The PM says he’s “made up his mind” on whether to have a TV debate but wants to leave an announcement until the format is properly decided. Mandelson today confirms it will happen.
So is it a good thing?
Yes for the PM – he’ll actually get a chance to question Cameron and force him to elaborate on catchy soundbites that lack substance once you scratch below the surface.
We’ll get more of this:
…and less of this:
It would also work for Clegg in that people would actually see him on their TV screens for longer than a couple of seconds.
News tonight that pollsters YouGov have found that, since the start of the 2009 Labour Party Conference, the Conservative lead has declined by 7 points – i.e. cut in half.
Now let’s not get carried away – as no doubt some still trapped inside the conference bubble will do (I escaped this evening). Parties always get a bounce after their annual gathering. Largely because they have dominated the news agenda for the past week and at least some people are bound to have liked what they heard. The true test will of course be what the polls say once the inevitable Tory bounce has settled down after next week in Manchester.
However, Labour should take heart from this bounce because it means that people are at least still willing to give their ideas a hearing. The door in the minds of the electorate is still ajar, not slammed and locked in the face of any potential policy initiative.
He might as well have come on to Barry Manilow crooning “oh Mandy…” so much were the delegates swooning in the aisles.
It was a fantastic speech, delivered with a cool wit, and all the more dramatic doesn’t normally ‘do’ visably passionate.
It did just the trick – honest, conciliatory, funny and appealing to the activists, with the extension of the car scrappage sche e and pledges never to limit University numbers raising the roof.
Sky News/Populus showing a 5 point Labour gain also will be a tonic for wound licking activists.
I also enjoyed the Guardian fringe. A couple of particularly good points:
- Helena Kennady argued that Labour must do better at clearly explaining to voters why the Tories are wrong for urging cuts NOW and not later. She proposed a narrative based on normal people’s everyday experience of taking on debt to build for their future (a mortgage, a student loan).
- James Purnell encouraged Labour to base the General Election campaign on education, as it would inject optimism about owning the future (excuse the horrible New Labour buzz words!) The Government he argues should commit to matching the spending levels of the best educating nations in the world and aim large – like erradicating illiteracy as South Korea and Finland have done.
All in all, a cracking day and some good new ideas…roll on GB tomorrow!!
By resigning, Stephen Hesford MP, Parliamentary Aide at the Ministry of Justice (technically to Vera Baird QC not Baroness Scotland incidentally), has attempted to hammer another nail into the coffin of the Attorney General over her employment of an illegal cleaner.
His rationale however is an odd one. “In my view, the facts of the case do not matter” he says. An odd statement. In my book, deliberately overlooking the facts is seldom a good thing.
Incidentally, the facts – which apparently do not matter – are:
1) The UK Border Agency have acknowledged that Baroness Scotland didn’t know she was employing an illegal worker.
2) The Attorney General did request documents from the employee in question, which turned out to have been forged (hardly her fault).
3) The key error was simply an administrative one – Baroness Scotland did not keep copies.
4) A fine has been levied and paid accordingly.
I can’t see here where the point of principle is that would make Baroness Scotland unable to continue to discharge her duties as Attorney General…am I missing something?
A BNP voter wears the opposite of rose-tinted spectacles, but the idea still applies. Every utterance, announcement and statement by mainstream parties passes through an emotional filter and is instantly discounted.
Any argument made by a mainstream party againstthe BNP are simply taken as further fuel on the fire of why that voter supports the BNP in the first place. A gut instinct impermeable to reason – “if they say it’s wrong…then it must be right!”
Much as I love the BBC, I think I’ll be sitting this particular installment of QT out.
Excuse the lacklustre pun in the blog post subject header.
It’s been a while since the last blog post – ammunition has been a little thin on the ground lately as tumbleweed rustle across the pseudo-Gothic halls of Parliament.
But as Parliamentarians limber up ahead of the new Westminster season, jogging down the tunnel and touching the “This is Anfield” sign that is party conference, something stoked me to return early to the blogosphere…no…not the Inter-Toto Cup.
Moving on from that over-stretched football metaphor, what has got my goat…? The answer – penalty fares on the train.
Having bought my return ticket from London to Shenfield with a Young Person’s Railcard concession, I felt secure in my legality as the ticket inspector approached. But I failed to produce the goods, my Young Person’s Railcard – which I had paid £25 at the start of the year – had been left in the drawer at home…”that’ll be a £20 penalty fare” the National Express employee growled.
Naturally I took the stiff-upper-lip approach and paid, but that’s not the point. As somebody under 26, why do I have to stump up cash for a railcard every year just for the privilege of getting an under 26 concession? This isn’t the case across continental Europe or on the Eurostar.
Youth fares on trains are great. They help young people out who often have less money, and encourage people to get into the habit of train (rather than car) travel at an early age, thus helping the environment. But making people pay for the right of travelling within their own age classification is surely wrong.
Rant over.
Am I just being naive? Or is this cheeky revenue raiser for the rail companies unfair?
It was good to see the PM get the chance, for once, to flex his (considerable) intellectual muscle. The speech gave an indication of just how persuasive he can be when he deviates from his safe-zone of reeling of statistics and setting up “dividing lines” between Labour and the Tories. There was no “since 1997 (insert undeniable but over-used achievement here) in this speech.
What’s more, he’s got a point. Ahead of the Copenhagen summit in December where international governments will seek to establish a global climate agreement that can truly fight climate change, a global network of user-generated communication can drive those governments to act.
Blogged testimonies and videos of those already feeling the brunt of climate change, beamed around the world is exactly what we need to make what seems like a remote threat to many, more pressing and present now.
On a lighter note, if you get the chance, check out other TED talks at www.ted.com- particularly this one where Malcolm Gladwell talks about spaghetti sauce:
President Obama successfully avoided embarrassment when throwing the ceremonial first pitch of the All Star Major League Baseball game.
I take it that the driver of the golf cart voted for McCain.
Just trying to imagine Gordon Brown scoring a ceremonial penalty before the start of the FA Cup Final (or perhaps a Raith Rovers game would be more up his street).
In brief…
Parliamentary Researcher, Labour Parliamentary Candidate for Suffolk Coastal, Ipswich Town fan, part-time Public Policy MSc student – not necessarily in that order…
