Prime Ministerial Debates- Thread

[Darat]

While I don't think bringing rights into it is really helpful, I can see what you mean.

...snip...

I think it is - for instance Rolfe as a Scottish person has the same rights within our country as I do being an English person, the idea therefore that there is some "inequality" because of where we were born in our country is simply not true, or rather no more true than there is "inequality" because I was born in one of the poorest regions of our country and someone else was born in one of the wealthiest regions of our country.

 

[Ashles]

Which constituencies did they win last UK election?

I didn't say in the UK election - they won seats in the European Parliament - although in the UK election they took almost 200,000 votes.

In England their voice and presence is greater than the SNP.

 

[Ashles]

Oh, you think ruling patries always make sure they bend over backwards to give rivals they cordially detext a fair crack of the whip? Really?

And your solution is to disproportionally represent the minority groups?

Well the one you personally support anyway.

And that's exactly what's wrong with this incorporating union. So much for the equal partnership of nations.

It's not an equal partnership though is it? One country has far more inhabitants than the others.
England represents 84% of the population of the UK, yet for some reason you expect it to give specifically Scottish issues an equal representation?

Dream on.

Which planet are you on? The more the "Big Three" strut the stage and pretend its all about them, the more the smaller parties are edged out.

This is just weird - so the parties most people vote for should be penalised and we should artifically inflate the media presence of less popular parties?
Why?

And all this 'strutting the stage' business is a little bit silly.

And that affects the SNP and PC (etc.), with their large followings in their own countries, just as much as it affects UKIP and the Greens - probably more, actually.

And they will be subsequently represented in their own countries.

And not in other countries where they do not agree with the policies which are not even relevent to them.

Me, personally? I'm talking about a serious democratic deficit inherent in this grandstanding style of politics, affecting three of the four COUNTRIES that make up the UK.

Or to put it another, less misleading way, a democratic process that represents just 16% of the UK electorate and concerning some parties which represent issues specific to those 16%.

 

[Ashles]

Wrong.

Yes the SNP voters appear massively open to mind changing...

 

[Rolfe]

People who vote for the SNP vary widely, just as for other parties. I can envisage few circumstances that would induce me to vote otherwise, but then I've been a member of the party for many years, and held office at branch level. There are many people who might vote SNP who are a lot less committed than I am, and who are very likely to be swayed by these debates.

Rolfe.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

People who vote for the SNP vary widely, just as for other parties. I can envisage few circumstances that would induce me to vote otherwise, but then I've been a member of the party for many years, and held office at branch level. There are many people who might vote SNP who are a lot less committed than I am, and who are very likely to be swayed by these debates.

Rolfe.

Right...so why should the SNP be allowed on national debates again?

What's wrong with having a Scottish debate that includes the SNP and other Scottish parties (which the BBC is going to do, actually) and a national debate that doesn't give unfair airtime to minority positions?

 

[Rolfe]

There isn't a solution to this. The "national" debate being aired in Scotland (and Wales and Northern Ireland) is a serious disadvantage to the national parties of these countries. There are also valid objections to not airing that debate in Scotland (and, etc.), if it happens.

We seemed to manage fine without this circus in previous years, and deciding to ape the Americans has opened a can of worms that would have been better kept shut.

Rolfe.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

I think the SNP and PC could gain more support in England for their causes if they didn't continuously use 'London' as an insult. The PC leader was actually caught saying: "Some of my best friends are English".

Also, why does Salmond keep calling Labour a 'London Party'? It's founder was a Scottish as can be.

 

[commandlinegamer]

This is just weird - so the parties most people vote for should be penalised and we should artifically inflate the media presence of less popular parties?

Stretching that argument you might say the Lib-dems shouldn't be part of the televised debates as at last count they only had 63 MPs compared to the Tories 193 and Labour 345.

In any case I'm not convinced by the case for Scottish Independence but consider it significant enough that it should be discussed at a UK-wide level.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

There isn't a solution to this. The "national" debate being aired in Scotland (and Wales and Northern Ireland) is a serious disadvantage to the national parties of these countries. There are also valid objections to not airing that debate in Scotland (and, etc.), if it happens.

We seemed to manage fine without this circus in previous years, and deciding to ape the Americans has opened a can of worms that would have been better kept shut.

Rolfe.

You haven't explained why allowing the leaders of major parties to talk on television is so dreadful.

Yes, you've vaugely flailed that not allowing the SNP onto national debates is bad because it makes it look like there are only three parties (really? How long have the SNP or PC been around again?) and that SNP voters will slip away.

