Backtracking

[jazzy_dave]

Cameron must be scared of doing these head to head interviews , and probably kbows that his government will be lacking, without an answer to give concerning the shambles they have made of everything. They know that they will be shredded to pieces, metaphorically speaking.

This week David Cameron's Director of Communications said the Prime Minister would only take part in one debate with 7 party leaders. But broadcasters had planned for several debates during the election campaign. If agreement can't be reached, the debates may not happen. In fact, this backtracking now only reinforces the distrust many have in politicians.

The TV debates provide the public with an opportunity to hear directly from the leaders of the main parties. In 2010 they were watched by over 9.9 million people. But with Cameron, as the Prime Minister, not confirming he will participate, he is essentially stopping the debates from happening, as many are saying that without the PM, the debates are pointless.

So Cameron and cronies, be afraid, be very afraid, your time is nigh!

Comments

[ggreig]

They're not pointless without Cameron. Especially for smaller parties that don't usually get the coverage, they're an opportunity to put ideas in front of the public, and perhaps increase representation of a diversity of democratic ideas in Parliament.

So I hope the broadcasters stand by what they've said, and empty-chair him.

[davesmusictank.livejournal.com]

Agreed. This way we will get a better sense of what the other parties can come up with and also give a fresh perspective on things. I hope these broadcasts will continue as who really needs the Tories. I for one do not.

[davesmusictank.livejournal.com]

Looks like they will.

[howlin-wolf-66.livejournal.com]

He shouldn't have a choice... the broadcasters should decide. If he doesn't turn up, strip him of office, by default.

[thespian15.livejournal.com]

I say do the debates and leave an empty chair or podium where Cameron would have been. In my opinion, it would just make him look bad for not showing up. :p
Hugs, Jon

[a-phoenixdragon.livejournal.com]

UGH...hope he gets the boot soon. And good riddance!!

*HUGS*

[silme.livejournal.com]

Look, I am no fan of Cameron. I've never liked the Tories and abhor this coalition government. I liked Old Labour and dislike New Labour. I'm very, very left wing. I live in a constituency where the Tory MP has a 17K vote majority and will win re-election easily, so I'll probably vote Green to ease my conscience. (I wish I lived in Brighton. I remember when Caroline Lucas was my MEP! And voting Green in the MEP election last year did help us keep a Green MEP.)

But these 'debates' aren't debates. They're merely media exercises in mud-slinging. I always hated the ones in the US, where I actually taught debating and had to teach students that that's now how debates are run. If they actually were run as debates -- real debates -- I wouldn't mind them. But as they are in both the US and the UK? Forget 'em. The only good the 2010 ones did was give my A level students fodder for their linguistic investigations. Interestingly, my students who worked with them in terms of spoken language techniques coincidentally earned A and A* grades in the class overall -- and determined that Brown actually used more power devices successfully than Clegg and Cameron. Too bad the media had already determined that he had lost the debates. The media, however, aren't linguists.

[davesmusictank.livejournal.com]

Agreed. Mud slinging is an appropiate term for these presidental style floor shows. I probably will not even bother watching them. I would have preferred a face to face one on one type interview with each candidate seperately.

[silme.livejournal.com]

I'm more concerned about how Cameron is planning on opening 153 more 'free' schools. :(