Tuesday, 2 March 2010

Televised Leaders Debate

So the children have eventually decided on the rules of the playground! Well, well, well - and only three of them can play!

Whilst appreciating that the broadcasters base their criteria on the percentage of votes parties received at the last general election, times have changed. Should not all registered political parties have representation in such an 'election event'? Why should just three parties only be allowed to 'present their case'? Should not the Greens, who it is generally accepted may well gain their first parliamentary seat in Brighton & Hove, not be included in the debate? Even a more stronger case can be made for UKIP who, it will be remembered, was the second placed party in the last election held in the United Kingdom? Should not the SNP and Plaid Cymru be included?

This 'big three' debate smacks of a 'stitch-up' by those parties and the broadcasters - and it stinks!

So much for 'due democratic process'!!!


Anonymous said...

quote - debate smacks of a 'stitch-up' by those parties and the broadcasters - and it stinks!- /quote

That was my first thought, and of course it is and does.
But then I wondered. Many voters have a sense of fairness and I think this may be a miscalculation by the lib/lab/con. Doesn't it in fact gift the smaller parties, and especially Ukip, with sympathy over unfair and dishonest treatment. And couldn't a campaign issue highlighting the cozy sameness, collusion, and arrogance of the three main parties be exactly the sort of issue that Ukip and others need to get people voting outside the big three parties?
Just a thought.


Witterings From Witney said...

Ah A, and will UKIP and the 'minor' parties 'pick-up' on this? Will the public?

It is not just for the benefit of UKIP that I posted what I did - it is for democracy and the point that all views should be heard.

I thank you for your input.

Anonymous said...

You said:
"Ah A, and will UKIP and the 'minor' parties 'pick-up' on this? Will the public?"

I have absolutely no idea! But I do think that there is currently an astonishing groundswell of public distrust and anger at the main parties. Therefore a suggestion that the big three are cozily divvying up the spoils between them and deliberately excluding opposition could have traction.

As for democracy and everyone being heard, yes that too :-)