91Èȱ¬

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

It seems a godsend to the British public to be honest. Why would we want to listen to three at once ducking every question and simply gabbling about anything other than the questions asked.

Not one of them seems to even get near to the problems facing the public of Britain. All have fancy ideas and inititives which cost more and more whilst the general worker suffers yet again.
Just read HYS on the 91Èȱ¬ if you need to know the things that concern most people. Politicians have never lived in the real world and their policies dont address the real problems, a soap opera debate will do nothing to help.

Shame their seems no alternatives to the "Big Three" perhaps that is why fringe parties are making up the ground albeit very slowly.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Nothing new about this then. Many bloggers fortold that Brown would find any excuse not to face us, the electorate, never mind the politicians.

If the media are to be believed, he cannot make his mind up over what type of biscuit he prefers, took 24 hours before a decision, allegedly.

A decision as to whether or not to appear on national tv, that may take 24 months or weeks. In other words, no chance.

Can you not find, something else out of the mass of news that is available, to discuss? The Balls up over the appointment of the new Children's Commissioner is just one example of newsworthy items. Surely you can find something to get the political juices flowing?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

You joke ! Are you suggesting that Bottler Brown will actually answer a question he doesn't have foreknowledge of. This will be a first .

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Does a joint conference make any real sense to anyone outside broadcasting or politics?

I am just reminded about the clip of Nixon and Kennedy with Nixon looking, well lets be honest, not too good.
I bet the fear is that would still happen today....

Mistakes just happen with all the planning that goes on

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Poor timing or

Maybe one takes longer in makeup than the others?

I would like to see the party leaders on question time, but in the audience.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

"However, they will now follow one after the other. It's a decision which the Tories are pinning on "Bottler Brown". It is one which frankly matters little other than to demonstrate where we might end up if the parties don't reach a firm agreement on prime ministerial debates sooner rather than later. "

If it matters so little, Nick, then why is this the best you can do? As mentioned by exiledscot52 at post #7, we really do need to start examining much more important matters - all of which will determine the very real political environment the next PM will be working in.

Over on the other side of the Atlantic (north of the 49th parallel), the CBC has an excellent program called The Fifth Estate. This is how journalism should be. The CBC may operate under a Federal charter (in much the same way the 91Èȱ¬ does), but its reporters are not afraid to take on, not only large corporations and institutions that abuse their power, but also the governments (federal or provincial) of the day. What a contrast with the psychophantic irrelevant ramblings we get on the 91Èȱ¬.

Is it against House rules to question if the subject of the blog is the most pertinent to the political situation?

Clear bluewater? Between the 91Èȱ¬ TV Channels? Thank goodness. I was about to have my viewing interrupted by the utterances of a recent Formula One Motor Racing Champion at a Kent shopping mall - hence the start of this text - so please do NOT panic. No offence Mister Button but I could not turnover quick enough. I would have been first on the grid for turning over when lady commentator said you were about to stop posing in front of a boys toys of a car and - er - speak! Ah! lol
On the 91Èȱ¬ News channel? Then I remembered the Parliamentary alternative. It was playing - the Speakers Conference and I completed my viewing of all three leaders – as you said Nick. One after tother. Parliamentary Representation? Well done the Speaker for that Conference.
On The News Channel it kept scrolling that another - allegedly so called politician (now) would not "cease and desist" from utilising the Winston Churchill and Spitfire images.
Oh my. That new TV show "Flash Forward". There is an episode called Black Swan? Hmm.
In my own flash forward - I foresaw much fun in the future. But I will not be laughing much - I do not think.

6. At 11:11am on 20 Oct 2009, b-b-jack wrote:
Nothing new about this then. Many bloggers fortold that Brown would find any excuse not to face us, the electorate, never mind the politicians.

If the media are to be believed, he cannot make his mind up over what type of biscuit he prefers, took 24 hours before a decision, allegedly.

-----------------------------------

Was it hob nobs?

Actually bet it was custard creams - they seem quite apt.

"17. At 11:51am on 20 Oct 2009, jbjannieb wrote:
So far 12 comments have been published.Eight have been moderated off.

Wheres the debate? Whats going on?"

People rather foolishly thought that there are more important topics to discuss than 'Speaker's conference'. Those people are clearly wrong as the 91Èȱ¬ moderators have shown. Obviously the only thing on people's minds at the moment is the Speaker's Conference. Oh, if only there were more Speaker's Conferences, I hear people say all the time. Why isn't there more coverage of Speaker's Conferences, I hear people cry all the time.

Thank goodness for the Moderators unbiased overview. Without them, there might be a debate about the economy or something equally trivial.

Brown will use every excuse in the book to avoid actually appearing on the same program as David Cameron and Clegg. I still don't believe it will happen. Have an empty chair ready to represent the PM.

Excellent choice of topic Nick. Can't believe others think there are more important events happening. Keep up the good work.

#23

"Oh,if only there were more Speakers Conferences,I hear people say all the time".

They must be the very same people who rushed up to Jackie Smith begging for I.D.cards to be introduced!

23#

Indeed Andy.

All Hail The Speakers Conference!


Pardon me. I think I have to go and barf.

"sweetAnybody wrote:
6. At 11:11am on 20 Oct 2009, b-b-jack wrote:
Nothing new about this then. Many bloggers fortold that Brown would find any excuse not to face us, the electorate, never mind the politicians.

If the media are to be believed, he cannot make his mind up over what type of biscuit he prefers, took 24 hours before a decision, allegedly.

-----------------------------------

Was it hob nobs?

Actually bet it was custard creams - they seem quite apt."

I think he is still trying to narrow it down to an actual type as the article I read suggested he liked something with a bit of chocolate!

