Squeak, scribble and snap
So, am I "a squeaker, a scribbler or a snapper" or, perhaps, it's a case of all three?
That was the Labour Party chairman's description for what John Prescott described rather more directly as the "damned media" this morning at Labour's local election launch.
We, in return, sulked and whinged that reporters were not allowed to ask questions at the event. Yes, we TV guys did get to ask the PM a question or two, but the newspaper hacks got shut out and none of us could ask
- Gordon about Tony,
- Tessa about David (her husband who thinks his Italian trial is such fun);
- Ian - the party chairman - about loans;
- John - the DPM - about how plans for a "stable and orderly transition" were going;
- or anyone about the cut in the £200 council tax benefit paid to pensioners.
Read that list and you can see why they fixed it the way they did.
My growing sense is that Tony Blair regards these past few weeks as an unpleasant storm which will eventually pass overhead. He looks remarkably untroubled by it. It's Gordon Brown who looks edgy (he does, mind you, have a cold).
Perhaps the PM is calculating that despite all the sound and fury there is simply no appetite in his party to turf him out against his will. Gordon Brown will never wield the knife and the rules make it nigh on impossible for his enemies on the left to run a "stalking horse" to trigger a wider contest.
It's still possible that the electorate in May will alter that calculation but, if not, Gordon Brown is going to have to get used to another long wait.
I'm 
Comments
So no questions allowed at the presser, does Tony really believe this storm will pass over... I don't think so. He now has to go, this is damaging and very very boring for us punters.
Nick
Do you share the view that, if Blair doesn't go this Autumn, Brown's chance will have gone and he will never be PM?
Is it any wonder that the Labour leadership decided that it would not take any questions it was not as if the journalists would ask about the local election.
Perhaps you should have considered asking them about the abolition of parliament bill, or is there some agreement not to bring that topic up either?
What stops average people turning up to these new conferences? I am niether a "squeaker", "snapper" nor a "scribbler" I am a "voter".
I wonder if Tony remembers about them? It just seems that he thinks if he's not running next time, then we don't matter
Given that list, what on earth did you ask them about? The weather?
The longer this saga runs on between TB and GB the more voters will think that GB does not have the heart to lead the country.
He certainly has the head, that is not in dispute.
But Remember why many voters fell for TB in the first place? Not all voters vote because of policy. Some voters will be starting to feel the same for David 'Street' Cameron. Leaders need to show they are capable of showing both sides but Gordon is lacking in one of those departments.
Why, if you are so upset about not being allowed to do your job properly, don't you and your colleagues simply refuse to post any reports on this "News Conference".
Then see just how quickly the politicos change their ways once denied the Oxygen of Publicity.
It is a pity that Mr. Blair thinks it is a virtue for him to say "I understand your worries" but (a) does nothing about them and (b) carries on regardless. When is he and Gordon Brown going realise that they are there as a result of us electing them there and not by virtue of their self-belief?
You list Labour politicians you would like to question. What about adding to your list some questions to Patricia and Tony and Gordon about the current crisis in the NHS?
This is why the Labour party are so successful and undemocratic.
If there is anything wrong then they'll ignore it, refuse to allow (or even answer) questions about it.
We used to live in a parliamentary democracy but that seems to be changing now. You no longer need to answer to the people, only at election time.
Do they really wonder why people detest politicians and what they stand for?
It seems to me that political journalism should be about reporting on how well or badly our politicians are serving our country. And not about all this trivia.
In a democratic coutry it is a shame that the government is trying to limit the effectiveness of scrutiny by the media. Maybe you should have asked them how they are finacing their local election campaign!?
How the media, politicians, and public conduct themselves is important to the wellbeing of the nation. Calm, detachment, and focus on positive and constructive issues, sets a better lead than squabbling. If the more damaged areas of the press are routed around, so be it.
If I may remind you of your earlier lecture on the relationship between the various pillars of society. It sounded good, but aspirations and ideals need hard work to take hold. Sometimes, you have to draw a line and hold that line. This was it.
Prime Minister Blair has made some very serious mistakes, but the overall drift of thinking and attitude is in the right direction. I don't want to see a rude or servile country. I want to see a smart and mature country. Sometimes, getting a grip is the only way to stay on the Cluetrain.
The ever more blatant managing of the news media in this country is one of the worst outrages of this government. But why do you and your colleagues put up with it, Nick? Isn't it time you stood up and were counted? Nowadays, most reporters aren't worthy of the name. You seem to just accept government press releases and report them word for word, never questioning what you are told, never asking the pertinant questions.
And is there truly anyone out there still naive enough to believe the 'solidarity' of Brown/Blair, trotted out specially for elections?
With current affairs banned from these opportunities I'm beginning to wonder "What's the point"
Perhaps the media should shun them
Nick,
Is it possible for the media to refuse to play ball if the politicians try to dictate the terms?
Why don't the Fleet Street hacks and TV media just turn round and walk out. Depriving politicians of the "oxygen of publicity" is a very powerful weapon. Why not use it and refuse to play their game?
Yawn !
When will you give up trying to make a crisis out of the Tony/Gordon Go/Stay situation. For the past 2 weeks you've been banging on about this non-story.
Surely there's some real substance you can report on rather than constant speculation?
Why doesn't Nick Robinson leave the PM alone to get on with his job. When he is ready to go he will tell us. You are only interested in sensationalism. Nobody I know ever mentions him going. Tabloids and media cause a lot of problems by the way we report our news. How many parents have lost children because of the way tabloids reported the MMR vaccine story? Ask questions that are relevant. Prescott is right, more power to his elbow.
