I seldom agree with David Cameron however several slip-ups by broadcasters with TV debates recently have changed my stance. Lord Michael Grade, ex-chairman of the BBC and ITV, was right in describing their proposals as “shambolic”. The TV companies have come off far worse than David Cameron in the ensuring rows.zz
The broadcasters should have discussed their plans straight after the 2010 election and put forward proposals before the onset of surprising trends such as European election results. It could have been sorted out long before the pre-election panic that would have been much harder for David Cameron to avoid. The Green Party should also have been included from the beginning if UKIP was. Whatever David Cameron’s motives, however driven by self-interest, he was right to show up the inconsistency in inviting UKIP but not the Greens. It is not balanced, or logical, to include one significant alternative party and not the other. It made the broadcasters look reactionary, as if they hadn’t really thought it through, which I don’t believe they had. And, the increasing hype around the Greens, and the growth of their membership, shows how misguided the broadcasters’ judgment was. Thank goodness Cameron stood up to them. Cameron, and his strategist Lytton Crosby are right to think that this row will have blown over in two months’ time. As the campaigns pick up, few voters will remember the controversy over this now.
So, is it all media hype and media game-playing as Cameron suggests? I think not.
The moment an outsider, Nick Clegg, stepped on screen, looked sincere, and ‘won’ the debates last year, their power was confirmed for the broadcasters. And David Cameron will want to avoid a repeat of the Clegg effect. Although the Lib Dems actually lost five seats after their debate ‘triumph’, Nick Clegg was seen as a viable political leader as a result of his performance. They were watched and they were discussed. All you can hope is to inspire people to talk about parliament and what they want from it, and then go to vote. In total, 22 million people watched the last debates; it beat viewing figures for Eastenders and Coronation Street. The number of people voting in 2010 increased by 2 million; there was a 65.1% turnout up from 61% in 2005. Whether or not this was a result of the debates, they started conversations and got people talking about their political choices. That is even more important this year, when the political landscape is more fractured and the outcome uncertain.
The broadcasters are right, the debates were very good television, and they will be again this year, with or without David Cameron. I just wish the TV channels had been smarter negotiating them. Given the impact they can have in shaping people’s perceptions, it is not surprising risk-adverse Crosby thinks Cameron should avoid them. The incumbent politician always has more to lose in a debate like this when they have to defend their record. Certainly Ed Miliband’s popularity can’t get much worse, he only stands to gain from this platform. There are risks for Cameron, but he could come out well. He is better at PR politics and public debate than Miliband (so far) and a confrontation could suit him. Crosby’s campaign at the moment certainly plays on that choice between party leaders: Cameron or Miliband. And, it would be a chance for Cameron to champion his economic recovery, such as it is. But Crosby is right in thinking that the risks may outweigh the benefits. This election is being fought strictly on message (‘long term economic plan’ is being parroted throughout Westminster). Any clash on a debate could distract from that.
One thing is for certain. We have seen the end of two-party politics, and one party-government for the next few years. Instead of just inviting Natalie Bennett to join the debates, they were opened out to include seven leaders. The inclusion of Plaid Cymru and the SNP confirms how important these national parties might be in a coalition. The Lib Dems’ seats will likely be critical in forming a government, and a workable coalition may well depend on them winning back enough to help form a majority. There could even be a second election. Another wild card to look out for will be the cohesion, or not, of the Tories. Crosby is keeping them united and on point in the election run-up, but afterwards the backbenchers will make their voices heard on the EU, deals to be brokered and certainly cause quite a headache for Cameron. If nothing else these debates are crucial to remind people how much is at stake in this election. They matter, and the broadcasters are right to fight for them now, if only they’d done it sooner.
About the Author