"AndyC555 wrote:

Oh, if only there were more Speaker's Conferences, I hear people say all the time. Why isn't there more coverage of Speaker's Conferences, I hear people cry all the time."

The interesting thing about the Speaker's Conference is the comment that the last one was held in 1978 and the following year Labour were thrown out of Government - lets hope history repeats itself!

"24. At 12:04pm on 20 Oct 2009, BGarvie wrote:
Brown will use every excuse in the book to avoid actually appearing on the same program as David Cameron and Clegg. I still don't believe it will happen. Have an empty chair ready to represent the PM."

Didn't they have a tub of lard on "Have I got News" once instead of Roy Hattersley? Rather than an empty chair, perhaps the readers of this blog could suggest what would make a suitable repalcement for our dear beloved leader.

Yet we move to the comments of one leader in another blog it appears neither Brown nor Clegg had anything to say.

"AndyC555 wrote:

Didn't they have a tub of lard on "Have I got News" once instead of Roy Hattersley? Rather than an empty chair, perhaps the readers of this blog could suggest what would make a suitable repalcement for our dear beloved leader."

I think a bowl of custard would be appropriate considering Brown's reputation for lacking courage

28:

It'll be something from a corner convenience store, with a sugar-coating. That way you don't realise that there's a bitter after-taste, and you'll never find out that it cost three times more than if you'd gone to a proper shop.

Back to the topic in hand, for fear of being moderated for being off topic: I for one can't see why debates such as this are so important. As Nick says, it really makes little difference. Where Nick and I disagree is on the question "why?". Nick, you obviously feel that having the three main leaders talk through issues which the electorate believe are important is a big thing, and that it needs sorting 'sooner rather than later'. (At this point, I could call into play the sweet irony that the very posts above asking the same of you have been moderated, but that would be churlish)

I reckon it's different. I think the reason it doesn't really matter is that people's minds are now made up. The electorate are so used to their priorities being ignored, their questions being unanswered, and their views disregarded that they know who they will vote for. and no amount of political posing will change that.

Best get an early election called and let the people answer the question that's of prime importance: who do WE want running the country?

A rather feeble subject to blog upon, surely there are more important issues as others have pointed out.

As to the debate itself, as long as the participants are not given the questions in advance and limited to 15 second responses (and no more) then it may be of interest.

Brown has most to lose in this as he is a poor screen performer and finds it impossible to give straight, succinct answers to anything, even to what is his favourite biscuit.
No wonder he's dithering about apprearing, why not just come out with a decisive No?
The other two must be rubbing their hands at yet another own goal by the PM.

All three party leaders gave pretty dreary performances today. Ducking questions and the usual grand standing that occurs at these Committee hearings. A debate with all 3 is likely to be three times as bad.

this idea of putting the three leaders on tv in a live debate is just a gimmick that has been borrowed from the usa and will have no impact on voters plans.
rather than wasting time on pointless publicity stunts these mp's should be planning their agenda and wrking on whats best for the people of this country.

Nick, can you PLEASE stop going on about these flipping debates ?

None of us will believe these debates will happen until we SEE THEM WITH OUR OWN EYES !! Everything else is just spin, and lacks any firm contract.

We know enough about these three people already, and to suggest that the proposed debates or any other meetings that might come along would be useful to voters is wishful thinking. We know how they would perform, and I bet that almost everyone on these boards could write their speeches for them - they would be master classes in obfuscation and exercises in noise over substance. It is only the media that will make the running on this - they would like to see debates in the same way that they like to put on reality shows. Strictly Come Politics.

What we need is to start to see what each party would do in much more concrete terms than we have already - unfortunately for the Tories and the Lib Dems that must inevitably go on hold until the pre-budget report and even then I doubt we will have enough meat to make judgments on cuts, taxes and spending.

We also need to wait to see if the European Treaty will be signed - if not then the opposition parties can both promise their referendum although on two totally different subjects. I doubt any of the parties will be able to promise anything radical on Europe once the treaty is signed, other than spelling out the opt outs and where they will draw lines in the sand on key issues.

Above all, we need to put some flesh on the bones of the debt mountain and how they propose to handle it in much more detail than we have now. That is where the lack of a CSR is going to prove so damaging - both the Tories and the Lib Dems can legitimately say that the only people who know the true state of the economy is Government, and they will keep their knowledge for a long as they can, within the rules of our system.

There is one thing that we should all insist on this time around, and that is getting an agreement on what a manifesto is, and how binding the ingredients and promises in that document should be, and are in practice. The Nation that was conned in 2005 should not allow itself to be conned again in 2010.

Not interested. These guys are politicians. I see enough of their mugs on my screen already. I can't believe their inevitably "gentlemanly" debate will illuminate them further.

Still, let Mandelson stand in for Brown. He'll do anything for a photoshoot.

Gordon Brown really takes the biscuit ... followed by ... David 'blueblood' Cameron who has a lineage that goes directly back the one of our Kings ... followed by ... Nick 'Cleggover'.

Who, apart from political journalists, would follow these three as they go round and round in conventional political circles playing these idiotic games.

The English people need a (political) revolution in the head, the outcome of which should be that this sort of nonsense becomes history.

I can't think of anything worse. Bottler Brown's face makes me want to break things. Blairvid Cameron makes me want to break things. And if I could remember the third one...

#30 Andy C555 - How about a large vacuum? There's nothing there, and sound doesn't travel through it.

# 34 Breakfast-maker - It's not the blog subject that is feeble in itself - it is the subject of the Speaker's Conference. Surely there are more important issues that could have been addressed. (Sorry to mention it, but expenses comes to mind!).

#34 and some cannot even blogg about other issues as they are remove for being off-topic, more sensorship