BY BRAD JAMES
Months of wrangling and jostling over the new en vogue democratic process – the televised debates – have now ceased and decisions have been reached. Yet it appears that the importance of David Cameron’s participation has been the main debate itself. The Prime Minister has essentially been acting out in the manner of a petulant child, who refuses to give quarter until they get their own way. His open reluctance could actually be deemed also, as a Machiavellian masterstroke that keeps him removed and more enigmatic. As he is fully aware that no amount of waxing lyrical about policy is likely to lead to any party’s overall majority in May. So amid the clamour for attention, he is hoping that his silence and reticence speaks the loudest and is the only alternative on the debate front. Yet he is a statesman and public servant, after all. So his hand has been forced and he has received a painful reminder that democracy doesn’t serve anyone, but everyone. Democracy is an entity that forces a compromise and this is precisely Cameron’s situation here, compromise. Now the Prime Minister is pinned down and willing (of sorts) to contribute, the baying mob – or largely apathetic throng – have now received knowledge of the itinerary regarding the live events.
To begin with, a head to head question and answer formatted show will be presented by Jeremy Paxman and Kay Burley on Channel 4, on March 26th. Cameron doubtlessly agreed to this, as conditions are extremely controlled and the questions would have been pre-selected before the process begins. The programme will last for 90-minutes.
On April 2nd the seven party leader debate will take place. Featuring David Cameron, Ed Miliband, Nick Clegg, Nigel Farage, Natalie Bennett, Nicola Sturgeon and Leanne Wood. Another pointed diversion tactic by the Prime Minister here. A seven leader debate will ensure that he has his voice drowned out by six other leaders and has to offer only the bare minimum of (required) participation. He will most likely watch as his other opponents tear themselves to shreds. The debate will take place on ITV and will be moderated by Julie Etchingham.
April 16th will feature a debate between five opposition party leaders: Labour, Lib Dem, UKIP, Green and doubtlessly SNP, broadcast on the BBC and moderated by David Dimbleby. Something even David Cameron will not be a part of.
The final appearance will be a special edition of Question Time. Where David Dimbleby will chair a panel of David Cameron, Ed Miliband and Nick Clegg.
Ed Miliband has been contemptuous of the Prime Minister’s unwillingness to actively contribute on debates, saying:
“David Cameron is now in the ridiculous position where he’ll go to the same studio as me, on the same night as me, with the same audience as me but he won’t debate me head to head as he’s running scared.”
“I’m going to keep the offer of a head-to-head debate on the table right up to election day as it’s what the British people want.”
Meanwhile, Grant Shapps, Chairman of the Conservative Party, was delighted at the agreement:
“I think it’s important that this country gets to see what this election’s really about, the competence of a David Cameron-led Conservative government or the chaos of, frankly, all the others.”
Of course David Cameron would be delighted with this scenario. But why? As mentioned previously, the prospect of a Hung Parliament is shaping up to be inevitable. So when the prospect of no fresh leader or actual answers abound, the old adage: “better the devil you know than the devil you don’t,” gains more credence than ever. Perhaps the Prime Minister’s tight-lipped reluctance comes from the desire to not rock the boat politically. Because if he ends up on the back foot after the outcome of the debates, it may threaten to upset the political status quo. His coalition deal with the Liberal Democrats still means that he is Prime Minister and that the Conservative Party remains a tenuous majority. Why would he want to upset the apple cart? He may just dupe the British pubic into thinking the very same thing…
