For any political anorak, General Election night is one of
the few occasions when staying up all night is a must. The exit polls, the
swing-o-meter and the live interviews from the count all make for an
entertaining night and early morning’s viewing. 2010 was no different and the
campaign stands out for two particularly moments. Firstly, Gordon Brown’s cringing
faux pas where he labelled off-camera and what he thought was off-mic, a life-long
Labour supporter called Gillian Duffy ‘a bigoted woman’. Moments like this
occur on every campaign trail, but what was most memorable this time around and
completely untested was the live electoral debates.
On three separate occasions, Brown, Cameron and Clegg all
duelled in live debates about matters that would sway how the British public
would vote. Other Western democracies are used such set-ups, most notably in
America, and despite frequent appearances on the likes of the Today programme
or The Marr Show, such an event had never been held on British screens. In the
context of UK politics, it was a chance for all three parties to gain. Gordon
Brown felt that despite Labour’s lacklustre poll rating and the economic
backdrop, he had nothing to lose, as well as his utterance that this was ‘no
time for a novice’. David Cameron, his closest rival, buoyed by his polling had
an opportunity to demonstrate the rebranding of his Conservatism. The dynamics
of Britain’s three party system also gave a chance to a widely unknown Liberal
Democrat leader Nick Clegg.
And it was Clegg who stole the show. The entire nation ‘agreed
with Nick’ and as a consequence, Britain’s third party took 56 seats, down from
the 2005 count, but substantial enough to see Britain’s first ‘hung’ Parliament
since 1974. For most electoral strategists, there are many reasons to question
why the Conservatives did not win an outright majority, but the ‘Clegg-factor’ was
substantial enough to sway the ballot towards no overall control. The
following five days in May saw the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats to join
together to form today’s Coalition Government.
![]() |
The 2010 debate |
To this date, and a General Election less than two years
away, there is no agreement in place to whether we will see similar debates in
2015. And even despite Clegg’s performance last time, the question will be
whether all three parties would want it to take place. The viewing figures from
2010 were around 10 million. That’s unheard of for political programming and
simply cranks up the pressure on all party leaders, but if it has been done
before and worked, why would the broadcasters not want to do it again?
And for the leaders, would they really want it to go ahead?
For the Lib Dems and Nick Clegg, history may well hold them
hostage. The party remains bullish about its record in government and its
ability to hang onto its seats. The Eastleigh by-election demonstrated their
ability to win whilst in Government and the party grassroots will be as combative
as ever. Yet Mr Clegg is no longer the outsider to the British public and they
may well remember his paper promises come the vote next time, even if he puts
in a strong broadcast performance. A debate may simply be part of a long drawn
out annihilation.
For the Tories, David Cameron has yet to say on-record that
he is willing to take part in similar debates, but it is more than likely that political
pressure would force him to do so. Many would argue that Cameron remains the
party’s biggest asset and that on all occasions when he has been put on the
spot, most notably over Europe; he has triumphed and shown his statesman-like
qualities. Yet others are quick to blame his 2010 performance for the party’s
inability to win the previous vote outright. The continuing rebellion among
backbenchers and the irresistable rise of Boris Johnson may put the pressure on
Cameron on further. History shows that most leaders do not go onto better their
previous vote, for many within the party; it may be another reason why they see
it fit to unseat Mr Cameron’s leadership.
And what about Ed Miliband? The leader that to some extent
remains an unknown quantity to the British public. Would a ‘one-nation’ Labour transcend in a
live leadership debate? Would voters warm to a Mr Miliband whose performances
have become stronger since his rise to party leader in 2010? Or would they be
turned off by his personality? His awkwardness and most notably, his political
legacy in the Brown Government? Neither he nor Ed Balls have said that Labour
overspent in the time in Government, despite Britain having the biggest deficit
in the G8. Could a strong message and performance from Cameron and Clegg simply
vanquish all rebranding attempts made by Labour?
And what of UKIP or the SNP? Nigel Farage could well see his
party storm to success in the 2014 the European elections. Despite no
representation in the Commons, would it be unfair to exclude him from some or
all of the debates? Or would exclusion only benefit him further and his party’s
message? The same could be said of Alex Salmond. Why should the Conservatives,
who only have one MP in Scotland, be given such preferential treatment on
national broadcast? Who is not to say that the Independence debate in September
2014 could enhance the voice of the SNP in Westminster? Would it be unfair
then?
![]() |
Is it democratically unfair to ignore the likes of Farage and Salmond? |
There are many legal and broadcasting caveats to take into
consideration, as well as the overriding political risks, but it seems implausible
to go into 2015, without the prospect of a live leadership debate. As I
outlined above, there are extra considerations to be had, but in what will
develop into a crucial vote, the question is, who will we agree with this time?