I'm getting slightly annoyed by all politicians with regard to the televised debates to be held in the run up to the election. They all seem to want to do different things and are berating all three public broadcasters (BBC, ITV & Sky) for having an opinion on what the public want to see and suggesting they are acting above their remit.

Are the public broadcasters not in a better position to decide what the public want to see?

I would imagine that something like this has probably been consulted on by the broadcasters as well.

Is this just politicians trying to get out of potential embarrassing situations?

The "debates" are pointless anyway. Who cares aside from the broadcasters?

I think the debates make for interesting viewing, hearing what they've got to say on the spot instead of pre-prepared media friendly sound bites.

I don't particularly care whether there are tv debates or not to be honest however here's what I think about the whole thing:

- there has to be some kind of reasoning behind who/which parties are involved. Either you have the top 2 parties as they're the only ones capable of forming a majority government or will be the major player in a coalition. Or you have all the parties who are represented nationwide. Or you include ALL the parties with MP's/MSP's etc but that would have to include the Northern Irish parties too, including Sinn Fein. Or you include all parties and independents (obviously not reasonable).
But just picking 7 random parties isn't acceptable or fair.

- I don't like the way the broadcasters seem to set themselves up as "the voice of the people" in terms of saying that what they propose is what the people. They're like a lot of journalists in that respect, they're way too far up their own arses. No-one at the BBC or Sky or Channel 4 (or for that matter the Mail, Mirror etc) represents me. Nor is it their job to. It's their job to tell me what's happened and then I represent myself every few years at the voting booth or through direct correspondence with my MP. Some arrogant ex-public school lover who only got the opportunity to work for these institutions at such a level because of said public school definitely does not represent me.

- I hope Milliband has found some better advisors than he's had for most of the last 5 years.

- Cameron has backed himself into a corner and I have no sympathy with him. He wanted it when he thought it benefitted him 5 years ago but doesn't now.
Going a little bit OT (and this isn't aimed directly at Cameron, it's just one of the most notable recent examples) but this kind of hypocrisy is at least part of the reason why people are increasingly not getting involved with politics. Nobody knows where anyone really stands on any issue. No politician ever gives a straight answer and none of our pathetic, disgraceful, utterly woeful, monumentally overpaid media elite have the ability to actually question our politicians properly.

Other than that I don't really care that much. I may watch bits of some of the debates but I certainly won't be glued to the TV set.

I'm going for a lie down, I agree with Dally.

I'd much rather people/voters read up on the manifestos etc and made an informed decision than watched a stupid X factor style sound bite fest, where each leader will try to outdo the others for more applause. The whole thing is an unnecessary distraction from the actual election issues themselves.

All you'll get is a hyped-up version of Question Time, which for years has been nothing but soundbites and non-committal responses. I think the last time a politician gave a straight answer of any relevance was in the eighties. I still watch now and then but only if someone of interest is on the panel.

They'll all stick to script, except for Natalie Bennett, who'll probably collapse in tears under the pressure.

Ed Miliband was questioned for an hour on BBC3's FreeSpeech tonight.

I thought he acquitted himself well. Next Tuesday they've got a three-way with Sturgeon, Wood and Bennett

Now, you've left me with a dilemna. I have the choice to take the high road with a very mild, Radio 4 type joke about Sturgeon, Wood & Bennett sounding like a firm of solicitors.

Or....





Worst. Porno. Ever.

Well I think they should happen even though I don't care about them myself (to watch) because a lot of people watched them last time so they are part of the election. Also because things change and once Cameron let this cat out of the bag there ought to be no way to put it back. He was the one who said even Mongolia has these TV debates so we should as well.

As to the broadcasters dictating things I really don't think they are. I think they have bent over backwards to get these things aired.

As to Sinn Fein etc , err no! This is a UK wide election so unless a party has an ambition to stand UK wide (even if they don't/can't like say the Greens who won't have a candidate in every constituency) then no they should not be in a UK TV debate. Plaid, SNP, Sinn Fein, DUP, SDLP should be able to have debates v the main parties in their countries separately if the main parties are standing. So in Wales and Scotland where Lib/Lab/Con will stand v Plaid/SNP for example.



Has Cameron ever given a straight answer in PMQ's? THE big reason for the TV debates in my view is he would have to do so. Any flannel and that would do him no good. Which is why he doesn't want them.

I don't get leaders debates when in UK general elections you vote for a local MP, not who you want to be prime minister.

Realistically there are only two parties who could win a majority, Labour and the Tories. There is no point including LibDems, UKIP, SNP etc. when it doesn't matter one bit what their manifesto would be as it is irrelevant.

Personally I don't think it matters who wins power as it is just a different mask on the same face.