I left this earlier in response to the well known Nick Robinson:

'It's on - or, at least, it should be. The prime minister has, finally, confirmed that he is willing to take part in a prime ministerial debate on TV ahead of the election. Now all that remains is to agree the details. This could be easier said that done.'

As long as he can dictate the terms.

'In a message to his party on Labour's website, Gordon Brown makes clear that he wants a series of debates on specific subjects - the economy, public services, foreign affairs - to take place around the country starting as soon as possible, ie before the election campaign.'

See point 1.

This is not a 'a prime ministerial debate on TV ahead of the election' as understood by we the people it would be a series of set up non-debates organised by the Labour party with only the chosen few invited.

'He signals his desire for public involvement and argues that there should be a parallel series of debates involving senior ministers as well.'

Well slap me with a wet fish why don't you? It will not be a Prime Ministerial debate but one involving so many other people that the blame for it all going wrong can be attributed anywhere.

'Mr Brown does not mention the involvement of Nick Clegg but, as I wrote last week, he's said to be keen to go head to head with Mr Cameron and to be prepared to agree to debate with Mr Clegg on his own in order to allow that to happen.'

He might, could, may think about being prepared to...
What's that you say Mr.Robinson?
Jesus only knows what you say, Mr Robinson, a hey, hey, hey.

'Up till now Team Cameron have favoured a single debate during the election campaign, although I reported last week that they would agree to an earlier one providing the details could be negotiated. The Tory leader has always argued for the involvement of Nick Clegg in a three-way debate.'

Good.

'The two parties' positions stem from their analysis of their own positions. The self-proclaimed "underdog" wants as many chances as possible to reveal the weakness in his opponent's policies. He prefers to be asked questions by the public than the media as he regards them as less hostile. He wants to travel away from London to places where he believes Labour is stronger. What's more he wants a series of debates between the chancellor, home secretary, foreign secretary, etc and their shadows to expose what he sees as the shallowness of the Tory team.'

Again, this has as much to do with a Prime Ministerial Debate as my raising of chickens in a second floor flat. If he has not got the fortitude to stand up to the rigours of debate but decides instead to send out his juniors, why doesn't the underdog just say so.
A coward dies a thousand deaths, a hero only one.

'David Cameron is sure to be cautious about this since, as the front-runner, debates represent a risk. He's likely to argue that the more debates there are, the less public interest there will be. He'll welcome the presence of Nick Clegg in a debate with Gordon Brown hoping that in the search for Labour seats Mr Clegg would join him in attacking the prime minister. He's likely to argue that a three-way debate is fairer and less likely to be challenged legally.'

No more risk than Gordon doing a Death Stare as he tried and failed this week.

'Thus, we come to the broadcasters. Yesterday the BBC, Sky and ITV agreed that they favoured three debates - one for each broadcaster - to involve the three UK-wide party leaders. In their minds are their obligation to balance and fairness - not just to the Lib Dems but to the nationalists in Wales and Scotland as well. If mishandled this could be tested in court.'

Flannel.

'The broadcasters are also concerned about levels of audience interest if the debates are to be broadcast on mass market channels - BBC One and ITV 1 - not just on news channels.'

Theenk of the political cheeldren being exposed to a grown-up debate.

'All this will have to be settled in tricky negotiations. I wonder if Senator George Mitchell's free?'

I agree: best thing to do is laugh.

'However, TV debates now look more likely than ever to happen since all sides have declared their willingness early enough for the details to be hammered out before the campaign makes compromise impossible.'

cont/

/cont



Oops, that was a case for compromise?

STB.

It seems we concur.

p.s. Can you think of a suitable definition of the acronym STB that refers to Libertarianism as averse to Tory as I find myself moving farther and further to the concept?

pps 'Sorry, but your comment of 4528 characters exceeds the maximum character length of 4300. Please try shortening it and then post again.'

Made me laugh...

"The Brown Gorgon dithered professionally, as always, until one of his personal Baldricks came up with a cunning plan. Say yes, but insist it starts now."

Not as cunning as the original plan. To bottle out of Brown announcing a commitment to debate at the Labour conference.

A travelling clown troupe running the country would inspire more confidence, to be honest.

Trivia: My drama teacher at college was one of the Tefal boffins in the early 80s.