However, when it has been pointed out to you that there will also be debates in Scotland and Wales that will, I assume, include the relevant parties you say....nothing. You seem to ignore it just so you can bleat about how a National program which is directed at 100% of the British voting public doesn't include views which when added together make up 16% of said public. Let's face it, the main three parties are the only ones who are actually able to lead the country as a whole. SNP and PC MP's certainly can get elected in reasonable numbers and can make a difference, but they aren't ever going to be in power. Making the National Debate about the parties that actually have the scope and power to form a government is sensible.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

We seemed to manage fine without this circus in previous years, and deciding to ape the Americans has opened a can of worms that would have been better kept shut.

Rolfe.

It's practised in many European nations and elsewhere. Their system hasn't suffered.

 

[Rolfe]

You haven't explained why allowing the leaders of major parties to talk on television is so dreadful.

Yes, you've vaugely flailed that not allowing the SNP onto national debates is bad because it makes it look like there are only three parties (really? How long have the SNP or PC been around again?) and that SNP voters will slip away.

It's all about media presence these days, whether we like it or not.

However, when it has been pointed out to you that there will also be debates in Scotland and Wales that will, I assume, include the relevant parties you say....nothing.

I said, we'll have to wait and see how that works out.

You seem to ignore it just so you can bleat about how a National program which is directed at 100% of the British voting public doesn't include views which when added together make up 16% of said public. Let's face it, the main three parties are the only ones who are actually able to lead the country as a whole. SNP and PC MP's certainly can get elected in reasonable numbers and can make a difference, but they aren't ever going to be in power. Making the National Debate about the parties that actually have the scope and power to form a government is sensible.

And the LibDems are likely to form a government when, exactly?

Rolfe.

 

[Lothian]

And the LibDems are likely to form a government when, exactly?

Rolfe.

6 May 2010*.





*Hung parliament 6/5 with Paddy Power

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Heh.

 

[funk de fino]

So when is the cut-off then Funk? When you have constituency seats?

I dont care, see below.

Good point actually. Why can't the English have some say into Scottish independence? Afterall, you aren't wanting independence from a collapsing or corrupt government who are persecuting you, so why on Earth shouldn't we be able to vote on it too?

English people can vote on it too. They have to live in Scotland though.

Bolded - Really? Labour are not collapsing or Parliament is not corrupt?

True, but the SNP seem to have a serious problem with the English and ignore Wales and Northern Ireland unless it's convenient, much like PC (but with a focus on Wales, obviously).

Serious problem? With people who try and deny the people of Scotland a free vote on independence? Why wouldnt they have a problem?

I didn't say in the UK election - they won seats in the European Parliament - although in the UK election they took almost 200,000 votes.

In England their voice and presence is greater than the SNP.

Then your claim about seats was an irrelevance to this discussion. Their presence in England is also twice as large as it is in Scotland. That should tell you something.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

And the LibDems are likely to form a government when, exactly?

Rolfe.

Why do you think the leader of the Liberal Democrats gets two guaranteed questions at PMQ's? It's not just a media invention this third-party showing you know.

 

[funk de fino]

Why do you think the leader of the Liberal Democrats gets two guaranteed questions at PMQ's? It's not just a media invention this third-party showing you know.

So the 4th party in Scotland get no airtime for the Scottish debates then?

I think thats fair.

 

[Fiona]

People who vote for the SNP vary widely, just as for other parties. I can envisage few circumstances that would induce me to vote otherwise, but then I've been a member of the party for many years, and held office at branch level. There are many people who might vote SNP who are a lot less committed than I am, and who are very likely to be swayed by these debates.

Rolfe.

Well if it is any consolation, it is not going to influence my vote at all

 

[Rolfe]

Well if it is any consolation, it is not going to influence my vote at all

Nor mine, but I'd be surprised if it didn't influence some votes. All the current speculation about it causing a surge in LibDem votes certainly points up the potential for such exposure to boost the standing of a party previously seen as an outsider. Mind you, if it does anything, it's likely to be to boost the chances of a hung parliament.

Rolfe.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

So the 4th party in Scotland get no airtime for the Scottish debates then?

I think thats fair.

Except that this presumably means the Tories, right? Well, that's not really viable, since they will still hold a significantly larger number of seats in the UK government overall, meaning that they will affect Scotland even if they don't make much progress in Scottish seats.

The SNP pretty much only affects Scotland (for now, of course), whereas the "Big Three" affect everywhere.