Following your blog with interest. Don't these politicians understand the principles of a free press?
More than 100 British soldiers are dead in Iraq because TB et al wanted to give them the gift of democracy and freedom of expression - and in the next breath they are busy placing shackles on our own journalists.
From a purely practical point of view - as a reporter myself - do they actually think they're going to get a BETTER press by shutting out journalists?
Apologies for the rant...
That's democracy for you. A press conference (which is basically what the election launch amounts to) at which the press are allowed to ask no questions and the broadcast media are allowed to, but only those from a friendly pool chosen by the PM and his merry bunch of spin doctors.
Surely the whole point of elections is to hold to account those who are making decisions, and the public-facing events in advance of them should be our chance to grill the politicians via the media on any subject we consider to be important in order to decide if they're worthy of our vote?
That's democracy for you. A press conference (which is basically what the election launch amounts to) at which the press are allowed to ask no questions and the broadcast media are allowed to, but only those from a friendly pool chosen by the PM and his merry bunch of spin doctors.
Surely the whole point of elections is to hold to account those who are making decisions, and the public-facing events in advance of them should be our chance to grill the politicians via the media on any subject we consider to be important in order to decide if they're worthy of our vote?
In fact, in many people's eyes the Government will lose more face for feeling the need to impose such restrictions than they would have struggling to answer the tough questions.
Nick,
Lets put one thing straight right now. You are our trusted and well respected reporter of all things political. We all know that you and the wider 91Èȱ¬ are completely impartial. So where does the PM and his chums get off telling you what you can and cannot ask questions about. The day that is allowed to happen, it will be a dark day for free speech and democracy.
Stick to your guns Nick! Don't give in and let the Government push you around. As Churchill always said "KBO...Keep Buggering On!"
Best wishes,
Simon
Dear Nick,
Why do journalists accept such restrictions? I thought Fleet Street was made of tougher stuff! Surely a few no shows at non events such as this or, even better, zero coverage, in a few key newspapers would stop Mr Blair's media controllers from attempting such 1984 style tactics?
Rgds, Ian
Nick,
Just out of curiosity, what would have happened if you did ask one of the questions on the 'banned' list?
Would you have been arrested under anti-terrorism laws perhaps?
PS - Jax above makes a valid point. I haven't heard anyone in the 91Èȱ¬ mention the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill. Why is that?
What a bunch! Pity we can't give them all a good rest in a NHS ward, but then they probably haven't any beds
Nick, as a national newspaper journalist who sometimes covers politics myself, I have to ask: why didn't you all just agree to walk out when you weren't allowed to ask the questions you wanted? That way the walkout would have become the story and Labour would have been left looking incredibly foolish. It would have been a disastrous start to their local election campaign, sending it off-beam right at the start and leaving them struggling to pull it back. You could bet your life that they wouldn't try and pull the same trick again!
You need to focus your boyish enthusiasm on some of the real issues instead of the personalities, the petty politics etc. You and your cyncial ilk in the media and your obsession with feeding the system's voracious appetite for stories, celebrities, gossip and knocking politics will ultimately destroy our democracy and lead to knee jerk populist reactions orchestrated by electronic public opinion poll. You need to use your own unaccountable power with more responsibility, maturity and restraint.
Dear Nick,
If you are not allowed to ask questions in the usual way, could you use the Freedom of Information Act to ask Mr Prescott to answer the question which he so skilfully evaded ("it's for me to know") as to when Mr Blair will step down? it is, after all, a question which is in the public interest
I always think for any reporter to do a good job you have to annoy the goverment anyway!
Nick, your blog only confirms what I know already: that this Labour Government has descended into a farce. We all scoffed at the Tories during their last few sleazy years in power. Now I am older and wiser and have seen it all before. The truly sad thing is that the cynical and pathetic behaviour of politicians turns most people off politics for good (especially the young) - one can be left wondering why we should bother to vote at all!!!
As much as I appreciate your journalism, this whole "When are ya gonna leave Tone?" thing is really boring now. Accept that he's not going to tell you and get on with life. There is more newsworthy and original reporting to be done.
There is now a concerted attack on the media by New Labour. Add to today's fiasco Geoff Hoon's contribution to the modernisation committee in the Commons last week when he said:
"There is not a media in the developed Western world that is as dismissive or as aggressive or as intrusive as ours."
"Increasingly politicians don't trust the media to provide a fair account of what we do." This can be seen as part of the relentless move towards an elected dictatorship by Blair and co. which we witness on a daily basis and to which many people are regrettably still oblivious. The media must resist this attack upon them as they have a critical role to play in helping to return this country to a true democracy.
I just saw a clip of the two on the news - it was priceless, and worthy of far more "trivial soap opera" comment than it will get. Neither TB, who can pull off asserting that the Iraq war was a unanimous hard evidence based decision and an unmitigated success without a flicker, or GB, who can redefine an economic cycle and assert that the economy could be no better if we had discovered the secret of limitless pollution-free energy and eternal life with a confident smile, could feign anything other than utter unease at being within 6 feet of each other. More please.
I wouldn't call Labour's refusal to answer reporters questions 'news management'.
Desperation seems closer to the mark.
Weren't allowad to ask questions -- What a shame. You should follow the lead of your American colleagues and boycott the damned thing. Tony needs you more than you need him!!
This was not hard to predict. A government seeking to introduce a law enabling ministers to amend legislation without any scrutiny in Parliament or the Lords is hardly likely to worry about a few journalists trying to uphold the tradition of free speech.
If Blair is calculating that there is no mood to get rid of him I sense he is in for a big shock on the morning of may 5 !