicity stunts.
Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 6 2015, 08:12 PM
QUOTE(Danny @ Mar 6 2015, 07:54 PM)
But there's going to be even less talk about policies without them, though. The debates are the only thing which stops the leaders from the endless cycle of managed publicity stunts.
Exactly. That's why Cameron is so determined to avoid them. People might notice just how clueless he is.
Are people interested? The viewing figures in 2010 suggest that they are.
Posted by: April Mar 6 2015, 08:53 PM
QUOTE(Harve @ Mar 6 2015, 07:48 PM)
Does anyone actually care about these debates? I'd rather we were talking about policies. When the (admittedly limited amount of) UK news I read is about whether someone wants to participate in a debate, it's not really telling me much.
The policies will be discussed in the debates. That's the whole point of them.
Posted by: steve201 Mar 20 2015, 09:33 PM
Ugh it so infuriates me that this Bullingdon boy has squirmed out of these debates - just because it's part of the campaign Lynton Cosby can't dictate and control so of course there's no way they can happen. So dictatorial!!
Hope Milliband makes sure he mentions it in his audience with shows.
That's the thing with this PM he believes he was born to rule and wanted to be PM because he thought he'd be good at it and it's clear he has no real ideology.
Posted by: Apricot Mar 21 2015, 03:14 PM
A deal has been reached...
Live Q&A session with David Cameron & Ed Miliband (separately) on Sky News + Channel 4 (26th March)
Leaders debate featuring the 7 parties previously mentioned on ITV (2nd April)
Opposition leaders debate featuring the 5 non-governing parties on BBC One (16th April)
Primetime Question Time special with the 3 main party leaders (appearing separately) on BBC One (30th April)
Posted by: Qassändra Mar 21 2015, 04:10 PM
FFS!
Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 21 2015, 04:43 PM
So, Miliband gets to appear in four debates, Cameron three and Clegg just two (including one which is so crowded that no leader will face any real examination). How does that satisfy impartiality rules?
Posted by: Rooney Mar 21 2015, 05:06 PM
Sounds good to me. Stops Leaders scoring points off each other, and might be good to actually share their policies instead of trying to bat each other down.
Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 21 2015, 05:14 PM
QUOTE(Rooney @ Mar 21 2015, 05:06 PM)
Sounds good to me. Stops Leaders scoring points off each other, and might be good to actually share their policies instead of trying to bat each other down.
But will the people chairing these debates actually ask some difficult questions? Or will they just bow and scrape before Cameron in their usual way?
Posted by: Rabbit Froot Mar 21 2015, 05:19 PM
QUOTE(Rooney @ Mar 21 2015, 05:06 PM)
Sounds good to me. Stops Leaders scoring points off each other, and might be good to actually share their policies instead of trying to bat each other down.
I agree, hopefully it gives a chance for them to discuss policies properly. I'm extremely tired of every politician attacking the other parties, it's boring and does nothing to help me decide where my vote is going.
Posted by: Apricot Mar 21 2015, 05:32 PM
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Mar 21 2015, 05:14 PM)
But will the people chairing these debates actually ask some difficult questions? Or will they just bow and scrape before Cameron in their usual way?
The presenters are David Dimbleby (BBC), Julie Etchingham (ITV), Jeremy Paxman and Kay Burley (Channel 4 + Sky News).
Dimbleby and Paxman have a proven record in the political world of course, Burley's get a record for being a dick but I don't know much about Etchingham.
QUOTE(Suedehead2 @ Mar 21 2015, 04:43 PM)
So, Miliband gets to appear in four debates, Cameron three and Clegg just two (including one which is so crowded that no leader will face any real examination). How does that satisfy impartiality rules?
Apparently Clegg was excluded from the BBC debate at the request of David Cameron!
Posted by: popchartfreak Mar 21 2015, 06:02 PM
worst of all worlds.
One show with 7 answers to the same questions will be tedious and fairly limited for time reasons. Miliband vs Cameron gives them opportunity to just slag each other off, as opposed to debate, 5 opposition parties without right of response from the the other 2 will just be government-attacking, so the only one that really counts is the last one.
I would have preferred a tub of lard to be honest...
Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 21 2015, 10:24 PM
QUOTE(Apricot @ Mar 21 2015, 05:32 PM)
The presenters are David Dimbleby (BBC), Julie Etchingham (ITV), Jeremy Paxman and Kay Burley (Channel 4 + Sky News).
Dimbleby and Paxman have a proven record in the political world of course, Burley's get a record for being a dick but I don't know much about Etchingham.
Apparently Clegg was excluded from the BBC debate at the request of David Cameron!
So, if those presenters want to restore some faith in the process, here are some questions for Cameron.
In the last election campaign, you said "No top-down reorganisation of the NHS. How did that work out?"
How much money has your party received from companies and individuals who have benefited financially from your NHS reorganisation?
In his first Budget, the Chancellor promised to eliminate the deficit by 2015. He failed, didn't he?
Your party chairman, Grant Shapps lied about whether he had a second job after being elected as an MP. When a constituent accused him of having a second job, he threatened the constituent with legal action unless there was a full apology. Why is Shapps still in the Cabinet?
Have you had any contact with Andy Coulson recently?
You have accused the Leader of the Opposition of being "a waste of space". Is that language fitting for a Prime Minister or does it demean the office you hold?
You said you wanted to be PM "because I thought I'd be good at it". Do you still think that?
Posted by: popchartfreak Mar 21 2015, 11:12 PM
Good questions.
sadly most of these will be basically Andrew Mart type solo interviews so not worth watching as they will add nothing a normal interview couldn't cover.
Posted by: Apricot Mar 21 2015, 11:50 PM
QUOTE(popchartfreak @ Mar 21 2015, 11:12 PM)
Good questions.
sadly most of these will be basically Andrew Mart type solo interviews so not worth watching as they will add nothing a normal interview couldn't cover.
Jeremy Paxman is presenting though.
Posted by: Suedehead2 Mar 22 2015, 12:22 AM
QUOTE(Apricot @ Mar 21 2015, 11:50 PM)
Jeremy Paxman is presenting though.
That doesn't mean he will ask any of my questions. Nor does it mean that when Cameron goes blathering on about how the UK has the fastest growth in the G8 - and he will - he will be asked how UK growth compares with the rest of the G8 over the last four years. I'm restricting it to four years because, for the first year of this government, it is impossible to say how much was due to the actions of this government and how much was due to the actions of the previous administration. I would hope that Paxman would have the real answer in his notes - after all, given his record, Cameron will just make up an answer. However, I would be surprised if the question is even asked. This exceptionally dim-witted PM has rarely been asked any really searching questions.
Powered by Invision Power Board
© Invision Power Services